This story was originally published at Prism.

This election was painful for so many across the country, and while some celebrated victories for reproductive rights, others — like us in Nebraska — watched a crucial opportunity slip away.

On Nov. 5, I sat in my living room surrounded by my community, watching a tightly contested ballot measure to protect abortion access in Nebraska slowly fall out of reach. In the months leading up to this election, Nebraska faced two competing ballot initiatives. The first, Initiative 439, sought to amend the state constitution to protect abortion access up to fetal viability. The second, Measure 434, aimed to cement Nebraska’s 12-week abortion ban as state law. This situation — two dueling abortion measures on the same ballot — was unprecedented and only made possible through millions of dollars poured into a national, state-level strategy to confuse voters through a deceptive media blitz. Nebraska voters ultimately rejected the opportunity to secure access to abortion up to viability, instead approving an amendment enshrining the state’s restrictive 12-week abortion ban into our constitution.

As executive director of the statewide abortion fund Nebraska Abortion Resources (NEAR), it’s my responsibility to stay grounded in our values and make the best decisions I can to help protect access for as many Nebraskans as possible. This role also gives me a front-row seat to the often-overlooked battles in this part of the country. And let me tell you: The path leading up to this election and the deceptive tactics employed by anti-abortion forces here in Nebraska demand closer examination. This wasn’t just a Nebraska loss; it was a victory for anti-abortion strategies. The anti-abortion movement’s desperation to gain ground amidst a national outpouring of support for abortion access brings ballot measure after ballot measure in front of voters—and what happened in Nebraska will soon be replicated in other states.

What happened in Nebraska’s election was a coordinated effort to sow confusion. Anti-abortion groups, led by figures like Nebraska Sen. Pete Ricketts, poured millions into a campaign that blurred the lines between pro-choice and anti-abortion positions. They co-opted our language, our logo, and our fonts; they strategically used phrases like “reproductive rights are human rights.” Petitioners were even caught directly lying to voters by telling them that signing the anti-abortion petition would protect their right to access abortion. Playing off the energy felt by Initiative 439, the anti-abortion movement deliberately stifled our efforts by collecting pro-choice signatures and making voters think they had already done their part to secure abortion access so they wouldn’t duplicate and sign for Initiative 439. They didn’t care if voters understood which measure did what; their only goal was confusion. Hundreds of voters came forward to have their names removed from the “wrong” petition, but it was too late. Ads ran on every platform throughout the campaign phase, claiming that voting against the viability measure would protect Nebraskans from........

© Truthout