Maine begins first-ever post-election audit pilot
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)
Maine started the state's first-ever post-election audit pilot on Monday as a result of a law that seeks to provide additional assurance that procedures are fair and secure.
The Maine Legislature passed a law in 2021 that created a non-partisan Division of Post-Election Audits and Training to pilot a post-election audit process for the 2024 election results, specifically six legislative races that were within a 5% margin of victory.
The state is slated to make such audits a routine part of the post-election vote verification process starting in 2026.
'Mainers should be very proud of our free, safe and secure elections,' Secretary of State Shenna Bellows said in a statement. 'This new post-election risk limiting audit process is a way that we can further prove the accuracy of Maine election results and the integrity of our elections.'
The new division, which is located within the Department of the Secretary of State, is tasked with creating these procedures and overseeing post-election audits and training on an ongoing basis.
The pilot will cover Maine House of Representative districts 17, 20, 55, 83, and 90, and Maine Senate district 15.
On Monday, the division started auditing the race for House District 55, which covers Manchester, West Gardiner and Hallowell, and House District 90, which covers part of Auburn.
The audit process is open for public observation and will occur daily from 9 a.m. to 4 p.m. at 45 Commerce Drive in the Florian Room in Augusta.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Axios
19 minutes ago
- Axios
Congress' fight over security erupts after Minnesota shootings
A long-simmering fight over congressional security roared back to the surface this weekend following a pair of shootings against Minnesota state legislators at their homes that left two dead and two others hospitalized. Why it matters: The shootings have deeply unnerved members of Congress, who feel that any one of them could be the subject of an unanticipated attack — particularly at home in their districts and while in transit. Personal security details are largely a privilege for top congressional leaders and — in some cases — other high-profile members facing specific, credible threats. Rank-and-file members are renewing a push for greater security, arguing for their own details, greater safety measures at their homes and at airports and more stringent measures to hide their sensitive details. Driving the news: Minnesota state House Democratic Leader Melissa Hortman and her husband were shot and killed at their home early on Saturday. The suspect, identified by law enforcement officials as 57-year-old Vance Boelter, also allegedly shot Democratic state Sen. John Hoffman and his wife at their home, leaving both hospitalized. Boelter was allegedly dressed as a police officer and driving a vehicle similar to those used by local law enforcement. He also had what investigators described as a "manifesto" that listed other Democratic lawmakers, as well as prominent abortion rights advocates, officials allege. State of play: The shooting sent shockwaves through Capitol Hill, with Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) saying he asked for increased security for Sens. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.) and Tina Smith (D-Minn.). House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) said he similarly asked security officials to "ensure the safety of our Minnesota delegation and Members of Congress across the country." The Capitol Police said in a statement Saturday it was "aware of the violence targeting state lawmakers in Minnesota" and had "been working with our federal, state and local partners," but declined to offer further details. What they're saying: "I call on the Capitol Police to assist in providing real solutions for increased security for members," said Rep. Bennie Thompson (D-Miss.), the ranking member of the House Homeland Security Committee. Thompson, who had a security detail in 2022 as chair of the Jan. 6 committee, said he expects "full cooperation and resources from Republican leadership." "We're just as exposed as [Hortman] was. We have no more security than she does. You know, Capitol Police is not equipped ... for 435 members, to keep them safe," Rep. Jared Moskowitz (D-Fla.) told Axios in an interview. "It's not their fault," he added. "Things have changed. And as Congress becomes less functional in general, we can't even function to keep ourselves safe." What we're hearing: House Republicans held a call on Saturday afternoon, in which lawmakers exhorted their leadership to provide more security resources to individual members. Specific proposals included increasing security measures at members' homes and at airports, as well as boosting security for meetings, according to three House Republicans who were on the call. One of the GOP lawmakers, asked if leadership was receptive to those pleas, told Axios they "don't think so" and that "nothing's changed." A spokesperson for House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) did not respond to a request for comment. What's next: Jeffries will host a virtual briefing next Tuesday afternoon on members' security, according to invites viewed by Axios. A senior House Democrat told Axios that their colleagues are "scared" and want their addresses hidden — as well as regular security updates — and "won't be silenced." Another House Democrat said there is "heavy demand" in the party for rank-and-file members to have their own security details. The intrigue: Moskowitz told Axios he may force a House vote on holding what is called a " secret session" so members can have sensitive security discussions "if I have to." Such sessions, in which lawmakers can debate on the House floor away from public view, are typically used to discuss confidential information, as was the case the last time the House went into a secret session in 2008. Moskowitz can force a vote on his proposal unilaterally through what is called a privileged motion. "Maybe it also won't come to that," he told Axios. "Maybe we'll hear something from the speaker in the next week."
