Maine "Clean Elections" Initiative, Question 1 (2015)

• Text of measure
• Background
• Support
• Opposition
• Media editorials
• Path to the ballot
• Maine profile

Question 1
Type	Initiative
Origin	Citizens
Topic	Elections and campaigns
Status	Approved a

Maine 2015 ballot
Question 1 - Elections
Question 2 - Senior citizens bond issue
Question 3 - Transportation bond issue

All 2015 U.S. measures

The Maine "Clean Elections" Initiative, Question 1 was on the November 3, 2015 ballot in Maine as an indirect initiated state statute, where it was approved. The initiative strengthened the Maine Clean Elections Act.

Voting yes would have increased funding for the Maine Clean Elections Fund; increased penalties for violating campaign finance disclosure rules; adjusted political ad disclosure rules; and allowed candidates to qualify for additional funds.

Voting no would have kept current laws unchanged, including the funding for the Maine Clean Elections Fund and current disclosure and qualification rules.

The measure increased funding from $2 million to $3 million for the Maine Clean Elections Fund. The additional funding came from eliminating $6 million in “low-performing, unaccountable” corporate tax exemptions, deductions or credits “with little or no demonstrated economic development effect.”

The initiative increased penalties for violating campaign finance disclosure rules. Finances reported late are penalized at 100 percent, rather than the former $5,000. Penalties and sanctions are doubled for violations when they occur within 24 days before an election and tripled when violations occur within 14 days.

Advertisements and communications are required to disclose the campaign's top three funders.

The measure also allowed candidates to qualify for supplemental funds and required disclosures regarding gubernatorial inaugurations and transitions.

Election results

Maine Question 1
Result		Votes	Percentage
a Yes		119992	54.96%
No		98343	45.04%

Election results via: Maine Secretary of State

Text of measure

Ballot title

The ballot title was:

“

An Act To Strengthen the Maine Clean Election Act, Improve Disclosure and Make Other Changes to the Campaign Finance Laws Do you want to change Maine law to allow publicly financed state candidates to qualify for additional funds under certain limits and rules in the Maine Clean Election Act, to improve the disclosure of who pays for political ads, and to increase penalties for violations of campaign finance law?

”

Summary

The summary was:

“

This initiated bill makes the following changes to the laws governing campaign finance reporting and disclosure and the Maine Clean Election Act. 1. It authorizes the establishment of gubernatorial transition committees for the purpose of raising money to finance a Governor-elect's inauguration and transition into office and establishes requirements regarding disclosure and acceptance of donations from persons involved in lobbying. 2. It amends the Maine Clean Election Act by adding a system of optional supplemental funding for participating Maine Clean Election Act candidates who collect additional qualifying contributions. 3. It establishes new baseline initial distribution amounts for Maine Clean Election Act candidates. 4. It authorizes the Commission on Governmental Ethics and Election Practices to impose enhanced penalties for campaign finance violations occurring shortly before election day. 5. It increases the baseline penalties for failure to file required reports. 6. It increases the maximum penalties for certain campaign finance violations. 7. It requires communications that are independent expenditures to include a conspicuous statement listing the top 3 funders of the entity making the independent expenditure. 8. It increases the amount of the annual transfer to the Maine Clean Election Fund from $2,000,000 to $3,000,000. 9. It requires the Commission on Governmental Ethics and Election Practices to report annually on the Maine Clean Election Fund's projected needs, including an operating margin of 20%. 10. It repeals the seed money requirement for gubernatorial candidates. 11. It adjusts the number of qualifying contributions required for initial certification of gubernatorial candidates from 3,250 to 3,200 to correspond to the increments established for supplemental funds distributions. 12. It doubles the seed money cap for legislative candidates. 13. It provides rule-making authority for the Commission on Governmental Ethics and Election Practices regarding several of the statutory changes. 14. It directs the joint standing committee of the Legislature having jurisdiction over taxation matters to report out legislation to eliminate corporate tax expenditures totaling $6,000,000 per biennium, prioritizing low-performing tax expenditures.

