Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

“I’m an American Before I am a Republican”: Bacon Reflects on Tenure

“I’m an American Before I am a Republican”: Bacon Reflects on Tenure
Don Bacon | U.S. Congressman Don Bacon speaking with attende… | Flickr

As a self-proclaimed ‘Reagan conservative,’ Rep. Don Bacon proposes a return to normalcy.

Amidst a retirement announcement, voting in favor of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, and dealing with criticism both offline and online. Bacon reflects on his tenure as a congressman.


“I never thought I’d run for Congress,” said Bacon about his decision to pursue a career as a politician.

Bacon’s love for politics began as a 13-year-old boy, during the 1976 Republican primaries, when former President Gerald Ford and Ronald Reagan were competing to secure a spot on the general election ticket. Both his parents and grandparents were volunteers for Reagan’s campaign.

During Bacon’s adolescence, his grandmother often gave him history books; he enjoyed reading about leaders he considered great, such as former president Abraham Lincoln, Dwight Eisenhower, and Ulysses Grant.

“I hoped that maybe I could be a guy that could make a difference in a positive way, not just be a politician,” Bacon said. “I don’t want to just be a guy that’s worried about winning elections.”

Before his tenure as a congressman, Bacon honed his leadership skills during nearly three decades in the Air Force, where he commanded five times. His political roots date back to his early work for Rep. Ed Madigan.

Presently, Bacon is serving his fifth term as U.S. Representative for Nebraska’s 2nd congressional district. However, he recently announced that he will not be seeking re-election next year.

Although he says family is one of the deciding factors for his retirement, Bacon notes that his passion for being in the House is no longer the same as it was two or four years ago.

“A lot of people glorify being a congressman, but the reality is, you’re one of 535 members, right?” Bacon said. “And is the juice worth the squeeze, or is the squeeze worth the juice of working 14-hour days for being one of the 535 members of Congress?”

Regarding America’s two-party system, Bacon feels he is being attacked from both the left and the right. He felt as if it was time for something new, but while he is still in office, he wants to fight for the soul of his party.

Isolationism, protectionism, and anti-immigration revert back to the 1930s type of Republican, Bacon says. He believes the United States needs more legal immigration.

Bacon has stated multiple times that he is a ‘ Reagan conservative’, the former president thought immigration enriched America. During Reagan’s presidency, he signed the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986, which penalized employers who knowingly hired undocumented immigrants, but also granted amnesty to immigrants who entered the country before 1982. The act was omnibus, employer sanctions were placed, and border funding was increased, in hopes of eliminating the lure of jobs in America and shrinking the size of illegal populations.

Bacon frequently votes in favor of legislation aimed at strengthening border security and increasing enforcement measures. He claims he has the willingness to find solutions for undocumented populations, but he emphasizes the need for a “balanced approach”.

The representative faces backlash for expressing reservations about certain aspects of a bill or issue, but ultimately votes in favor of the legislation. Most recently, he faced criticism for voting in favor of the "Big Beautiful Bill," but he defends his vote.

“Some things I wish were better. So it was imperfect,” Bacon said. “I negotiated for maybe four months to get the best I could on Medicaid, SNAP, federal pensions, and green energy.”

The requirements for Medicaid are low; Americans expect healthy adults to work, Bacon says.

“I could defend that day in and day out, we did work requirements for healthy, mentally healthy, physically healthy adults that don’t have small children, they have to work at least 20 hours a week, take classes or volunteer,” Bacon said.

According to Bacon, the new requisites put in place will make 5 million people ineligible for Medicaid. He says he insisted on not hurting those who need Medicaid, listing children and disabled adults as an example.

As for his hesitancy towards the bill, Bacon says he compromised because he was able to negotiate on areas of the bill he deemed important. If he had voted ‘no’ on the bill, Nebraska was going to receive a 20% tax increase, says Bacon.

However, it is unlikely that Nebraskans would have directly seen a tax increase; many Americans would be affected due to the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017. The “Big Beautiful Bill” intends to prevent some of those federal tax increases by extending the cuts as they are set to expire at the end of 2025. The tax increase would not have been linked to the failure of the bill, but to the expiration of the 2017 tax cuts.

“I felt like in the end, there was more good than bad in this bill,” Bacon said.

When dealing with criticism, especially online, Bacon says he has thicker skin than he used to. He says he ‘trolls the trolls’.

“I like teasing these people; they are so angry and want to get under your skin,” Bacon said. “I sort of laugh them off, poke at them a little bit.”

