Maine Question 5, Ranked-Choice Voting Initiative (2016)

Maine Question 5
Election date November 8, 2016
Topic Electoral systems
Status a Approved
Type State statute	Origin Citizens

2016 measures
November 8
Question 1 a
Question 2 a
Question 3 d
Question 4 a
Question 5 a
Question 6 a
Polls
Voter guides
Campaign finance
Signature costs

The Maine Ranked Choice Voting Initiative, also known as Question 5, was on the November 8, 2016, ballot in Maine as an indirect initiated state statute. The measure was approved.

A "yes" vote supported adopting ranked-choice voting for congressional, state legislative, and gubernatorial elections.

A "no" vote opposed adopting ranked-choice voting.

Question 5 was originally designed to go into effect on January 1, 2018. The state legislature, however, approved a bill to delay implementation until December 2021 and repeal Question 5 unless a constitutional amendment addressing concerns over the legality of ranked choice voting is passed. Proponents of Question 5, however, collected and submitted enough signatures for a veto referendum targeting the repeal of the legislation to delay ranked-choice voting. On June 12, 2018, Maine voters used ranked-choice voting to decide certain primary races and decided in favor of keeping the ranked-choice voting method rather than delaying and potentially repealing it.

On May 23, 2017, the Maine Supreme Judicial Court sent a non-binding opinion to the legislature, which said that portions of Question 5 conflicted with the Maine Constitution. Legislators attempted to address the issue during the 2017 legislative session, but the Republican and Democratic caucuses were unable to agree on a solution. During the special legislative session on October 23, 2017, the state legislature approved the bill to require the passage of a constitutional amendment allowing for ranked-choice voting by December 1, 2021, or else Question 5 would be repealed. Governor Paul LePage (R) allowed the bill to go into effect without signing it.

This election was one of Ballotpedia's top 10 state-level races in 2016. Click here to read the full list.

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.

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."

As of August 2016, there were no states that used ranked-choice voting for standard statewide elections. The passage of Question 5 made Maine the first state to use the ranked-choice method for elections. As of 2016, all other states used 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.

Aftermath

Click here to read about the 2018 veto referendum that was approved, preserving ranked-choice voting instead of delaying and potentially repealing it.

Opinion of the Supreme Judicial Court

See also: Maine Supreme Judicial Court advisory opinion on ranked-choice voting

Senate

On February 2, 2017, the Maine State Senate voted 24 to 10 to ask the Maine Supreme Judicial Court to review and issue an opinion on Question 5. Senate President Mike Thibodeau (R-11) said he wanted to know whether the ballot initiative was in conflict with the state constitution. Sen. Eric Brakey (R-20), a supporter of ranked-choice voting, said, "I do think that there are some very serious constitutional issues here that even the attorney general has raised." In 2016, Attorney General Janet Mills (D) said ranked-choice voting appeared to conflict with language in the state constitution stating that election winners are decided by "a plurality of all votes returned," not a simple majority as required by ranked-choice voting. The questions that the Senate asked, which the Supreme Judicial Court also addressed, was:

“

Question 1. Does the Act's requirement that the Secretary of State count the votes centrally in multiple rounds conflict with the provisions of the Constitution of Maine that require that city and town officials sort, count, declare and record the votes in elections for Representatives, Senator and Governor as provided in the Constitution of Maine, Article IV, Part First, Section 5, Article IV, Part Second, Section 3 and Article V, Part First, Section 3? Question 2. Does the method of ranked-choice voting established by the Act in elections for Representative, Senator and Governor violate the provisions of the Constitution of Maine, Article IV, Part First, Section 5, Article IV, Part Second, Sections 3 and 4 and Article V, Part First, Section 3, respectively, which declare that the person elected shall be the candidate who receives a plurality of all the votes counted and declared by city and town officials as recorded on lists returned to the Secretary of State? Question 3. Does the requirement in the Act that a tie between candidates for Governor in the final round of counting be decided by lot conflict with the provisions of the Constitution of Maine, Article V, Part First, Section 3 relating to resolution of a tie vote for Governor for the House of Representatives and Senate?