”

Full text

The full text of the measure can be found here.

Background

MCEA

The Maine Clean Elections Act (MCEA) was enacted in 1996 through a ballot initiative titled Question 3. MCEA was designed to provide full public financing to candidates for the positions of governor, state representative and state senator. The Maine Commission on Governmental Ethics and Election Practices described the process of obtaining public financing under MCEA:

“	Candidates who choose to participate may accept very limited private contributions at the beginning of their campaigns (seed money contributions). To become eligible, candidates must demonstrate community support through collecting a minimum number of checks or money orders of $5 more made payable to the Maine Clean Election Fund (qualifying contributions). After a candidate begins to receive MCEA funds from the State, he or she cannot accept private contributions, and almost all goods and services received must be paid for with MCEA funds.	”
—Maine Commission on Governmental Ethics and Election Practices

Support

The campaign that supported the initiative was led by Mainers for Accountable Elections.

Supporters

Officials

• Sen. Roger Katz (R-15)
• Sen. David Dutremble (D-32)

Organizations

• Allen Avenue Unitarian Universalist Church
• Brennan Center for Justice
• Common Cause
• Democracy for America
• Demos
• End Citizens United
• Environment Maine
• Environmental Health Strategy Center
• Every Voice
• Food & Water Watch
• Free Speech for People
• League of Women Voters
• Maine Center for Economic Policy
• Maine Citizens for Clean Elections
• Maine Conservation Alliance
• Maine Council of Churches
• Maine Education Association
• Maine Equal Justice Partners
• Maine People’s Alliance
• Maine Small Business Coalition
• Maine Unitarian Universalist Advocacy Network
• Maine Women’s Lobby
• NAACP Portland Branch
• People for the American Way
• Public Citizen
• Sierra Club
• United Steelworkers

Businesses

• Ben & Jerry's Homemade Holdings Inc.

Arguments in favor

Sen. Roger Katz

Sen. Roger Katz argued in a column on CentralMaine.com:

“

It will strengthen transparency and accountability in elections by increasing fines and penalties for those who break our election laws and requiring wealthy special interests spending money on attack ads to disclose their top donors directly on their political advertisements so that Mainers know who is trying to influence their vote. It also will limit the influence that wealthy donors and special interests have on our political system by reforming our state’s public campaign finance system.

”

The League of Women Voters of Maine said the initiative aligned with the tradition of the group, namely, "the ideal of one person, one vote." The organization also argued:

“

When big-money donors spend in political campaigns, they create a feedback loop in public policy that further advances their own interests, deepening the political and economic chasm between themselves and ordinary people. Mainers have rejected this type of influence in the past by enacting the Clean Elections Act, and we're eager to do it again now.

”

The Maine Center for Economic Policy, a research organization focusing on economic well-being, endorsed the measure:

“

In order to truly strengthen this state’s economy we need to ensure that politicians are accountable to everyday, middle-class Mainers who are struggling to get by, pay their bills and keep food on the table – not wealthy individuals and big corporations that can write big campaign checks. These reforms will also make it possible for anyone to run for office - not just the independently wealthy, those dependent on the existing political infrastructure, or people beholden to moneyed interests. Until we limit the influence of big money on our representatives and increase transparency in Maine elections, special interests will continue to block progress on issues that impact Mainers throughout this state.

”

The Sierra Club Maine, the state's largest volunteer environmental organization, also endorsed the initiative, noting:

“

Sierra Club Maine is endorsing this referendum because we need clean elections to have a clean environment. A fair electoral process and transparent campaign financing regulations are essential to protecting Mainers’ environmental heritage, health and safety, and to transition our state to a clean energy economy. We won’t be able to achieve these critically-important public interest goals until we put control of elections back in the hands of Maine voters – not special interests and corporations.

