From Ballotpedia
| A "yes" vote supported establishing a statewide system of ranked-choice voting. |
| A "no" vote opposed this proposal to establish ranked-choice voting, thereby maintaining the current voting system. |
This election was one of Ballotpedia's top 10 state-level races in 2016. Click here to read the full list.
Election results
- Election results from New York Times
Overview
Ranked-choice voting (RCV) is also known as instant-runoff voting. Question 5 provided that ranked-choice voting be used to elect U.S. senators, U.S. representatives, the governor, state senators, and state representatives.[1]
Question 5 defined ranked-choice voting as "the method of casting and tabulating votes in which voters rank candidates in order of preference, tabulation proceeds in sequential rounds in which last-place candidates are defeated and the candidate with the most votes in the final round is elected."[1]
As of August 2016, there were no states that used ranked-choice voting for standard statewide elections. Currently all states use the method of voting that allows voters to choose one candidate, and the candidate with the most votes in a single round of voting is elected.
Text of measure
Ballot question
The question appeared on the ballot as follows:[2][3]
| “ | Do you want to allow voters to rank their choices of candidates in elections for U.S. Senate, Congress, Governor, State Senate, and State Representative, and to have ballots counted at the state level in multiple rounds in which last-place candidates are eliminated until a candidate wins by majority?[4] | ” |
Ballot summary
The official ballot summary was as follows:[1]
| “ | This initiated bill provides ranked-choice voting for the offices of United States Senator, United States Representative to Congress, Governor, State Senator and State Representative for elections held on or after January 1, 2018. Ranked-choice voting is a method of casting and tabulating votes in which voters rank candidates in order of preference, tabulation proceeds in rounds in which last-place candidates are defeated and the candidate with the most votes in the final round is elected. | ” |
Intent and content
The following intent and content statement was prepared by the office of the attorney general:[5]
This citizen-initiated legislation would establish a new method of voting and counting votes in elections for the offices of United States Senator, Representative to Congress, Governor, State Senator and State Representative, and in primary elections to determine the nominees for those offices. Rather than choosing one candidate for each of these offices, voters would be allowed to rank all the candidates listed for each office, including up to one write-in candidate, in order of the voter’s preference. Thus in a three-way race, instead of marking one vote on the ballot for candidate A, B or C, the voter could express preferences among all three candidates by ranking them as choice(s) #1, 2 or 3 on the same ballot. Ballots are counted at the municipal level in Maine, and there are approximately 500 municipalities. Under current law, all 500 municipalities report their vote tallies to the Secretary of State within three business days of the election, and the Secretary of State then aggregates those results in a single tabulation. The candidate with the most votes for each office based on that single tabulation wins. Ranked-choice voting involves a different process for tallying voters’ choices. All of the voters’ first-choice votes would be tallied in the first round of counting by municipal officials and reported to the Secretary of State within three business days of the election, as occurs now. In a multi-candidate race, if one candidate were to win more than 50% of the total votes in the first round, that candidate would be declared the winner. If no candidate received over 50% of the vote in round one, then there would be a second round of counting. The candidate in last place after the first round would be eliminated, and the second-choice votes of the voters who preferred the eliminated candidate would be distributed to their second-choice candidates. In a three-way race, only two candidates would continue to round two, and the candidate with the most votes after round two would win. If there were four or more candidates in the race, the process might need to go to a third round of counting. A voter’s first choice would continue to be counted in each round unless that candidate had been eliminated, at which point the voter’s next ranked choice who had not been eliminated would be counted. This process would continue until only two candidates were left in the final round, or until one candidate received a majority. The second and subsequent rounds of counting voter preferences could not be performed at the local level for statewide offices such as Governor or U.S. Senate, or for any elective office that encompasses more than one municipality. The process of re-allocating voter preferences in a multicandidate race would have to be done centrally, using computer software to read digitally scanned images of the ballots. Ballots or electronic devices holding images of ballots would have to be retrieved from all the municipalities in the district for that particular elective office (meaning 500 towns in a gubernatorial or U.S. Senate race), and delivered to a secure central location where the second and, if necessary, subsequent rounds of counting could be performed. The Maine Constitution currently provides that in elections for Governor, State Senator and State Representative, the candidate who receives “a plurality of all votes returned” as reported by the municipalities wins. In order to implement ranked-choice voting in general elections for these offices, this language would have to be amended by a separate constitutional resolve, adopted by a two-thirds vote of the Legislature and approved by the voters at a statewide referendum election. See Opinion of the Attorney General, No. 2016-01, dated March 4, 2016. If approved, the citizen initiative would take effect 30 days after the Governor proclaims the official results of the November 2016 election, but the ranked-choice voting system would not apply to elections until 2018. This would allow time for the Legislature and the voters to consider a constitutional amendment before implementation. A “YES” vote is to enact the initiated legislation. A “NO” vote opposes the initiated legislation. |
Full text
The full text of the measure could be found here.