”

The Committee for Ranked Choice Voting, the group sponsoring the initiative, responded to the state Senate vote, saying, "The 400,000 people who voted for ranked-choice voting in Maine are going to do everything in their power to defend this law and our direct democracy through the citizen initiative process."

Supreme Judicial Court

The Maine Supreme Judicial Court heard oral arguments regarding the initiative's constitutionality on April 13, 2017. In a unanimous opinion, the Supreme Judicial Court advised the state legislature that ranked-choice voting violates the Maine Constitution on May 23, 2017. Responding to the Senate's question, the court said, "Yes, the Ranked-Choice Voting Act conflicts with the Maine Constitution." The court also stated:

“

According to the terms of the Constitution, a candidate who receives a plurality of the votes would be declared the winner in that election. The Act (the ranked choice system), in contrast, would not declare the plurality candidate the winner of the election, but would require continued tabulation until a majority is achieved or all votes are exhausted. Accordingly, the Act is not simply another method of carrying out the Constitution’s requirement of a plurality. In essence, the Act is inapplicable if there are only two candidates, and it is in direct conflict with the Constitution if there are more than two candidates.

”

The advisory opinion dealt only with elections for governor, the Maine State Senate, and the Maine House of Representatives, as these are the offices for which plurality voting is specified in the state constitution.

Legislative proposals

On May 25, 2017, the state's legislative council allowed two bills to be introduced into the 2017 session—a procedural step required since the deadline for introducing new legislation had passed. One was a proposed constitutional amendment sponsored by Sen. Cathy Breen (D-25) to allow for ranked-choice voting. The other was a bill sponsored by Senate Majority Leader Garrett Mason (R-22) to repeal the initiative. The legislative session adjourned on June 29, 2017. Although no bill regarding Question 5 was passed in the regular session, a bill to delay implementation and automatically repeal the ranked-choice voting initiative in December 2021 if a constitutional amendment to address legal concerns is not enacted was approved by the legislature in a one-day special session on October 23, 2017.

Proposal to amend constitution

See also: Maine Changes to Implement Ranked Choice Voting Amendment (2017)

Sen. Cathy Breen (D-25) introduced the constitutional amendment into the state legislature to allow the state to use ranked-choice voting. A constitutional amendment would require a 2/3 vote of each legislative chamber and voter approval at the ballot box. She said, "I’m grateful to the court for so clearly laying out the path we must take if we want ranked-choice voting to become law, as voters intended. Voters in Maine approved ranked-choice voting because they’re tired of politics as usual. They want a better way forward, one that’s less partisan and more inclusive."

Senate President Mike Thibodeau (R-11) said he was doubtful a constitutional amendment would pass the legislature. He stated, "Political reality, I doubt very much that there are the votes to pass a constitutional amendment, we all know that threshold is two-thirds."

House Minority Leader Ken Fredette (R-100) said, "There’ll be no republican support for a constitutional amendment coming to the floor or whatnot."

On June 23, 2017, the House of Representatives 78 to 68, with five members absent, to approve the measure. As 101 members were needed to pass the measure, the enactment vote failed. The lower chamber's Democrats and independents supported the amendment. Republicans voted against the amendment.

Proposal to repeal Question 5

See also: Legislative repeal or alteration of citizen initiatives

Sen. Garrett Mason (R-22), the chamber's Majority Leader, filed Legislative Document 1625 (LD 1625) to repeal Question 5 on May 31, 2017.

The following officials sponsored the bill to repeal the ranked-choice voting initiative: Sen. Garrett Mason (R-22), Sen. Ronald Collins (R-34), Sen. Dawn Hill (D-35), Sen. Michael Thibodeau (R-11), Rep. Michelle Dunphy (D-122), Rep. Kenneth Fredette (R-100), Rep. John Martin (D-151), Rep. Heather Sirocki (R-28), and Rep. Ralph Tucker (D-50). Sen. Michael Carpenter (D-2) was a co-sponsor of the bill, but said he changed his mind after listening to testimony and reviewing the facts involved.

To repeal Question 5, a simple majority vote is required in both chambers of the legislature. Maine is one of 12 states with no restrictions on how soon or with what majority a citizen initiative can be repealed or amended.

On June 21, 2017, the Maine State Senate voted to table the bill, pending a motion from Sen. Mason. On June 27, 2017, the state Senate voted 21 to 13 to pass the repeal bill. Senate Republicans and three Democrats voted to pass the repeal bill, while 13 Democrats voted against the bill.

The Maine House of Representatives voted 79 to 66, with six members not voting, to pass an amended version of LD 1625 on June 27. The amended version replaced the content of the repeal bill with language providing for ranked-choice voting in congressional general elections and congressional and state primary elections. The amended LD 1625 would also allow ranked-choice voting in state legislative and gubernatorial general elections should a constitutional amendment be passed to authorize the legislature to determine the method of electing state officials. House Democrats and independents voted to pass the amended bill, while House Republicans rejected the changes.

On June 28, 2017, the state Senate voted to reject the House's amended LD 1625. The vote was 20 noes to 15 yeses. Two Democrats joined the Senate Republicans in voting against the amended bill. The remaining 15 Senate Democrats voted to pass the amended LD 1625. The House asked for a conference committee in response. The Senate rejected the conference committee in a vote of 12 to 18. LD 1625 was declared dead on June 28. To bring the bill back for further consideration during the 2017 session, a two-thirds vote of the legislature would have been required.

On June 29, 2017, Secretary of State Matthew Dunlap (D) said his office would begin drafting the process of implementing ranked-choice voting.

Kyle Bailey, the campaign manager for the Committee for Ranked Choice Voting, said the Question 5 supporters would have considered a veto referendum to overturn a bill to repeal ranked-choice voting. He stated, "If they choose not to do so, certainly supporters of ranked-choice voting have the option to do a people’s veto to repeal the Legislature’s repeal and to restore the ranked-choice voting law as enacted by voters."

Proposal to require constitutional amendment or repeal Question 5 in 2021

See also: Maine Question 1, Ranked-Choice Voting Delayed Enactment and Automatic Repeal Referendum (June 2018)

On October 23, 2017, the Maine State Legislature held a special legislative session. The state House took up Rep. Kent Ackley's (Common Sense Independent-82) LD 1646. The original version of LD 1646 would have delayed the implementation of ranked-choice voting until voters approved a constitutional amendment allowing the legislature to determine the state's method of voting. Rep. Kenneth Fredette (R-100) motioned the state House to amend LD 1646 to set a deadline of December 1, 2021, for the passage of a constitutional amendment and, if an amendment was not passed by the date, repeal Question 5. The state House voted 73 to 65, with 12 members absent and one member excused, to accept the amendment. The state House then voted 68 to 63, with 20 members not voting, to pass the amended LD 1646. Rep. Ackley, who sponsored the original version, voted against the amended LD 1646. The state Senate voted 19 to 16 to approve the amended LD 1646.

Gov. LePage allowed the bill to go into effect without his signatures. Referencing the veto referendum against LD 1646, LePage said, “I encourage the people who want to have a people’s veto to bring it in. The Supreme Court has already said it is unconstitutional, so let the courts decide.” LePage also said, "If the state of Maine doesn’t kill it, I’m sure because it has the federal officials in it, the First Circuit will, the federal courts will say it is just clearly unconstitutional on many grounds."

Vote in the Maine House of Representatives October 23, 2017
Requirement: Simple majority (50 percent) vote of those voting in each chamber
Number of yes votes required: 66  a
	Yes	No	Not voting
Total	68	63	20
Total percent	51.91%	48.09%	N/A
Democrat	11	56	7
Republican	57	0	13
Green Independent	0	1	0
Common Sense Independent	0	1	0
Independent	0	5	0

Vote in the Maine Senate October 23, 2017
Requirement: Simple majority (50 percent) vote of those voting in each chamber
Number of yes votes required: 15  a
	Yes	No	Not voting
Total	19	10	6
Total percent	54.29%	45.71%	N/A
Democrat	2	10	5
Republican	17	0	1

The Committee for Ranked-Choice Voting launched a veto referendum petition effort to repeal LD 1646. Kyle Bailey, campaign manager for the Maine Committee for Ranked Choice Voting, responded to the bill's approval, saying, "Hopefully, Maine people will see what's happening here and hold them accountable in the next election, and also rise up, if we move forward with a people's veto, if that's what comes out of tonight, that we're able to move forward and restore rank choice voting." In Maine, a veto referendum requires 61,123 signatures submitted 90 days after the legislative session. The Maine Committee for Ranked Choice Voting collected and submitted enough signatures to qualify the veto referendum for the June ballot. Because they submitted enough valid signatures, the enactment of LD 1646 was delayed, which means Maine voters used ranked-choice voting to decide primary races and voted on whether or not to keep ranked-choice voting or delay and potentially repeal it on the same ballot. Voters decided in favor of preserving ranked-choice voting. To read more about the veto referendum, click here.

Legislative alteration context

See also: Legislative alterations of ballot initiatives and Legislative alteration rules

From 2010 through 2018, 97 initiated state statutes and two initiated ordinances in D.C. were approved by voters. Of these 99 total initiatives from 2010 through 2018, 28 were repealed or amended as of April 2019. The states with the most total cases of legislative alterations of initiatives approved since 2010 were Maine—with four initiatives altered out of eight approved—and Colorado and Oregon—each with three initiatives altered out of five approved. Among initiatives approved from 2010 through 2018, marijuana was the topic that drew the most legislative alterations, with eight initiatives. Other topics addressed by legislatively altered initiatives included elections and campaigns, term limits, education, business regulation, law enforcement, minimum wage, taxes, and gambling.

The rate of legislative alteration was 13 percentage points higher for initiatives approved in 2016 and 2018 than initiatives approved from 2010 through 2015.

Legislative alteration rates
Year span	# approved	# altered	Alteration rate
2010 - 2023	152	30	19.74%
2016 - 2018	56	20	35.71%
2010 - 2015	43	9	20.9%

Click here for information about all legislative alterations of initiatives approved since 2010.

Election results

Maine Question 5
Result		Votes	Percentage
Yes		388,273	52.12%
No		356,621	47.88%

Results are officially certified.

Source

Vote in Pivot Counties

See also: Pivot Counties: The counties that voted Obama-Obama-Trump from 2008-2016 and Pivot Counties in Maine

Voters in Maine passed Question 5, with 52.12 percent voting to enact the initiative. At the county level, the vote ranged from 41.61 percent in Piscataquis County to 59.70 percent in Cumberland County.

The seven counties that voted for Hillary Clinton for president in 2016, and Barack Obama in 2008 and 2012, passed the measure by an average of 53.60 percent. Piscataquis County, the one county in Maine to vote Republican in the 2008, 2012, and 2016 presidential elections, voted against the measure, with 41.61 percent supporting.

Maine's other eight counties voted for Obama in 2008 and 2012 and then flipped to the Republican candidate Donald Trump in 2016. Ballotpedia calls these Obama-Obama-Trump counties Pivot Counties. Averaging across the state's eight Pivot Counties, support for the measure was 47.04 percent.

By winning eight counties that Obama won in 2008 and 2012, Donald Trump was able to secure one electoral vote in Maine for winning the 2nd Congressional District in the northern part of the state. Although Maine has awarded two of its electoral votes in presidential elections based on who wins each congressional district since 1972, the two electoral votes had never been split until 2016. In 2008 and 2012, Obama won the vote in both congressional districts.

The average yes vote percentage on Question 5 in Pivot Counties was 47.04 percent, which was 5.43 percent more than in the Republican county and 6.55 percent less than in Democratic counties.

Vote on Question 5 (2016) in Maine Pivot, Democratic, and Republican Counties
County	Type	Trump Margin in 2016	Percent "Yes" on Question 5	Percent "No" on Question 5
Androscoggin	Pivot	9.39%	49.16%	50.84%
Aroostook	Pivot	17.19%	44.88%	55.12%
Cumberland	Democratic	-26.35%	59.70%	40.30%
Franklin	Pivot	5.47%	47.67%	52.33%
Hancock	Democratic	-7.51%	51.27%	48.73%
Kennebec	Pivot	3.58%	50.32%	49.68%
Knox	Democratic	-14.24%	55.51%	44.49%
Lincoln	Democratic	-2.39%	51.27%	48.73%
Oxford	Pivot	12.94%	49.43%	50.57%
Penobscot	Pivot	10.91%	45.69%	54.31%
Piscataquis	Republican	25.14%	41.61%	58.39%
Sagadahoc	Democratic	-6.29%	53.07%	46.93%
Somerset	Pivot	22.67%	44.85%	55.15%
Waldo	Democratic	-0.28%	49.84%	50.16%
Washington	Pivot	18.44%	44.33%	55.67%
York	Democratic	-4.76%	54.51%	45.49%
All Pivot Counties		12.57%	47.04%	52.96%

Text of measure

Ballot question

The question appeared on the ballot as follows:

“

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?

”

Ballot summary

The official ballot summary was as follows:

“

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:

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 measure amended Maine Revised Statutes. The initiative added the following underlined text:

Citizen Referendum on Ranked Choice Voting Be it enacted by the People of the State of Maine as follows: Sec. 1. 21-A MRSA §1, sub-§27-C is enacted to read: 27-C. Office elected by ranked-choice voting. "Office elected by ranked-choice voting" means any of the following offices: United States Senator, United States Representative to Congress, Governor, State Senator and State Representative, and includes any nominations by primary election to such offices. Sec. 2. 21-A MRSA §1, sub-§35-A is enacted to read: 35-A. Ranked-choice voting. "Ranked-choice voting" means 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. Sec. 3. 21-A MRSA §601, sub-§2, ¶J is enacted to read: J. For offices elected by ranked-choice voting, the ballot must be simple and easy to understand and allow a voter to rank candidates for an office in order of preference. A voter may include no more than one write-in candidate among that voter's ranked choices for each office. Sec. 4. 21-A MRSA §722, sub-§1, as amended by PL 2009, c. 253, §36, is further amended to read: 1. How tabulated. The Secretary of State shall tabulate all votes that appear by an election return to have been cast for each question or candidate whose name appeared on the ballot. For offices elected by ranked-choice voting, the Secretary of State shall tabulate the votes according to the ranked-choice voting method described in section 723-A. The Secretary of State shall tabulate the votes that appear by an election return to have been cast for a declared write-in candidate and shall tabulate the votes that appear to have been cast for an undeclared write-in candidate based on a recount requested and conducted pursuant to section 737-A, subsection 2-A. Sec. 5. 21-A MRSA §723-A is enacted to read: §723-A. Determination of winner in election for an office elected by ranked-choice voting 1. Definitions. As used in this section, unless the context otherwise indicates, the following terms have the following meanings. A. "Batch elimination" means the simultaneous defeat of multiple candidates for whom it is mathematically impossible to be elected. B. "Continuing ballot" means a ballot that is not an exhausted ballot. C. "Continuing candidate" means a candidate who has not been defeated. D. "Exhausted ballot" means a ballot that does not rank any continuing candidate, contains an overvote at the highest continuing ranking or contains 2 or more sequential skipped rankings before its highest continuing ranking. E. "Highest continuing ranking" means the highest ranking on a voter's ballot for a continuing candidate. F. "Last-place candidate" means the candidate with the fewest votes in a round of the ranked-choice voting tabulation. G. "Mathematically impossible to be elected," with respect to a candidate, means either: (1) The candidate cannot be elected because the candidate's vote total in a round of the ranked-choice voting tabulation plus all votes that could possibly be transferred to the candidate in future rounds from candidates with fewer votes or an equal number of votes would not be enough to surpass the candidate with the next-higher vote total in the round; or (2) The candidate has a lower vote total than a candidate described in subparagraph (1). H. "Overvote" means a circumstance in which a voter has ranked more than one candidate at the same ranking. I. "Ranking" means the number assigned on a ballot by a voter to a candidate to express the voter's preference for that candidate. Ranking number one is the highest ranking, ranking number 2 is the next-highest ranking and so on. J. "Round" means an instance of the sequence of voting tabulation steps established in subsection 2. K. "Skipped ranking" means a circumstance in which a voter has left a ranking blank and ranks a candidate at a subsequent ranking. 2. Procedures. Except as provided in subsections 3 and 4, the following procedures are used to determine the winner in an election for an office elected by ranked-choice voting. Tabulation must proceed in rounds. In each round, the number of votes for each continuing candidate must be counted. Each continuing ballot counts as one vote for its highest-ranked continuing candidate for that round. Exhausted ballots are not counted for any continuing candidate. The round then ends with one of the following 2 potential outcomes. A. If there are 2 or fewer continuing candidates, the candidate with the most votes is declared the winner of the election. B. If there are more than 2 continuing candidates, the last-place candidate is defeated and a new round begins. 3. Ties. A tie under this section between candidates for the most votes in the final round or a tie between last-place candidates in any round must be decided by lot, and the candidate chosen by lot is defeated. The result of the tie resolution must be recorded and reused in the event of a recount. Election officials may resolve prospective ties between candidates before the election. 4. Modification of ranked-choice voting ballot and tabulation. Modification of a ranked-choice voting ballot and tabulation is permitted in accordance with the following. A. The number of allowable rankings may be limited to no fewer than 6. B. Two or more candidates may be defeated simultaneously by batch elimination in any round of tabulation. 5. Effect on rights of political parties. For all statutory and constitutional provisions in the State pertaining to the rights of political parties, the number of votes cast for a party's candidate for an office elected by ranked-choice voting is the number of votes credited to that candidate after the initial counting in the first round described in subsection 2. 6. Application. This section applies to elections held on or after January 1, 2018. Sec. 6. Application. This Act applies to elections held on or after January 1, 2018.

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.

Support

The campaign in support of Question 5 was led by the Committee for Ranked Choice Voting.

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. 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."

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. A schedule of the events can be found here.

Organizations

• Maine Democratic Party
• Libertarian Party of Maine
• Maine Green Independent Party
• League of Women Voters of Maine
• Represent.Us

Individuals

• Augusta Mayor David Rollins
• Bangor Mayor Sean Faircloth
• Brewer Mayor Bev Uhlenhake
• Chellie Pingree (D-1), member of the United States House of Representatives
• 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
• Kerri Prescott Bickford (R), former member of the Maine House of Representatives
• Ben Chin, political engagement director for Maine People's Alliance
• Charles Morrison, former Commissioner of Labor and former president and CEO of the Androscoggin County Chamber of Commerce
• Lucien Gosselin, former director of the Lewiston-Auburn Economic Growth Council and former Lewiston city administrator
• Howard Dean (D), former governor of Vermont
• Dennis Damon (D), former state senator and Hancock County commissioner
• Rep. Paul Gilbert (D-87)
• Krist Novoselic, former bassist, Nirvana
• Karen Heck, former mayor of Waterville

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:

Ad paid for by The Committee for Ranked Choice Voting.

“

RCV allows voters to vote for their favorite candidate without fear of helping elect their least favorite candidate. It minimizes strategic voting and eliminates the spoiler effect. RCV is most likely to elect a candidate with broad appeal. It ensures that winners enjoy majority support when matched against their top opponents. RCV encourages candidates to run with new ideas and dissenting opinions. It promotes civility in campaigns and encourages winning candidates to reach out to more people, reducing negative attacks. Unlike traditional runoff elections, it accomplishes these goals in a single election. Traditional run-offs require candidates to raise much more money and are much prone to negative attacks ads.

”

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:

“

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.

”

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:

“

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

”

State Rep. Diane Russell (D-39) made the following argument:

“

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.

”

Although they did not endorse Question 5, the following experts stated that the measure was constitutional:

• 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

• Rep. Heather Sirocki (R-28)
• Gov. Paul LePage (R)
• Don Roberts, former Augusta city councilor
• Sen. Andre Cushing (R-10)
• Sen. Bill Diamond (D-26)
• Matthew Gagnon, chief executive officers, Maine Heritage Policy Center

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:

“

violate the Maine Constitution in two ways – Plurality Requirement and Instant Runoff Tabulation Requirements lead to costly court challenges make Maine the only state in the nation to implement RCV be costly to implement- an estimated $1.5 million for new equipment also include the federal candidates running for U.S. Senate and House of Representatives, as well as Maine Governor, Maine Senate, and Maine Representatives to the House involve instant recounts if there are more than two candidates that do not result in a majority vote be time consuming further disenfranchise voters by using the recounted ballots of the loser to determine the winner

”

Marian McCue, the former editor and publisher of The Forecaster, said the following:

“

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.

”

Gordon L. Weil, a former state agency head, argued the following:

“

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.

”

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."

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.

Campaign finance

See also: Campaign finance requirements for Maine ballot measures

Total campaign contributions:
Support:	$2,944,419.44
Opposition:	$0.00

Support

As of January 18, 2017, the support campaign reported $2,944,419.44 in total contributions and $2,461,000.84 in total expenditures. Of the contributions, $416,596.82 were in the form of in-kind contributions.

Committee	Amount raised	Amount spent
Committee for Ranked Choice Voting	$768,364.21	$549,807.66
The Chamberlain Project PAC	$136,950.72	$138,691.60
The Chamberlain Project BQC	$669,849.28	$656,081.12
Fair Vote - BQC	$374,746.80	$373,587.60
GreenME PAC	$0.00	$1,100.00
Maine People's Alliance - BQC	$994,508.43	$741,732.86
Total	$2,944,419.44	$2,461,000.84

Top donors

As of January 18, 2017, the following were the top five donors in support of this initiative.

Note: The Chamberlain Project BQC has donated $134,017.52 in in-kind donations and the Committee for Ranked Choice Voting has donated $100,000 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	$100,000.00
Committee to Elect an Independent Senate	$72,500.00

Opposition

No ballot measure committees formed to oppose Question 5.

Methodology

To read Ballotpedia's methodology for covering ballot measure campaign finance information, click here.

Background

See also: Instant-runoff voting

While there are no other 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.

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.

Media editorials

Support

• Portland Press Herald said the following:

“

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.

”

Portland Press Herald and sister publications Kennebec Journal and Morning Sentinel also later said the following:

“

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.

”

• The Times Record said the following:

“

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.

”

• 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."

Opposition

The Ellsworth American said the following:

“

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.

”

Bangor Daily News said the following:

“

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.

”

The Mount Desert Islander said the following:

“

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.”

”

Polls

Maine Question 5, Ranked-Choice Voting Initiative (2016)
Poll	Support	Oppose	Undecided	Margin of error	Sample size
University of New Hampshire Survey Center 10/20/16 - 10/25/16	49%	31%	20%	+/-3.6	761
Portland Press Herald/University of New Hampshire Survey Center 9/15/16 - 9/20/16	48%	29%	23%	+/-4.3	513
Maine People's Resource Center 3/5/16 - 3/8/16	57.9%	29.8%	12.3%	+/-4.15	557
AVERAGES	51.63%	29.93%	18.43%	+/-4.02	610.33
Note: The polls above may not reflect all polls that have been conducted in this race. Those displayed are a random sampling chosen by Ballotpedia staff. If you would like to nominate another poll for inclusion in the table, send an email to editor@ballotpedia.org.

Reports and analyses

Fiscal impact

The Maine Office of Fiscal and Program Review prepared the following fiscal impact statement:

“

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.

”

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 be certified for the 2015 ballot. 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.

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. The group claimed to have gathered about 45,000 signatures by December 10, 2014, and 60,000 by the first week of January 2015.

Question 5 was certified by the secretary of state on November 18, 2015.

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.

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

Elections and campaigns measures on the ballot in 2016
State	Measures
South Dakota	South Dakota Independent Candidates Election Law Referendum, Referred Law 19 d
Colorado	Colorado Unaffiliated Elector, Proposition 108 a
Missouri	Missouri State and Judicial Campaign Contribution Limits, Constitutional Amendment 2 a/ot

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.

Maine Question 5, Ranked-Choice Voting Initiative (2016) - Google News

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 six presidential elections between 2000 and 2020.

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
• Influencers in Maine
• Maine fact checks
• More...

See also

Suggest a link

• Maine 2016 ballot measures
• 2016 ballot measures
• Laws governing the initiative process in Maine
• Instant-runoff voting
• Election Policy

Additional reading

• Portland Press Herald, "Ranked-choice voting advocates gathered 36,000 signatures on Election Day," November 12, 2014
• Bangor Daily News, "Maine lawmakers seek to end strategic voting, ‘spoilers’ with petition for ranked-choice voting," October 27, 2014

External links

• Maine Citizen's Guide to the Referendum Election

Basic information

• Citizen Referendum on Ranked Choice Voting

Support

• Committee for Ranked-Choice Voting
• Committee for Ranked-Choice Voting Facebook page