”

Maine's U.S. Sen. Angus King said:

“

It will toughen fines and penalties for those who break Maine’s election laws so they are truly held accountable to the people. And it will encourage strict campaign spending and contribution limits by strengthening the state’s landmark Clean Elections system so that candidates throughout Maine can run for office without being reliant on special interests and big money donors. I’ve watched as Maine’s Clean Elections system has transformed the state’s Legislature and opened the door for everyday people like plumbers, teachers, carpenters and firefighters to be able to run for office and compete against deep-pocketed or well-connected opponents. By putting a focus on low-dollar donations and taking special interest money out of the equation, Clean Elections makes a $5 donor become a political player in our system and ensure that politicians answer to the people. That’s why Democrats, Republicans, Greens and independents have been such strong supporters of the system. Unfortunately, because of misguided changes at the state and federal level in recent years, our Clean Elections system has been severely weakened. Question 1 gives us an opportunity to make it strong once again. By passing Question 1, we can halt the unprecedented shift in campaign financing and return control of our elections to the hands of the people, restoring faith in our political system and protecting the fundamental principle of having a government that is of, by and for the people.

”

Campaign contributions

The Mainers for Accountable Elections committee raised $1,329,997.31 as of October 29, 2015.

Committee info:

PAC	Amount raised	Amount spent
Mainers for Accountable Elections	$1,329,997.31	$1,287,918.75
Total	$1,329,997.31	$1,287,918.75

The following is a list of those who contributed $9,000 or more to the campaign supporting the initiative:

• Maine Citizens for Clean Elections
• Sean Eldridge
• Maine Education Association
• Every Voice
• MPRC
• Common Cause
• Pat Stryker
• Communications Workers of America
• Katie McGrath
• Jeffery Jacob Abrams
• Proteus Action League BQC
• Cyrus Y. Hagge
• National Education Association

Opposition

In late September, Rep. Joel Stetkis, (R-105) created the NO on Question 1 campaign to begin pushing opposition against the initiative.

Arguments against

Rep. Joel Stetkis said:

“

Question 1 is nothing but an assault on the Maine citizens who want a citizen legislator to represent them. And I say that after looking at this: The front group that calls themselves the Mainers of Accountable Elections are trying to convince us that if this was to pass that this would actually reduce the power of the ultra wealthy special interest groups in Maine elections. ... It's a flat out lie. ... I've got a chart on (Facebook) that actually maps out where the money is coming from, supporting or being funneled into this group Mainers for Accountable Elections. As it turns out, when you look at the July finance report submitted to the state by this group, they've received about $312,000 dollars and over $300,000 dollars comes from special interest groups, political action committees and ultra wealthy donors from Massachusetts, New York and Washington DC. As it turns out, these are ultra wealthy special interest groups and their partners that have been active here in Maine for years, whether its hunting bears or traditional values or gun rights. So all of a sudden are we to believe that these groups have brought theirs staffs here to the state of Maine (and) spent hundreds of thousands even millions of dollars to protect us from them?

”

Rep. Lawrence Lockman

Rep. Lawrence Lockman (R-137) said:

“

It borders on scandalous that anybody would propose taking scarce money out of the General Fund to spend on robocalls, negative ads and lawn signs. Every dollar from the General Fund that goes to fund political campaigns is one less dollar for all of these urgent needs.

”

Gov. Paul LePage

Gov. Paul LePage (R) said:

“

This is the biggest scam on Maine people, this is truly, truly about getting the wealthy, wealthier and the poor people, dumb — keep them dumb — dumb them down. This is a scam.