an hour ago
The GOP's big bill would bring changes to Medicaid for millions
WASHINGTON -- WASHINGTON (AP) — Republican Sen. Josh Hawley has been clear about his red line as the Senate takes up the GOP's One Big Beautiful Bill Act: no Medicaid cuts. But what, exactly, would be a cut? Hawley and other Republicans acknowledge that the main cost-saving provision in the bill – new work requirements on able-bodied adults who receive health care through the Medicaid program -- would cause millions of people to lose their coverage. All told, estimates are 10.9 million fewer people would have health coverage under the bill's proposed changes to Medicaid and the Affordable Care Act. That includes some 8 million fewer in the Medicaid program, including 5.2 million dropping off because of the new eligibility requirements. 'I know that will reduce the number of people on Medicaid,' Hawley told a small scrum of reporters in the hallways at the Capitol. 'But I'm for that because I want people who are able bodied but not working to work.' Hawley and other Republicans are walking a politically fine line on how to reduce federal spending on Medicaid while also promising to protect a program that serves some 80 million Americans and is popular with the public. As the party pushes ahead on President Donald Trump' s priority package, Republicans insist they are not cutting the vital safety net program but simply rooting out what they call waste, fraud and abuse. Whether that argument lands with voters could go a long way toward determining whether Trump's bill ultimately ends up boosting — or dragging down — Republicans as they campaign for reelection next year. Republicans say that it's wrong to call the reductions in health care coverage 'cuts.' Instead, they've characterized the changes as rules that would purge people who are taking advantage of the system and protect it for the most vulnerable who need it most. House Republicans wrote the bill with instructions to find $880 billion in cuts from programs under the purview of the Energy and Commerce Committee, which has a sprawling jurisdiction that includes Medicaid. In the version of the bill that the House passed on a party-line vote last month, the overall cuts ended up exceeding that number. The Kaiser Family Foundation projects that the bill will result in a $793 billion reduction in spending on Medicaid. Additionally, the House Ways & Means Committee, which handles federal tax policy, imposed a freeze on a health care provider tax that many states impose. Critics say the tax improperly boosts federal Medicaid payments to the states, but supporters like Hawley say it's important funding for rural hospitals. 'What we're doing here is an important and, frankly, heroic thing to preserve the program so that it doesn't become insolvent,' Speaker Mike Johnson said on NBC's 'Meet the Press.' House Democratic leader Hakeem Jeffries, meanwhile, has denounced the bill as an 'assault on the healthcare of the American people' and warned years of progress in reducing the number of uninsured people is at risk. The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office estimates that the GOP's proposed changes to federal health programs would result in 10.9 million fewer people having health care coverage. Nearly 8 million fewer people would be enrolled in Medicaid by 2034 under the legislation, the CBO found, including 5.2 million people who would lose coverage due to the proposed work requirements. It said 1.4 million immigrants without legal status would lose coverage in state programs. The new Medicaid requirements would apply to nondisabled adults under age 65 who are not caretakers or parents, with some exceptions. The bill passed by the U.S. House stipulates that those eligible would need to work, take classes, or record community service for 80 hours per month. The Kaiser Family Foundation notes that more than 90% of people enrolled in Medicaid already meet those criteria. The legislation also penalizes states that fund health insurance for immigrants who have not confirmed their immigration status, and the CBO expects that those states will stop funding Medicaid for those immigrants altogether. Republicans have cited what they call the out-of-control spending in federal programs to explain their rationale for the changes proposed in the legislation. 'What we are trying to do in the One Big Beautiful Bill is ensuring that limited resources are protected for pregnant women, for children, for seniors, for individuals with disabilities,' said Rep. Erin Houchin, R-Ind., in a speech on the House floor. Senate Majority Whip John Barrasso argued that Medicaid recipients who are not working spend their time watching television and playing video games rather than looking for employment. Republicans also criticize the CBO itself, the congressional scorekeeper, questioning whether its projections are accurate. The CBO score for decades has been providing non-partisan analysis of legislation and budgetary matters. Its staff is prohibited from making political contributions and is currently led by a former economic adviser for the George W. Bush administration. While Republicans argue that their signature legislation delivers on Trump's 2024 campaign promises, health care isn't one of the president's strongest issues with Americans. Most U.S. adults, 56%, disapproved of how Trump was handling health care policy in CNN polling from March. And according to AP VoteCast, about 6 in 10 voters in the November election said they wanted the government 'more involved' in ensuring that Americans have health care coverage. Only about 2 in 10 wanted the government less involved in this, and about 2 in 10 said its involvement was about right. Half of American adults said they expected the Trump administration's policies to increase their family's health care costs, according to a May poll from KFF, and about 6 in 10 believed those policies would weaken Medicaid. If the federal government significantly reduced Medicaid spending, about 7 in 10 adults said they worried it would negatively impact nursing homes, hospitals, and other health care providers in their community. For Hawley, the 'bottom lines' are omitting provisions that could cause rural hospitals to close and hardworking citizens to lose their benefits. He and other Republicans are especially concerned about the freeze on the providers' tax in the House's legislation that they warn could hurt rural hospitals. 'Medicaid benefits for people who are working or who are otherwise qualified,' Hawley said. 'I do not want to see them cut.'
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
How Trump's budget bill will impact student loans: What to know
US President Trump's "big, beautiful bill," which is currently being considered by the Senate after passing the House, will change the rules for current students relying on federal loans and grants as well as borrowers working to pay down their debt. Author and student loan expert Mark Kantrowitz joins Wealth to outline these changes and what student loan borrowers need to know. To watch more expert insights and analysis on the latest market action, check out more Wealth here. Sign in to access your portfolio
