He remembers getting home, and seeing his own face looking back at him from a political mailer. Alongside his photo: charges that the Gothenburg banker, Nebraska state lawmaker, Republican and candidate for the University of Nebraska Board of Regents, was a secret liberal.
He had let violent criminals, including pedophiles, out of prison early. He was soft on “illegal immigrants,” wanted to raise property taxes and supported removing the words “husband and wife” from state law.
“Say no to Matt Williams on November 8th,” said one of the mailers, which went to voters in the vast seventh district covering western Nebraska.
He was shocked that anyone would go to such lengths to keep him off the Board of Regents, an important office more associated with NU boosterism than bare-knuckle D.C. politics.
Then Williams saw the mailer was paid for by a political action committee, the “Nebraska Future Action Fund.” And he was less surprised.
Nebraska Future Action Fund was bankrolled almost entirely by then-Gov. Pete Ricketts, a fellow Republican. As a state senator, seven years before, Williams had voted to abolish the death penalty and cast other votes that went against the goals of the governor’s administration.
Ricketts ended up spending six figures on the regent’s race, attacking Williams and supporting his opponent, Kathy Wilmot – who beat the former lawmaker.
“I think any governor – not just Ricketts – any governor has significant influence,” Williams said. “When you couple a governor that also has financial resources, that doubles down.”
Ricketts, the eldest son of a billionaire businessman, does have vast financial resources. A new Flatwater Free Press analysis of campaign finance data shows that he and his parents, Joe and Marlene Ricketts, have in fact doubled down, raining millions on conservative campaigns and ballot initiatives.
In Nebraska, their spending sets them apart from any other living governor and his or her family.
Nationally, the spending places the Ricketts family among other wealthy politicians and their families, who dump massive amounts into home state politics, FFP found. But the way the family spent their money, spreading it around, differentiated them from two other high-profile examples.
In the years before Pete Ricketts ran for governor, his family never spent more than $400,000 in any state campaign cycle, according to available Nebraska Accountability and Disclosure Commission records.
Then, in the decade that he was running for and serving as governor, the Ricketts family spent at least $9.8 million on Nebraska political campaigns and causes.
That spending spiked when Ricketts first ran for the state’s top job, jumping to 5 percent of all recorded Nebraska political giving.
And it spiked again as he prepared to leave office, when they spent $5.4 million – much of it funneled to electing his successor, Jim Pillen, who soon appointed Ricketts to the U.S. Senate.
In that cycle, Ricketts’ money made up more than 7 percent of all political giving to every political campaign and cause in Nebraska.
The family – mostly the governor and his parents – delivered money far and wide while Pete Ricketts was running for and then serving as governor.
They funneled money to all levels of government: high-profile ballot measures, low-level local races and PACs that bolstered candidates or attacked them. And, notably, they spent heavily in races for the Nebraska Legislature, the body that can advance or curb a governor’s agenda.
“Legally, any American citizen can contribute whatever they want to a (Nebraska) campaign,” said former Gov. Dave Heineman, a Republican. “I think it’s viewed differently when you’re a sitting governor and you’re making significant contributions to legislative races, primarily, to impact who might get elected who would reflect your views in terms of policy.”
It’s easy to forget now, but Pete Ricketts’ big spending entrance into politics nearly two decades ago ended in a landslide loss.
Ricketts says his interest in politics started when he joined the board of the anti-gambling coalition Gambling with the Good Life in 2004. Ricketts declined an interview, but did provide written responses to questions.
“We defeated a massive and well-funded effort to allow expanded gambling in Nebraska with a grassroots campaign, and I realized that real citizens can make a difference by getting involved,” Ricketts said in the emailed answers.
He then decided to run for the U.S. Senate, recruited into the race by state officials and Washington, D.C. Republicans, said longtime political adviser Jessica Flanagain, who answered questions during an interview and provided written statements.
Ricketts spent $12 million of his money trying to unseat Sen. Ben Nelson. But it was a bad year for Republicans nationally. Nelson cruised to victory on election night 2006, becoming the last Democrat elected statewide in Nebraska while thumping Ricketts by nearly 28 points.
Joe Ricketts, Nebraska City native and co-founder of the Omaha company that became TD Ameritrade, had dabbled in local Republican politics since at least the 1980s and donated to Nebraska campaigns at least as far back as the 1999-2000 election cycle, records show. Historical data for Nebraska campaigns is incomplete.
When Pete Ricketts ran for Senate, state records show that the Ricketts family gave roughly $360,000 to state campaigns. Their in-state spending stayed in the low six-digits each election cycle as Pete Ricketts became a national committeeman for the Republican National Committee, started the tax policy think tank the Platte Institute, then ran for governor.
This time it was different. He had Flanagain, former executive director of the state GOP, as his strategist from the outset. He spent less of his own money. He fundraised and traveled the state more.
“Every small donation matters – because each individual is committing to your vision and campaign,” Ricketts wrote. “I also realized how powerful it is to ask people directly for their votes, and to ask them to bring their friends and neighbors along in support – generally the importance of grassroots campaigning.”
Ricketts won the hotly contested Republican primary and sailed through the general election. On his second attempt for elected office, he was now Nebraska’s governor, entering office with millions of dollars that he could use to help allies – and stymie opponents.
****
The Ricketts family’s national political giving far outpaces anything they have done in Nebraska. But experts and other politicians say the family fortune has more influence in the Cornhusker State.
Joe and Marlene Ricketts are the 29th largest donor overall nationally this election cycle, according to a Washington Post analysis, sandwiched between the National Education Association, the powerful teachers’ union, and Walmart heir Rob Walton.
A list of the biggest donors compiled by nonprofit OpenSecrets, which tracks money in U.S. politics, showed Joe Ricketts as the 15th-largest individual donor in America as of August.
Since 2005, Joe, Marlene and Pete Ricketts combined have contributed more than $100 million to federal races, much of it to super PACs that can raise unlimited amounts of money. For context, that’s more than the 2024-25 general fund budgets for Nebraska’s Department of Agriculture and Nebraska State Patrol combined.
It’s worth noting this figure does not include certain political organizations, like nonprofit 527 groups.
“I think you need to realize that whatever you find reported is going to be the minimum,” said Richard Hasen, political scientist at UCLA and director of the Safeguarding Democracy Project.
Joe Ricketts’ other children have been active contributors, as well. Laura Ricketts, a Democrat, co-founded a PAC centered on LGBTQ+ issues.
They’re high-level federal donors, said Brendan Glavin, deputy research director at OpenSecrets. But that doesn’t make Ricketts a household name.
Billions of dollars will be spent in the presidential and congressional elections, and it’s hard to stand out. Billionaire Timothy Mellon, for example, has given Donald Trump and other conservative causes $165 million just in this election cycle – roughly nine times more than Joe and Marlene Ricketts in the same time frame.
But in Nebraska, with its relatively small population and even smaller pool of deep-pocketed donors?
“Five million spent in a cycle to elect members of the House and Senate – that’s a big number, but it’s not impactful,” said Bob Kerrey, former Nebraska governor and U.S. senator and a Democrat. “Five million spent on Nebraska races? Impactful.”
****
Williams entered the Legislature the same year that Ricketts became governor, two Republican politicians who at first seemed obvious allies. Ricketts donated $1,000 to Williams’ campaign, NADC records show. The pair campaigned together, and even used the same campaign support team.
“I had no reason to fear him,” Williams said. “And he had not been in a role like this, where he had exerted that power before.”
But it proved a tough first year for Ricketts. Williams and several other Republicans in the officially nonpartisan Legislature voted to override the new governor’s vetoes, ignoring his wishes on a few key bills.
One new law abolished the death penalty in Nebraska. Another increased the gas tax by 1.5 cents to fund road construction. The third allowed recipients of the federal Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, commonly referred to as Dreamers, to get driver’s licenses.
Williams and others knew these votes were not what Ricketts wanted, he said. But he didn’t feel politically vulnerable.
That changed the very next year.
The governor supported conservative opponents who defeated three incumbent Republican senators who voted as Williams did on some or all those votes.