”

Writer Nathan Strout said in an editorial on TheMaineWire.com:

“

The liberal groups behind the clean elections initiative, like the Maine People’s Alliance, know how to work the system in order to keep donors private, and they’ve been doing it for years. Why, then, would they support a referendum that would reveal those donors? The answer is that the referendum’s reforms are superficial. Let’s review the three major changes that they’re pushing for. 1. Increased fines for violators: Who cares? These groups are able to hide their donors legally without violating campaign finance laws. 2. Revealing the top three donors for outside political ads: That changes nothing. Donors who prefer to remain anonymous can essentially launder their money through 501(c)4’s which are not required to reveal their donors. 3. Increase public financing: It’s clear that public financing does not accomplish its goal of keeping money out of politics. Publicly financed candidates take taxpayer money, and then operate PACs to rake in special interest money to boost their campaigns. The Mainers for Accountable Elections referendum will not make campaigns/elections any more open. All it will do is allow liberals to campaign against big money and special interests in politics, while still raking in the money through progressive front groups and anonymous PACS.

”

Rep. Robert Foley

Rep. Robert Foley (R-7) said:

“

It’s a false negative to say you need to get money out of politics so it creates a level playing field. This is Maine. I haven’t met anybody in Augusta from either party whose motives I question. And that money can be better spent on programs that really impact Maine people.

”

Al Diamon said in a Daily Bulldog editorial:

“

'Big-money groups' will still be able to spend as much as they like to influence elections. It’s quite possible that, due to the increased funding this proposal provides to candidates, those deep-pockets contributors will counteract the extra public money by increasing their spending. But as the question indicates, there’s more to this measure than squandering another bunch of our tax dollars. It would also require political action committees that run advertising to include the names of their top three donors in the spots, so we’ll know who’s behind those nasty attack ads. But don’t expect to discover that the folks backing the well-funded effort to defeat your favorite legislator are the Committee to Subvert Democracy, the Council of Uncaring Fat Cats or Americans United for ISIS and Al Qaeda. Political consultants for major campaigns will make sure the big checks are all written by organizations with suitably benign names, such as Mainers for Fairness and Other Good Stuff, Local Citizens Committed to Our Own Idea of Better Government or Folks Just Like You Who Want Nothing More Than Your Happiness and Well-Being.

”

Campaign contributions

Opponents of Question 1 had raised over $33,000 as of October 29, 2015.

Committee information:

Committee	Amount raised	Amount spent
Mainers Against Welfare for Politicians	$33,965.00	$29,077.95
Total	$33,965.00	'29,077.95

Donors who contributed $10,000 or more to the campaign include:

Top contributors:

Donor	Amount
Linda Bean	$10,000
Doug Mayo	$10,000

Media editorials

Support

The Bangor Daily News editorial board wrote:

“

Question 1’s funding mechanism — admittedly an imperfect one — would more than cover the increased cost of clean elections if lawmakers comply with it: They would have to comb through dozens of tax breaks deemed ineffective following evaluation by the Legislature’s nonpartisan investigative arm and eliminate at least $3 million annually. Some have suggested opposing Question 1 because it won’t stem the flow of big, outside money into Maine politics. Others have said the initiative is more appropriately the domain of the Legislature. Virtually the entire question, in separate parts, has been supported by the Maine Legislature. Gov. Paul LePage thwarted a number of these needed changes. We agree that Question 1 won’t excise money from politics, but it builds on a system that has proven successful in limiting spending in many races, lowering candidates’ financial barriers to entry and making more legislative races competitive. The disclosure elements of the question are critical, long-needed changes.

”

Oppose

John Balentine, managing editor of keepMEcurrent.com, argued:

“

Campaign financing, for sure, is a complex issue. We agree with the Yes on 1 campaigners who are seeking a solution to it. But one thing is certain – just because someone spends a ton of money doesn’t mean they’re going to be elected. Recent presidential primary contestants are perfect examples. Well-heeled Jeb Bush is struggling, Scott Walker dropped out, and on the Democratic side, Bernie Sanders, who has masses of small donors aiding his run, is doing well. We think this proves that voters can be trusted with seeing through all the money and picking a candidate based on substance. We trust the voter, in other words, and we feel campaigns such as Question 1 don’t appreciate the fact that especially here in Maine, we judge based on substance. Take the bear-baiting referendum last year. Supporters of the ban spent the bulk of the money, though failed on Election Day. Money can be influential, no doubt, but campaigns have to win based on ideas. Also, the argument Question 1 supporters use – that good people don’t run for office nowadays because they don’t want to deal with collecting money and be beholden to donors – is based on pessimistic and false assumptions. It’s certainly not a given that a donation will make a candidate beholden to the donor. The answer isn’t changing the whole system; it’s electing independent, incorruptible people to office. Those seeking a fix to the very complicated issue of removing the outsized influence of moneyed donors should look to other solutions. Question 1 isn’t the answer.

”

Path to the ballot

See also: Laws governing the initiative process in Maine

Supporters of the measure were required to submit 61,123 valid signatures by January 22, 2015, in order to get the measure certified for the 2015 ballot. On January 21, 2015, Maine Citizens for Clean Elections turned in more than 85,000 signatures to the Maine Secretary of State's office. Of those signatures, about 80,000 were deemed valid. Since Maine initiatives are indirect initiatives, the legislature had the chance to approve the measure. Since the legislature did not, the measure went before voters November 2015. The Maine 2015 legislative session adjourned on June 30, 2015.

State profile

Demographic data for Maine
	Maine	U.S.
Total population:	1,329,453	316,515,021
Land area (sq mi):	30,843	3,531,905
Race and ethnicity**
White:	95%	73.6%
Black/African American:	1.1%	12.6%
Asian:	1.1%	5.1%
Native American:	0.6%	0.8%
Pacific Islander:	0%	0.2%
Two or more:	2%	3%
Hispanic/Latino:	1.5%	17.1%
Education
High school graduation rate:	91.6%	86.7%
College graduation rate:	29%	29.8%
Income
Median household income:	$49,331	$53,889
Persons below poverty level:	16.6%	11.3%
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, "American Community Survey" (5-year estimates 2010-2015) Click here for more information on the 2020 census and here for more on its impact on the redistricting process in Maine. **Note: Percentages for race and ethnicity may add up to more than 100 percent because respondents may report more than one race and the Hispanic/Latino ethnicity may be selected in conjunction with any race. Read more about race and ethnicity in the census here.

Presidential voting pattern

See also: Presidential voting trends in Maine

Maine voted for the Democratic candidate in all seven presidential elections between 2000 and 2024.

Pivot Counties (2016)

Ballotpedia identified 206 counties that voted for Donald Trump (R) in 2016 after voting for Barack Obama (D) in 2008 and 2012. Collectively, Trump won these Pivot Counties by more than 580,000 votes. Of these 206 counties, eight are located in Maine, accounting for 3.88 percent of the total pivot counties.

Pivot Counties (2020)

In 2020, Ballotpedia re-examined the 206 Pivot Counties to view their voting patterns following that year's presidential election. Ballotpedia defined those won by Trump won as Retained Pivot Counties and those won by Joe Biden (D) as Boomerang Pivot Counties. Nationwide, there were 181 Retained Pivot Counties and 25 Boomerang Pivot Counties. Maine had seven Retained Pivot Counties and one Boomerang Pivot County, accounting for 4.42 and 4.00 percent of all Retained and Boomerang Pivot Counties, respectively.

More Maine coverage on Ballotpedia

• Elections in Maine
• United States congressional delegations from Maine
• Public policy in Maine
• Endorsers in Maine
• Maine fact checks
• More...

Similar measures

• Maine Public Campaign Financing, Question 3 (1996) a

See also

Suggest a link

• Maine 2015 ballot measures
• 2015 ballot measures
• Laws governing the initiative process in Maine

External links

Basic information

• "Clean Elections" Initiative
• Maine 2015 Citizen’s Guide to the Referendum Election

Support

• Mainers for Accountable Elections
• Mainers for Accountable Elections Facebook
• Mainers for Accountable Elections Twitter