Checking In On Questions 3 and 5
Today is election day. Oh sure, there's a day in November when most voters will cast their ballots, but Mainers can request an absentee ballot and vote in the comfort of their own home right now, and an increasing number are choosing to do so.
In the last election some towns saw more than half of all ballots cast before election day. As we get closer to November 3, every day that passes means that more voters have put themselves out of reach of the persuasion efforts of the campaigns contesting the five statewide referenda on this year's ballot.
Some campaigns are already in full swing, and plan to use early voting to their advantage. Others are just barely off the ground.
Question 1, the attempt to strike down Maine's new same-sex marriage law, has been getting the lion's share of the public's attention, obviously due to the controversial nature of the issue, the large warchests of the campaigns seeking to influence the outcome, and the national implications of the vote.
Both sides have ads running on TV and radio and are currently locked in a policy debate over whether or not keeping the same sex marriage law would change Maine's school curriculum. (It wouldn't)
Questions 4 and 2, TABOR 2 and the excise tax cut, have been getting a bit less attention, but they also have groups supporting each side and are expected to be the subject of TV ads and other paid media.
In the last few days, those opposed to TABOR have launched their first TV ad, while those in favor have been distributing a controversial document describing what they say is wasteful government spending in Maine.
Question 2 so far has been mostly been defined by competing media events, conflict within the Green Party, and a steady stream of towns and municipalities passing resolutions opposing the initiative.
Which brings us to Questions 3 and 5 — the school consolidation repeal and the medical marijuana initiative, respectively. Both of these referenda have mostly languished in the shadows until recently, but one, at least, is now showing some signs of life.
Question 3 would repeal the school consolidation law championed by Governor Baldacci, which made it to the ballot due to a campaign led mostly by people in school districts in rural parts of the state who believe the system-wide savings promised by the law's supporters either aren't going to happen or will come at too great a cost to Maine's small towns.
There is a PAC registered in support and one in opposition to the law, but neither has reported much money raised or spent this year. Two principles of the campaigns, however, have recently been getting some press.
Newell Augur, a lobbyist known most for his successful campaign to repeal a beverage tax last year, is heading up the pro-consolidation side. Their slogan: It Costs Too Much & Hurts Our Schools. Catchy.
Skip Greenlaw, a former legislator who spearheaded the signature drive to put the question on the ballot, is continuing his leadership of the Yes on 3 election campaign. They don't seem to have much of an infrastructure in place, as evidenced by the fact that they've set up a ning.com page rather than a real Web site. They're also up on twitter.
If Yes on 3 wants to win, they'll have to do a lot more than tweet. A large majority of Maine voters live in municipalities large enough to be unaffected by the law or that have already consolidated. Regardless of the merits of the proposal, they're likely to just vote for the status quo unless the campaign can convince them otherwise.
I recently discussed Question 5, the medical marijuana initiative, in this space, so I won't rehash the policy details. There's not much to say about the politics so far, either.
The only formal opposition has been statements from the head of the Maine Drug Enforcement Agency and the director of the Maine Center for Disease Control opposing the initiative.
One expects that the measure's supporters would run a real campaign. After all, they were organized and driven enough to gather the signatures necessary to get it on the ballot, but the pro-pot folks seem to have trouble focusing for some reason. Instead of canvassing or holding press conferences, a look at their recent email blasts shows they're mostly just interested in planning a party. Specifically, an event called “Harry's Harvest Ball” that features bands such as Jerks of Grass, Stoned Mountain Boys and Bearquarium.
The only obviously political action they've asked their members to take is to write letters to Dr. Dora Anne Mills, the previously mentioned Maine CDC director, asking her to reconsider her stance on the initiative. Considering that Mills only has one vote and isn't likely to change her mind, perhaps that effort could be more productively spent writing letters to swing voters or, better yet, local newspapers.
If they want to use the current referendum as a chance to promote their issues at all, they had better get moving and find a creative way to break through the election noise. Maybe the folks who came up with the name Bearquarium have some ideas.
The views expressed on this Web site are those of the authors alone and do not necessarily represent the views of Down East Enterprise or its employees.
- Mike Tipping
- Login or register to post comments















Questions 3 and 5
Change is inevitable, it is only a question of what type(s) of change we allow (or are pressured from the outside if we are unsuccessful).
Beyond the very brief responses below I go into much greater depth and detail at http://hammer2010.com
Question 3: School administrative functions should bear cost savings through some consolidation, but most agree the process by which this has been handled has been lacking.
I do not favor a repeal, but better implementation and even more importantly a greater sophistication in regard to what type of cost-cutting, and other measures, translate into greater prosperity.
Overall, I believe in a stabilize to invest model that has two fundamental steps. Some people call it cut to invest, but stabilize to invest indicates that we must address structural deficiencies such that cutting does not become merely a stopgap measure that is always reactionary and behind the times (like plugging our fingers into every hole where water is already coming through).
Just as individuals and businesses must be fiscally responsible, so must Government. We must, as step one tighten our belts and not live beyond our means.
Step two is growing a bigger pie in Maine through the creation of better paying jobs, so that we have more income earned by Mainers and are not always just relegated to fighting over who is going to get a larger piece of that smaller pie.
My expertise in step two is one critical qualification for being Governor and increasing the prosperity of our state.
Question 5: I honestly haven't significantly studied this question, but I will, so I will reserve comments on it at this time.