Fiscal impact
The Maine Office of Fiscal and Program Review's fiscal impact statement stated that the secretary of state's office would need $761,344 in fiscal year 2017-18 and $641,440 in fiscal year 2018-19 to print additional ballot pages and update ballot machines. The Department of Public Safety would need a general fund appropriation of $75,926 and a Highway Fund allocation of $72,948 in fiscal years 2017-18 and 2018-19 for overtime and fuel to retrieve, secure and return election ballots. These expenditures would be repeated in subsequent years in similar amounts.[5]
Support
The campaign in support of Question 5 was led by the Committee for Ranked Choice Voting.[6]
The initiative was proposed by Rep. Diane Russell (D-39) and former Sen. Dick Woodbury (I-11). Both were proponents of ranked-choice voting in the state legislature, but their bills never passed.[7] Rep. Russell, speaking about Question 5, said, "I think the voters are hungry for a system that allows them to vote their hopes." Former Sen. Woodbury said, "Under the current ‘winner-take-all-system,’ the entire system is about polling and spoilers. That’s not what’s great about democracy."[8]
As part of the campaign in support of Question 5, the Committee for Ranked Choice Voting held several "beer election" events to demonstrate how ranked choice voting works.[9] A schedule of the events can be found here.
Supporters
Organizations
Individuals
- Augusta Mayor David Rollins[13]
- Bangor Mayor Sean Faircloth
- Brewer Mayor Bev Uhlenhake
- Chellie Pingree (D-1), member of the United States House of Representatives[10]
- Shenna Bellows (D), former executive director of the Maine ACLU, former candidate for United States Senate, and current candidate for Maine State Senate
- Dale McCormick, Augusta city councillor, former candidate for the United States House of Representatives, former member of the Maine State Senate, and former Maine state treasurer
- Peter Mills (R), former member of the Maine State Senate, two-time gubernatorial candidate, and recipient of the Navy Achievement Medal and Navy Commendation Medal
- Dick Woodbury (I), former member of the Maine State Senate and Maine House of Representatives, and former Federal Reserve Bank of Boston visiting scholar
- L. Gary Knight (R), former member of the Maine House of Representatives
- Terry Hayes (I), Maine state treasurer and former member of the Maine House of Representatives
- Stacey Fitts (R), former member of the Maine House of Representatives
- Tom Allen, former member of the United States House of Representatives and candidate for United States Senate
- Eliot Cutler (I), two-time gubernatorial candidate[7]
- Kerri Prescott Bickford (R), former member of the Maine House of Representatives[14]
- Ben Chin, political engagement director for Maine People's Alliance[15]
- Charles Morrison, former Commissioner of Labor and former president and CEO of the Androscoggin County Chamber of Commerce[16]
- Lucien Gosselin, former director of the Lewiston-Auburn Economic Growth Council and former Lewiston city administrator
- Howard Dean (D), former governor of Vermont[17]
- Dennis Damon (D), former state senator and Hancock County commissioner[18]
- Rep. Paul Gilbert (D-87)[19]
- Krist Novoselic, former bassist, Nirvana[20]
- Karen Heck, former mayor of Waterville[21]
A full list of endorsements for Question 5 can be found here.
Arguments in favor
The League of Women Voters of Maine, which has endorsed ranked-choice voting (RCV), listed the following five points as advantages of the system:[22]
| Ad paid for by The Committee for Ranked Choice Voting. |
| “ |
| ” |
Former Sen. Dick Woodbury (I-11), who was involved in proposing Question 5, provided the following six reasons to support the ranked-choice voting measure:[23]
| “ | First, the finally elected candidate is chosen by a majority of voters. Second, there is no such thing as a spoiler candidate. If a candidate turns out not to be electable, then he or she is eliminated in the counting process. The candidate doesn’t “spoil” the result by taking away votes from somebody else. Third, voters can cast their vote for a preferred candidate without the strategic dilemma of potentially helping a candidate they oppose. Fourth, by avoiding spoiler candidates and strategic voting, the entire messaging of campaigns, media coverage and public evaluation of candidates will focus on issues, vision, experience and capabilities; not on polling and electability. Fifth, elected candidates can serve with a credibility and mandate that can only be delivered by a majority of votes cast. Sixth, and perhaps most importantly, campaigns will be more civil and respectful, as candidates avoid alienating their opponents’ supporters. Rather than appealing to loyal supporters alone, a winning candidate needs to appeal to a genuine majority of all voters, including those whose first choice may be somebody else. [4] | ” |
Dick Woodbury also submitted the following public comments on behalf of The Committee for Ranked Choice Voting to the secretary of state's voter's guide in support of Question 5:[5]
| “ | We need a system that works – where candidates with the best ideas, not the biggest bank accounts have a fighting chance. You should never have to vote for the “lesser of two evils” when there is another candidate you really like. Question 5 proposes a better system, Ranked Choice Voting, which restores majority rule and gives voters more voice in our democracy. This simple change to the way we elect Maine’s leaders gives you the freedom to vote for the candidate you like best without feeling like your vote is “wasted” – and without worrying that you will help to elect the candidate you like least. Question 5 is broadly supported by Democrats, Republicans, Independents, Greens, and Libertarians across Maine. Seventy-three thousand Maine citizens signed petitions to place it on the ballot. That's because Mainers understand our system is broken, and we'll be better off as a state if voters have more voice and a majority elect our leaders. Ranked Choice Voting works just like actual runoff elections without the cost and delay. It is the only runoff system that allows the men and women of the U.S. Armed Forces stationed overseas to fully participate in our elections. It has been used across the U.S. for years, including in Portland, Maine, where voters report ease of use and greater satisfaction with elections. We all have a responsibility to vote to make our state and our country a better place for our children and grandchildren. Question 5 is the change we need to give voters more voice in our democracy. Please visit our website for more information: www.YesOn5.me[4] | ” |
State Rep. Diane Russell (D-39) made the following argument:[24]
| “ | Maine has a strong independent streak, something we’re fiercely proud of. As it stands, our current election system is not designed to account for multiple candidates, like we often have. The current system is outdated for a world of choice. Every salad bar comes with multiple dressing options; why shouldn’t every election come with multiple candidates? It’s time for a better election system. It’s time for ranked choice voting. Instead of just voting for a first-choice candidate, voters would be able to have a second and third choice. ... Mainers deserve vibrant elections about ideas and vision — real choice, instead of campaigns about polls and spoiler effects. Ranked choice voting is the clear choice to bring that vision to reality.[4] | ” |
Although they did not endorsed Question 5, the following experts stated that the measure was constitutional:[25]
- Dmitry Bam, constitutional law professor, University of Maine School of Law
- Peter Pitegoff, former dean, University of Maine School of Law
- Timothy Shannon, partner, Verrill Dana LLP
- Alexandra Shapiro, partner, Shapiro Arata LLP
Opposition
Opponents
Arguments against
Many of the arguments against Question 5 were focused around a few key concepts. Opponents claimed that changing the voting system in Maine to a ranked choice system would be costly and time consuming to implement; could be unconstitutional , which could lead to additional court costs; would be confusing to voters; and would end in results that don't properly capture the will of the voters.
In an opinion article, Rep. Heather Sirocki (R-28) argued against ranked choice voting, saying that it would:[31]
| “ |
| ” |
Marian McCue, the former editor and publisher of The Forecaster, said the following:[32]
| “ | One problem of RCV is that especially with lots of candidates, a winner can be chosen with a relatively small number of first-place votes. This was exactly what happened in the city of Oakland, California, in 2010 when Jean Quan, who received only 24 percent of votes in the first round, ended up winning the election because she was the second and third choice of many voters. In Burlington, Vermont, after the leader in the first round did not win an election, RCV was repealed.[4] | ” |
Gordon L. Weil, a former state agency head, argued the following:[33]
| “ | Ranked-choice proponents dislike primaries, because fringe candidates can win, producing an unhappy choice in the general election. That sounds like the position of philosopher-kings who really don’t trust democracy and certainly want to see the end of political parties.
If there’s something wrong with primaries, find a way to get more people to vote. But don’t manipulate their voting. Perhaps better arguments would be that it is loss costly and easy. But why should real democracy be easy or cheap? It’s worth doing right. Maine now uses a system that has produced acceptable results, both easily and cheaply. If we want decisions guaranteed to be made by a majority, then a runoff is a better idea, because it allows voters to make a clear choice rather than the muddled, computer-run outcome of ranked-choice voting.[4] | ” |
While she did not state opposition to Question 5, Attorney General Janet Mills expressed concern over the likelihood that if passed, it would probably require changes to the state's constitution, saying the legislation "...does raise significant constitutional concerns, and it may not be possible to implement ranked-choice voting as envisioned by this legislation without amending the Maine Constitution."[34]
Deputy Secretary of State Julie Flynn shared similar concerns as Mills, stating a concern over the possibility that candidates elected through a ranked-choice system could be challenged in court.[35]
Campaign finance
Support
According to the most recent reports filed on October 25, 2016, the support campaign reported $2,473,162.77 in total contributions and $1,984,718.08 in total expenditures in 2016. Of the contributions, $352,941.33 were in the form of in-kind contributions.[38]
| Committee | Amount raised | Amount spent |
|---|---|---|
| Committee for Ranked Choice Voting | $558,559.64 | $350,659.84 |
| The Chamberlain Project PAC | $136,950.72 | $138,691.60 |
| The Chamberlain Project BQC | $604,849.28 | $582,793.61 |
| Fair Vote - BQC | $225,488.25 | $224,331.25 |
| GreenME PAC | $0.00 | $1,100.00 |
| Maine People's Alliance - BQC[39] | $947,414.88 | $687,241.78 |
| Total | $2,473,162.77 | $1,984,718.08 |
Top donors
As of October 25, 2016, the following were the top five donors in support of this initiative.[38]
- Note:The Chamberlain Project BQC has donated $134,017.52 in in-kind donations and the Committee for Ranked Choice Voting has donated $80,000 of its funds directly to other PACs in support of Question 5. While these figures are reflected in the Top Donors list below, those funds are not included in the amount raised total listed above, as Ballotpedia does not count money used in PAC to PAC donations twice.
| Donor | Amount |
|---|---|
| Action Now Initiative | $470,000.00 |
| Chamberlain Project BQC | $134,017.52 |
| Fair Vote | $107,413.23 |
| Committee for Ranked Choice Voting | $80,000.00 |
| Committee to Elect an Independent Senate | $72,500.00 |
Opposition
Ballotpedia has not yet found campaign finance information in opposition to Question 5. If you know of committees that have filed in opposition to Question 5, please email it to editor@ballotpedia.org.
Methodology
In calculating campaign finance for supporting and opposing committees, Ballotpedia does not count donations or expenditures from one PAC to another since that would amount to counting the same money twice. This method is used to give the most accurate information concerning how much funding was actually provided to and spent by the opposing and supporting campaigns. Ballotpedia reports all in-kind donations reported by the state government.
Background
| Ballot Box Update: Maine Ranked Choice Voting Initiative, Question 5. |
- See also: Instant-runoff voting
While there are no states that use ranked-choice voting for standard statewide elections, some states use it for special elections. Arkansas, Alabama, Louisiana, and South Carolina used RCV for overseas voters in certain runoff elections. Several cities and towns adopted RCV for municipal elections in states such as California, Colorado, Maryland, Minnesota, and New Mexico. In addition, Portland, Maine, voters approved RCV for mayoral elections in 2011.[40]
Prior to the initiative petition campaign for Question 5, the issue of ranked-choice voting had been introduced in the legislature several times. Rep. Diane Russell (D-39) introduced ranked-choice voting legislation three times and former Sen. Dick Woodbury introduced one bill, but all four attempts failed.[7]
Media editorials
Support
- Portland Press Herald said the following:[41]
| “ | We have a system that is constructed to serve a world that no longer exists. Across the nation, political parties are becoming less representative of the population, and technological advances have made it easier than ever for individuals and small parties to reach a large number of donors and voters. Mainers who are tired of campaigns like the one that is now coming to an end should mark the name of their favorite candidate on their ballots and then put their own names on a petition to fix this broken system.[4] | ” |
- Portland Press Herald and sister publications Kennebec Journal and Morning Sentinel also later said the following:[42]
| “ | Parties used to play the role of consolidating opinion and building big coalitions that could win elections, but it’s unrealistic to believe that they can reclaim that role.
We are much more likely to see competitive multi-candidate races in the future than we are to see a return of two-party dominance. Under the current system, loud voices are noticed and the ability to bring people together undervalued. Ranked-choice voting is the right change for Maine.[4] | ” |
- The Times Record said the following:[43]
| “ | We shouldn’t have an election when a huge percentage of people vote for a candidate they don’t think is the best one because they are afraid of the worst one getting in. Independents and third parties should have an equal shot at governance — goodness knows the two major parties haven’t done so well over the last decade or so.[4] | ” |
- The editorial board for Village Soup newspapers, which include the Camden Herald, Courier-Gazette, and Republican Journal said, "We believe Maine should follow the path of the city of Portland, which elected its mayor in 2011 by ranked-choice voting, and allow this into our ballot booths."[44]
Opposition
The Ellsworth American said the following:[45]
| “ | The concept that Maine’s state and/or federal office holders ought to be elected by a majority, rather than a plurality, may be worthy of consideration. But if citizens are committed to the idea, the first step should be a Constitutional amendment to establish such a requirement.
Question 5 puts the cart before the horse and ought to be rejected by voters on Nov. 8.[4] | ” |
Bangor Daily News said the following:[46]
| “ | We remain unconvinced that changing the way Maine residents vote will suddenly bring all these positive benefits, just as term limits and public financing of campaigns have not dramatically altered the makeup of the Maine Legislature, how well it functions or the public’s perception of it. And, in a state where half the communities hand-count ballots, we fear voting and vote counting will become confusing, less transparent and burdensome, further eroding voter turnout and faith in our election systems and government.
For these reasons, we recommend a “no” vote on Question 5.[4] | ” |
The Mount Desert Islander said the following:[47]
| “ | An Act to Establish Ranked-Choice Voting would institute a unique voting law used nowhere else in America for statewide elections. The proposal is cumbersome, confusing and very expensive to administer. Secretary of State Matt Dunlop estimates $800,000. Ballot results every general election will be delayed weeks while state troopers drive all ballots to Augusta for counting. Further, the state’s attorney finds the proposal unconstitutional. A “no” vote is necessary here to preclude a prolonged battle to resolve this complicated maneuver to produce “choice.”[4] | ” |
Polls
Reports and analyses
Fiscal impact
The Maine Office of Fiscal and Program Review prepared the following fiscal impact statement:[5]
| “ | This initiated bill proposes to implement ranked-choice voting for the offices of United States Senator, United States Representative to Congress, Governor and state legislative candidates for general elections and primaries held on or after January 1, 2018. The Department of Secretary of State would require a General Fund appropriation of $761,344 in fiscal year 2017-18 and $641,440 in fiscal year 2018-19 to print an additional ballot page, update the ballot tabulating machines, lease additional ballot tabulating machines, purchase additional memory devices, lease a high-speed vote tabulating unit and contract 2 limited-period Special Deputy positions to oversee the central rankedchoice voting counting process. The Department of Public Safety would require a General Fund appropriation of $75,926 and a Highway Fund allocation of $72,948 in fiscal years 2017-18 and 2018- 19 for overtime and fuel to retrieve, secure and return election ballots. As most of the expenditures are on-going rather than one-time start up, costs in subsequent years are anticipated to be in a similar range.[4] | ” |
Path to the ballot
Supporters of the measure were required to submit 61,123 valid signatures by January 22, 2015, in order to be certified for the 2015 ballot.[7] However, the campaign opted to aim for the 2016 ballot, meaning proponents had until January 2016 to turn in signatures. The primary reason for waiting until 2016, according to former Sen. Dick Woodbury (I-11), was to have more time to educate voters on ranked-choice voting.[48]
Proponents of the initiative started collecting signatures on the November 4, 2014, election day. The signature collection campaign was led by Rep. Diane Russell (D-39) and former Sen. Dick Woodbury (I-11). They claimed to have gathered more than 36,000 signatures on election day alone.[7] The group claimed to have gathered about 45,000 signatures by December 10, 2014, and 60,000 by the first week of January 2015.[49][50][51]
Question 5 was certified by the secretary of state on November 18, 2015.[52][53]
Although measure supporters gathered enough signatures to qualify Question 5 for the ballot, as an indirect initiated state statute, it first had to be sent to the legislature, which had the option to either pass the law or not take any action and allow the measure to go on the ballot for voters to decide. On March 15, 2016, the legislature indefinitely postponed a vote on the measure, confirming that it would appear on the ballot in November 2016.[54]
Cost of signature collection:
Sponsors of the measure hired individuals to collect signatures for the petition to qualify this measure for the ballot. A total of $49,577.35 was spent to collect the 61,123 valid signatures required to put this measure before voters, resulting in a total cost per required signature (CPRS) of $0.81.
Related measures
Recent news
The link below is to the most recent stories in a Google news search for the terms Maine ranked choice voting Initiative Question 5. These results are automatically generated from Google. Ballotpedia does not curate or endorse these articles; they are included to provide readers with the most recent news articles on the subject. Click here to learn more about this section.
State profile
This excerpt is reprinted here with the permission of the 2016 edition of the Almanac of American Politics and is up to date as of the publication date of that edition. All text is reproduced verbatim, though links have been added by Ballotpedia staff.To read the full chapter on Maine, click here.
The phrase “up in Maine” conveys some of the state’s distinctive personality—ornery, contrary-minded, almost bullheaded, and rough-hewn. In the far northeast corner of the United States, Maine is the state geographically closest to Europe, but it was not heavily settled until the mid-19th century, by people from the South and the West—not the usual direction of American migrations. Maine grew in a rush, and then mostly stopped. There were 600,000 people there in 1860, but the population dipped after the Civil War—many soldiers did not return—and it did not top 1 million until the 1970s. In the urbanizing and rapidly changing country of the early 20th century, Maine was famous for its pointed firs and steady habits, with a few dozen small factory towns and paper-mill towns but nothing like a major metropolis.
Over the past 30 years, Maine has lost jobs in shoe manufacturing, chicken processing, papermaking, leather processing, and timber, but gained them in tourism, call centers and health care to serve its aging population. The Grand Banks have been overfished and fishing seasons shortened, but the lobster industry has been thriving with the harvest rising from ... (read more)
| Demographic data for Maine | ||
|---|---|---|
| Maine | U.S. | |
| Total population: | 1,328,535 | 314,107,084 |
| Land area (sq mi): | 30,843 | 3,531,905 |
| Gender | ||
| Female: | 51.1% | 50.8% |
| Race and ethnicity | ||
| White: | 94% | 62.8% |
| Black/African American: | 1.1% | 12.6% |
| Asian: | 1.1% | 5% |
| Native American: | 0.6% | 0.8% |
| Pacific Islander: | 0% | 0.2% |
| Two or more: | 1.9% | 2.9% |
| Hispanic/Latino: | 1.4% | 16.9% |
| Education | ||
| High school graduation rate: | 91.3% | 86.3% |
| College graduation rate: | 28.4% | 29.3% |
| Income | ||
| Median household income: | $48,804 | $53,482 |
| Persons below poverty level: | 13.9% | 14.8% |
| Source: U.S. Census Bureau, "American Community Survey" (5-year estimates 2010-2014) | ||
Presidential Voting Pattern
The percentages below show Maine voter preference in general election presidential races.
Maine vote percentages
- 2012: 56.3% Democratic / 41% Republican
- 2008: 57.7% Democratic / 40.4% Republican
- 2004: 53.6% Democratic / 44.6% Republican
- 2000: 49.1% Democratic / 44% Republican
U.S. vote percentages
- 2012: 51.1% Democratic / 47.2% Republican
- 2008: 52.9% Democratic / 45.7% Republican
- 2004: 48.3% Democratic / 50.7% Republican
- 2000: 48.4% Democratic / 47.9% Republican
More Maine coverage on Ballotpedia
See also
Additional reading
External links
Basic information
Support
- ↑ 1.01.11.2League of Women Voters, "Citizen Referendum on Ranked Choice Voting," accessed November 13, 2014
- ↑Maine Secretary of State, "Secretary Dunlap announces final wording of referendum questions," June 23, 2016
- ↑Maine Secretary of State, "Public comment period now open on wording of five ballot questions," May 13, 2016
- ↑ 4.004.014.024.034.044.054.064.074.084.094.104.114.124.134.144.15Note: This text is quoted verbatim from the original source. Any inconsistencies are attributed to the original source.
- ↑ 5.05.15.25.3Maine Secretary of State, "Maine Citizen's Guide to the Referendum Election," accessed October 4, 2016
- ↑Committee for Ranked Choice Voting, "Homepage," accessed December 11, 2014
- ↑ 7.07.17.27.37.4Portland Press Herald, "Ranked-choice voting advocates gathered 36,000 signatures on Election Day," November 12, 2014
- ↑Portland Press Herald, "Effort underway to ask Maine voters to switch to ranked-choice voting," October 27, 2014
- ↑Maine Beacon, "Ranked choice referendum has a beer-based strategy to win in November," August 15, 2016
- ↑ 10.010.1RCV Maine, "Endorsements," accessed July 19, 2016
- ↑League of Women Voters of Maine, "LWVME Position," accessed November 13, 2014
- ↑Represent.Us, "2016 Initiatives," accessed October 14, 2016
- ↑Bangor Daily News, "Backers of ranked-choice voting say it would add civility to campaigns," September 27, 2016
- ↑Portland Press Herald, "Maine Voices: Ranked-choice voting should be everyone’s choice to better democracy," April 20, 2016
- ↑Sun Journal, "Ranked-choice voting for better elections," April 24, 2016
- ↑Sun Journal, "Ranked-choice voting would improve politics in Maine," October 9, 2016
- ↑New York Times, "Howard Dean: How to Move Beyond the Two-Party System," October 7, 2016
- ↑Ellsworth American, "Ranked choice voting: Fair, simple, needed," October 7, 2016
- ↑CentralMaine.com, "Ranked-choice voting restores majority rule," October 17, 2016
- ↑Portland Press Herald, "Former Nirvana bassist says ranked-choice voting is key to election reform," October 17, 2016