From that point, it was crystal clear that Ricketts would use his resources to affect elections, Williams said, even within his own party. But his consequences didn’t come until years later, when he tried to become an NU regent.
Ricketts’ team recruited then-Sen. Mike Groene to run against Williams, Groene told the Flatwater Free Press. He told them he’d run, he said in a text, only “if I did not have to fundraise or do advertisements.” Flanagain disputed this, and said she recalled no recruitment effort of Groene. The lawmaker quickly dropped out of the race after resigning from the Legislature amid scandal.
Then, a day before the filing deadline, Kathy Wilmot entered the race. Wilmot, who previously served on the Nebraska Board of Education, said Ricketts’ team did not recruit her. Flanagain said she was immediately supportive of Wilmot after learning she was mulling a campaign.
“It was what I perceived as … very poor treatment of Sen. Groene,” said Wilmot when asked why she ran. “I knew we needed a conservative individual that valued education in that particular position, and I felt that I was qualified.”
Wilmot brought in roughly $51,000, state records show, while getting endorsements from three Nebraska governors: Heineman, Ricketts and Kay Orr. Ricketts gave her $20,000. But he spent far bigger on two PACs that put $160,000 toward aiding Wilmot and attacking Williams.
Williams said he knew the governor wouldn’t support him. But he hoped he wouldn’t be a political target.
“It’s a whole different feeling of being let-down and damaged – almost disbelief,” Williams said of the mailers. “How could they say this? You know, I gave eight years of my life to this job.”
Williams was no pauper, bringing in $455,000 after August 2021, along with his own set of heavy-hitting endorsements from NU football legend Tom Osborne and five sitting regents, including Jim Pillen, who was elected governor in that election.
Wilmot won the general election with 54 percent of votes. She says she never saw an anti-Williams mailer until after the race.
“Your reputation you make for yourself, the record that you leave behind you is what speaks,” Wilmot said.
Williams isn’t the only person who saw Ricketts’ hand playing a role in the outcome.
“I supported Kathy Wilmot because she’s a longtime friend, she’s a very conservative person and I thought she’d be good on the Board of Regents,” former Gov. Heineman said. “I was not anti-Matt Williams. I know him, he was a good state senator. But those outside monies definitely contributed to Matt Williams’ defeat.”
What may look like payback to Williams is viewed by Ricketts, his allies and other observers as him transparently using resources to elect more politicians with whom he agrees. Ricketts and Flanagain described a straightforward consideration that guides his campaign contributions: Who is the most conservative candidate in a given race who can actually win on Election Day?
“I can’t think of any entity, any individual entity who has invested more in campaigns than the Rickettses have, and I think it’s been impactful in electing people who have their same political philosophy,” said Walt Radcliffe, a prominent Nebraska lobbyist who’s worked in and around the Legislature since 1969. “But, again, that’s why you give money.”
****
While governor, Heineman would “go after” Republicans “he didn’t especially like,” said John Hibbing, a longtime political scientist at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln.
One difference: He didn’t have Ricketts’ bank account, Hibbing said.
Heineman and Nelson, who served two terms as governor before being elected to the U.S. Senate, gave under $10,000 each in Nebraska over the last 20 years, according to available NADC data. (These analyses are limited to what FFP reporters could find – digital records weren’t robust during their terms.)
Ricketts stands far apart, and the impact of his donations while in office reached far beyond the financial, Kerrey said. A donation can signal to other donors that a candidate might win. And, while legislators interviewed for this series deny it affected their actions, Kerrey said it was surely on some state senators’ minds during pivotal moments.
“If you’re a member of the Legislature … (and) you vote against Gov. Ricketts, before you cast a vote, you’re going to say to yourself, ‘If I vote against it, he’s going to fund my opponent, he’s going to defeat me, he’s going to make it harder for me to win my election,’” Kerrey said.
Ricketts also extended his money, and influence, to the Nebraska Republican Party. By the 2022 cycle, Joe, Marlene and then-Gov. Pete Ricketts gave 45 percent of the state committee’s $1.2 million total, according to NADC records.
But that’s when an anti-Ricketts contingent of the party took over, ousting party leadership. Some Republicans who supported the change framed it as pushback against the status quo, the two-term governor and his money.