But online criticism differs from in-person criticism.

People have threatened his wife, his supporters, and himself, says Bacon, on more than one occasion, he has had to call police officers to his residence. There’s a loss of boundaries; you could disagree with each other, but I didn’t tell you, ‘I hate you,’ Bacon expresses. As he reflects, he remembers a time when a non-supporter approached him during an Easter egg hunt with his grandkids to complain about a bill he had voted on.

“She didn’t care. People are antagonized, and unfortunately, they don’t read a wide array of news,” Bacon said.

As for media representation in Nebraska, Bacon says he thinks he is treated fairly; he jokes that he is treated even better now that he announced his retirement.

The next person who runs for the Republican incumbent’s seat will have to win the ‘middle’ , says Bacon. He argues that you can’t focus solely on one party because it would not yield a favorable election outcome; instead, you must win over some moderates, Democrats, and swing voters.

Though a man of faith, who believes in the golden rule, Bacon says he will always put his country first by respecting the Constitution. An ‘American before a Republican, ’ he says.

“I’m a conservative, but I’m not going to follow my party off a cliff if I think they’re wrong,” Bacon said.

Roselyn Gonzalez isa recent graduate of the University of Nebraska–Lincoln and a cohort member with the Fulcrum Fellowship.

Please help the Fulcrum in its mission of nurturing the next generation of journalists by donating HERE!

Read More

Where Is the Democratic Party’s Clarion Voice?

Democratic Donkey with megaphone

Where Is the Democratic Party’s Clarion Voice?

Editor's Notes: below is a new version of the article published earlier today (2:13 pm EST, 8/9/25)

The Democratic Party is in disarray, trying to determine how best to defeat Trump and the MAGA movement in the next midterm and presidential elections.

Keep ReadingShow less
Are Community Partnership Visas the Solution To Boost Local Economies in the United States?

The American Academy of Arts and Sciences gave a presentation on their findings on their idea for Community Partnership Visas to a crowd at the American Enterprise Institute on May 29, 2025.

Angeles Ponpa/Medill News Service

Are Community Partnership Visas the Solution To Boost Local Economies in the United States?

Immigration has taken center stage in political discourse across the United States for more than a decade. A politically divided two-party system continues to claim it holds the solution to a deeply complex system. Meanwhile, immigration raids have increased since President Donald Trump took office. Yet some believe the issue remains worth tackling because the country has not fully recognized the power of immigrant labor.

One group believes it has found a bipartisan solution by proposing the Community Partnership Visa. The place-based visa aims to boost local economic growth and allow counties across the country to benefit from immigration, if it proves successful.

Keep ReadingShow less

Changing Conversations Around Immigration

At FrameWorks, we consider it our personal and moral mission to support those working to build a more humane immigration system. While we certainly don’t have all the answers, we join in the shared outrage over current injustices and harms and want to offer support where we can.

One thing we know is that the language we use to demand that change affects how people think about immigration. And if we aren’t intentional, the language we use to highlight protections for immigrants can inadvertently lead people towards thinking about the need to protect “us” from immigrants.

Keep ReadingShow less
"They want us divided sign" that represents partisanship among democrats and republicans.

In recent philosophical and political discourse, the concept of “deep disagreement” has gained traction as a diagnostic for the dysfunction of contemporary public debate.

Getty Images, Jena Ardell

Manufacturing Dissent: How ‘Deep Disagreement’ Serves the Anti-Democratic Elite

In recent philosophical and political discourse, the concept of “deep disagreement” has gained traction as a diagnostic for the dysfunction of contemporary public debate. The premise is simple yet highly seductive: Some disagreements we are told are so fundamental, so rooted in incompatible worldviews or paradigmatically incommensurable epistemologies, that no meaningful argumentation is possible between the disagreeing parties. The implication is stark: Reason and Dialogue cannot bridge the gulf. But this diagnosis, while sounding sobering and serious, is in fact a dangerous illusion. It is an intellectual sleight of hand that masks both the manufactured nature of such disagreements and the vested interests that thrive on perpetuating them.

Indeed, contrary to its glossy surface neutrality, the notion of “deep disagreement” is not merely a philosophical tool but has become a performative trope, perfectly suited for an age of outrage, polarization, and algorithmic amplification. It helps rationalize the breakdown of dialogue, casting it not as a product of bad faith, deliberate miscommunication, or elite manipulation, but as a tragic inevitability of divergent rationalities. In doing so, it gives cover to a much darker political agenda: The delegitimation of democracy itself.

Keep ReadingShow less