- ↑CentralMaine.com, "Heck: Vote for children on Nov. 8," November 2, 2016
- ↑League of Women Voters of Maine, "Ranked Choice Voting," accessed November 3, 2014
- ↑Bangor Daily News, "No more spoilers, a focus on the issues: 6 reasons it’s time for ranked choice voting in Maine," January 26, 2015
- ↑Bangor Daily News, "Maine deserves elections about competing ideas, not strategic voting," October 19, 2014
- ↑Independent Voter Project, "Beware of Unconstitutional Claims on Maine’s Ranked Choice Voting," November 5, 2016
- ↑Maine Wire, "Ballot Questions May Run Afoul of Maine Constitution," September 29, 2016
- ↑Centralmaine.com, "Roberts: Maine, the way life shouldn’t be," October 8, 2016
- ↑Centralmaine.com, "Senate District 10 candidates differ on minimum wage, background checks," October 10, 2016
- ↑Portland Press Herald, "Question 5 advocates try to allay confusion about ranked-choice voting," October 23, 2016
- ↑Bangor Daily News, "A plurality is a plurality. Why Question 5 is definitely unconstitutional," October 26, 2016
- ↑The Maine Wire, "Ranked Choice Voting: Wrong for Maine & Blatantly Unconstitutional," March 29, 2016
- ↑The Forecaster, "Capitol Notebook: Second thoughts on ranked-choice voting," December 7, 2015
- ↑centralmaine.com, "We don’t need ranked-choice voting," December 17, 2015
- ↑Bangor Daily News, "Maine AG: Ranked-choice voting plan needs constitutional fix," March 7, 2016
- ↑Portland Press Herald, "Maine officials, legislators question legality of ranked-choice voting," January 20, 2016
- ↑Note: These totals include all contributions and may include in-kind donations as well as cash donations.
- ↑Note: This date is the most recent date on which Ballotpedia staff researched campaign finance data. The actual date through which this information is accurate depends on the campaign finance reporting requirements in this state.
- ↑ 38.038.1Maine Commission on Government Ethics and Election Practices, "Ballot Questions," accessed July 19, 2016
- ↑Note:Maine People's Alliance - BQC also registered in support of Maine's minimum wage and income tax initiatives. The committee's reports do not indicate which measure their funds are raised or spent for, so the figures shown here are for the committee overall and may not reflect the funds specific to Question 2.
- ↑League of Women Voters Maine, "It's Time For Ranked Choice Voting (RCV) in Maine," accessed May 20, 2016
- ↑Portland Press Herald, "Our View: Ranked-choice petition first step toward reform," October 31, 2014
- ↑Portland Press Herald, "Our View: Ranked-choice voting is right for Maine," October 16, 2016
- ↑The Times Record, "Ranked Choice," November 13, 2014
- ↑Village Soup, "Cast your ballot for ranked-choice voting," December 31, 2015
- ↑The Ellsworth American, "Ranked-choice voting," September 16, 2016
- ↑Bangor Daily News, "The reasons for Maine to adopt ranked-choice voting are unconvincing," October 19, 2016
- ↑Mount Desert Islander, "Referendum review," November 4, 2016
- ↑Portland Press Herald, "Maine effort to switch to ranked-choice voting to wait until 2016," January 22, 2015
- ↑Bangor Daily News, "Maine ranked choice voting proponents within 15,000 signatures of forcing statewide referendum," December 11, 2014
- ↑Bangor Daily News, "Group pushing Maine electoral reform nears signature threshold, eyes referendum in 2015 or 2016," January 5, 2015
- ↑Bangor Daily News, "Maine lawmakers seek to end strategic voting, ‘spoilers’ with petition for ranked-choice voting," October 27, 2014
- ↑Portland Press Herald, "Maine election officials certify ranked-choice voting proposal for 2016 ballot," November 18, 2015
- ↑Daily Kos, "Morning Digest: Maine might become the first state to adopt instant runoff voting statewide," November 19, 2015
- ↑Maine Legislature, "An Act To Establish Ranked-choice Voting," accessed April 1, 2016