Committee rejects clean elections expansion, other proposals to alter election laws

Yahoo

10-03-2025

Voters fill voting booths at the Cross Insurance Center in Bangor, Maine on Tuesday, November 5, 2024. (Photo by Michael G. Seamans/ Maine Morning Star)
The Veterans and Legal Affairs Committee voted down several proposals to alter election laws on Monday, including measures that sought to expand the state's clean elections program, eliminate ongoing absentee voter status, and reestablish a component of ranked choice voting tabulations that was done away with last session.
The committee does however appear poised to sign off on requiring automatic recounts when there are apparent ties in elections, as currently there are no automatic recounts even in this case, though the final recommendation will be determined once absent members cast their votes in the coming days.
These mark the first few committee recommendations for how the state should, or shouldn't, alter its elections laws this session. The bills will now head to the House of Representatives and Senate for floor votes.
Other changes being weighed include a total elimination of ranked choice voting, an amendment to explicitly ban noncitizen voting (which is already illegal under the state constitution), and clarifying campaign finance laws.
Earlier on Monday, the committee heard testimony on a proposal to require voters to update their signatures every five years and require the registrar from each municipality to review the central voter registration system annually.
Several other tweaks to the Maine Clean Elections Act are also being considered this session.
Passed by voters, the act was used for the first time in 2000 by candidates for the Maine Senate and House of Representatives. Portland was the first city in Maine to run a clean elections program in 2023, an effort headed by Maine Citizens for Clean Elections.
That group's executive director, Anna Kellar, told Maine Morning Star that both expanding the program and increasing annual allocations above the $3 million currently provided are key priorities.
In unanimous votes among those present, with Senate Assistant Majority Leader Jill Duson (D-Cumberland) and Rep. Anne Graham (D-North Yarmouth) absent, the committee recommended against the passage of two bills that sought to expand the state's clean elections program.
LD 118 would expand the program to candidates running for sheriff and district attorney. Last session, lawmakers passed legislation to allow candidates for district attorney to also participate, but the bill was among those enacted when lawmakers reconvened for the final day of the session that Gov. Janet Mills refused to sign.
A separate bill that would expand public financing to those offices as well as to county commissioners is also expected to be considered this session, however the committee's argument against the more narrow measure signals passage of broader expansion appears unlikely.
While Rep. Laura Supica (D-Bangor) said she likes the idea of expanding clean elections, she can't support it at this time.
'We don't live in a world with unlimited funds,' Supica said, 'and we're facing some tough budget choices.'
The state is expecting a $450 million deficit over the next biennium. Reiterating budget concerns, Rep. Marc Malon (D-Biddeford) also said he does not want to dilute the funding available for the candidates currently under the program.
During the public hearing on the proposal, it became clear the state's current clean elections allocation is being drained faster than it is being replenished.
Lawmakers similarly rejected LD 454, which would allow candidates for secretary of state and attorney general to participate, but for different reasons — largely because it addresses a hypothetical scenario.
Currently, those positions are appointed by the Legislature. Efforts to make those posts subject to popular election have historically failed but another proposal is being considered this session.
'I really support the election by the people of the three constitutional officers, and the statutory office of state auditor, but we're not there yet,' said committee co-chair Sen. Craig Hickman (D-Kennebec), referencing the other legislation.
But Hickman argued legislating clean elections policy for positions that are not yet elected would be an overstep. Rep. Benjamin Hymes (R-Waldo) agreed and put it this way: 'This is a little bit of the cart before the horse.'
Those present also unanimously opposed LD 718, which seeks to eliminate ongoing absentee voter status and require municipal clerks to issue absentee ballots only to residents of their municipality.
Calling the measure a solution looking for a problem, lawmakers on both sides of the aisle argued it would harm seniors and people with disabilities who rely on family members and friends who do not live within the same municipal boundaries to submit their ballots.
Hymes, who represents Waldo County, said this change would create substantial problems for his constituents, who are often a part of large families with many older relatives.
'It doesn't make sense in rural Maine whatsoever,' Hymes said of the bill.
The final tally of the committee votes on all of the bills considered on Monday will technically not be confirmed until absent members cast their votes, which are due Wednesday. But those late votes could only change the outcome of the committee recommendation for LD 600, which seeks to require automatic recounts when there are apparent ties in elections.
Five of the committee members present voted for an amendment that would not offer automatic recounts but instead clarify who has standing to request recounts — any candidate who is not the winner. Six want the move forward with the original proposal.
Malon, the bill sponsor, said the amendment would not address the underlying reason for the bill.
Under current law, if no candidate requests a recount in an apparent tie, a recount may not happen, Malon told the committee when first presenting the bill earlier this month.
'If there is no recount, the Secretary of State would notify the relevant body that there was a tie and that no one had requested a recount,' Malon said. 'It would be up to that body to decide whether they agree it was a tie and if a special election was necessary.'
The legislators who favor the version Malon originally proposed, requiring automatic recounts, argued special elections would cost more than a recount.
'I get that it's making more laws for more laws for more laws and common sense should take place,' Supica said, 'but if there's one thing I'm learning as I get older is that this world does not have a whole lot of common sense this time. I think it's clarity and it seems like just an obvious choice.'
The majority of committee members present Monday voted against reestablishing batch elimination to ranked-choice voting tabulations in a 3-7 vote, with Duson, Hickman and Graham absent.
When Maine voters initially passed ranked-choice voting in 2016, the law included batch elimination, which allows for the simultaneous elimination of candidates that receive such low vote totals that it would be mathematically impossible for any of them to win.
However, the Legislature passed a law last session eliminating the ability to use this practice.
At that time, Deputy Secretary of State Julie Flynn testified the elimination was logistically necessary.
In the session before last, the 130th, a new batch elimination rule was set for presidential primary elections to not allow the practice when any candidate received more than 100 votes, but it was still always permitted for other offices. Flynn argued it seemed more prudent to eliminate the rule entirely because otherwise the department would have had to develop and maintain two different algorithms leading up the 2024 election cycle.
Now with that cycle behind, Rep. David Boyer (R-Poland), the sponsor of the bill this year, said the issue needs to be revisited.
'Batch elimination simplifies the tabulation process while preserving the benefits of ranked-choice voting,' Boyer told the committee when presenting the bill earlier this month. 'It does not affect the way voters cast their ballots or the way candidates run their campaigns. Rather, it offers a more concise method of counting ballots.'
Conversely, Secretary of State Shenna Bellows said in her testimony opposing the legislation, 'It does not save the state time or money to do batch elimination and we have greater detail about the voters' intentions when we use round-by-round elimination.'
SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE