Republicans in Congress are calling for a last-minute change to Nebraska’s presidential election system. This move could fundamentally change the election prospects and, in the event of a photo finish, decide the race in favor of Donald Trump.

Polls show Trump running neck and neck with Kamala Harris both nationally and in swing states. Republican congressional leaders are pushing for the Nebraska state legislature to replace the current system of splitting electoral college votes with the straightforward winner-takes-all system used in most U.S. states.

The change would increase the number of electoral votes Trump would be entitled to if he wins the heavily Republican state from four to five, and there is a chance that the former president could end up tied with Harris, as they each have 269 electoral votes.

In such a scenario, the final decision on the election would be left to the House of Representatives, which has the power under the Constitution to certify the results. The outcome of the general election in November, in which Republicans are defending a razor-thin majority, could therefore be even more decisive than usual.

The fact that more is now at stake is also shown by the fact that South Carolina Senator Lindsay Graham – a close ally of Trump – visited Nebraska this week and urged lawmakers to find the additional votes needed to return the Electoral College distribution system there to the all-or-nothing system that applied before 1992.

The state’s five congressmen also increased the pressure and wrote to Nebraska Governor Jim Pillen and Speaker of the unicameral legislature John Arch – both Republicans.

“As members of Nebraska’s federal delegation to Congress, we are united in our support of apportioning all five of Nebraska’s electoral votes in presidential elections according to the winner of the entire state,” said the letter from the Nebraska delegation, posted on X by one of the signatories, Republican Rep. Mike Flood. “It is high time that Nebraska joined 48 other states in applying the winner-takes-all principle to presidential elections.”

Changing the system requires a two-thirds majority in the Republican-led chamber. Only 31 or 32 of the 50-seat chamber are in favor, meaning the spotlight is on state Sen. Mike McDonnell, a former Democrat who switched to Republicans this year but vowed he would never support the winner-take-all principle.

Local media reports say McDonnell is undecided amid speculation that Trump may contact him personally soon.

The issue is potentially crucial because some pollsters have predicted that Harris is on track to win the 270 electoral votes needed to win the White House by winning the three northern swing states of Pennsylvania, Michigan and Wisconsin, where recent polls show Harris holding a small but consistent lead.

However, she would miss that point by just one vote if a winner-takes-all principle were applied in Nebraska: Nebraska’s second congressional district – which includes the state’s largest city, Omaha, and its suburbs – and its only electoral vote would likely go to Harris, as was the case with Joe Biden in 2020.

To avoid a tie, Harris would need to win the three battleground states in the north and at least one of the four southern Sun Belt states – North Carolina, Georgia, Nevada and Arizona. While she is tied with Trump in those states, polls often show a narrow lead for the former president.

Unlike most other states, Nebraska does not award its electoral votes to the presidential candidate who receives the majority of the vote; instead, the candidate receives two electoral votes and the remaining votes are awarded based on which party wins its three congressional districts.

Maine is the only other state that operates a similar system. This year, the Democratic House Majority Leader vowed to quash any attempt in Nebraska to return to a winner-takes-all approach by making a similar change in Maine.

But by delaying their efforts until less than seven weeks before the November 5 election, Republicans may have lost that opportunity.

Maine’s legislative rules say that a bill cannot take effect until 90 days after it is passed unless it passes with a two-thirds majority in both chambers. That means there is not enough time to implement a new system before Election Day. Although Democrats hold a majority in the state’s House and Senate, they do not have a two-thirds majority.