“Pete brought this on himself,” Matt Innis, an unsuccessful candidate for U.S. Senate and one member of the contingent, told a Nebraska Examiner reporter at the 2022 state convention.
Then the Ricketts family’s support for the state GOP – and the party’s funding overall – dried up. As of late June, the Nebraska Republican Party’s state committee had reported roughly $105,000 in contributions, total, this cycle.
****
In some ways, the Ricketts family isn’t all that unique. Ray La Raja, political scientist at the University of Massachusetts Amherst, noted that they may function similarly to the Koch brothers in Kansas, the Uihleins in Michigan, or Art Pope in North Carolina.
“The Ricketts sound like they have their own personal party,” La Raja said.
But the family appears to set itself apart by how and where it delivered money as its eldest son sat atop Nebraska’s government.
Two politicians who are billionaires or members of billionaire families, Illinois Democratic Gov. J.B. Pritzker and ex-Florida governor and now Republican U.S. Sen. Rick Scott, both donated far more than the Ricketts family in their home states.
The Pritzkers gave a staggering $396 million in Illinois between 2005 and last year. But the lion’s share of it, 85 percent, funded J.B. Pritzker’s own campaigns. Scott gave $67 million in Florida, and 90 percent went to his own campaigns.
North Dakota’s Republican Gov. Doug Burgum appears to act more like the Ricketts family – spreading money around.
Burgum, according to North Dakota campaign finance records, has given $4.7 million since 2020 to a campaign finance group that reportedly promoted certain Republican legislative candidates and opposed others. He gave $2.2 million to his own gubernatorial campaign committee between 2018 and 2023, according to records.
In Nebraska, Joe, Marlene and Pete Ricketts’ money has reached nearly every corner of state politics, as big as the 2022 governor’s race and as small as a race for Saunders County sheriff.
At most, the trio’s giving to Pete’s own campaigns made up only 12 percent of their overall Nebraska contributions, though it’s worth noting that no race since Ricketts’ first gubernatorial primary has been competitive. The remaining 88 percent went to other causes and campaigns.
****
A week after he was sworn in as governor, Jim Pillen announced he was appointing Ricketts to fill the U.S. Senate seat vacated by Ben Sasse.
He did so after the Ricketts family’s spending in Nebraska spiked to levels it had never before neared, as the outgoing governor and his parents gave a combined $1.6 million to support Pillen and attack two Republican primary opponents.
“I didn’t have political aspirations defined beyond my service as Governor, but when this opportunity presented itself, I wanted to continue serving our state,” Ricketts said in a statement about the Senate appointment. He’s now running against Democrat Preston Love to serve the rest of the term. “I genuinely believe Nebraska is what America is supposed to be – and we have to be intentional about preserving and protecting the rights and freedoms that enable the great opportunities we have here,” Ricketts said.
What Ricketts’ elevation to the Senate means for his and the family’s political giving remains to be seen.
Through June, NADC records show they had given 5 percent of the state’s total recorded contributions this election cycle, about $1.7 million. Over half went toward a ballot measure meant to preserve the state’s current abortion restrictions and allow for more restrictions in the future.
Sen. Pete Ricketts’ net worth was estimated at about $160 million as of early September, according to Quiver Quantitative’s live tracker that uses data from federal politicians’ stock portfolios. By their calculations, that makes him the fourth-richest U.S. senator.
His giving at the federal level has increased dramatically since he was appointed to the Senate. In the 2022 cycle, he gave about $886,000 that showed up in Federal Election Commission records. Through June, he had given $2.6 million.
He’s presumed to be in a safe Senate seat, and that has implications for his giving going forward, says OpenSecrets’ Glavin.
If Ricketts has leadership aspirations within the Senate, he might be generous with his colleagues, giving his own campaign money to support more vulnerable Senate Republicans.
But he’ll also still have money to send back home.
Said Glavin, “It’s going to probably become more about: How much influence does he want to maintain within the state? … Are things being done the way he feels that he wants them done?”
This article was first published by the Flatwater Free Press. Read the original article.
