Ballot questions split Mainers

Maine voters will face six referendum questions on the November 8 ballot, with issues ranging from background checks for gun sales, the legalization of marijuana and a new funding proposal for schools, to raising the minimum wage and adopting a new system for voting. Some of the issues, particularly the gun background check proposal, have created sharp divisions within the state.

Marijuana legalization
Question 1 asks voters if they favor allowing the possession and use of marijuana under state law by persons who are at least 21 years old, along with allowing the cultivation and distribution of marijuana, subject to state regulation and taxation. The citizen-initiated legislation would repeal the existing state law that makes it a civil violation to possess up to 2 1/2 ounces of marijuana. Anyone 21 and older would be allowed to possess up to 2 1/2 ounces and to cultivate up to six marijuana plants for personal use, and they would be allowed to smoke marijuana in non-public places. State licensing would be required for retail marijuana stores or social clubs, and local approval by the municipality would also be required. A 10% sales tax would be placed on any marijuana sales.
In support of the proposal, David Boyer of the Campaign to Regulate Marijuana Like Alcohol writes that the tax revenue generated would help the state fund vital services. He states: "We are wasting valuable law enforcement and court resources on punishing adults for small marijuana crimes. ... Regulating marijuana would free up time and money for police to focus on serious, violent and unsolved crimes." He adds, "If marijuana were legal for private, adult use, we could control and regulate it, rather than allowing criminals to control its distribution and quality."
Opponents argue that marijuana is a gateway drug that will create more addicts when the state is fighting a drug epidemic. In opposition, Hillary Lister of Augusta writes that the proposal does not guarantee that the revenue generated would cover expanded costs for regulation. She states that marijuana social clubs would lead to concerns about impaired driving. The state's current medical marijuana program already allows for regulated cultivation, "balancing safe patient access with needed safety protections. Maine has some of the lowest arrest and incarceration rates in the country for cannabis possession and cultivation, and law enforcement resources are able to be directed to more serious problems. Our laws can be improved without passing an initiative that would bring new costs and favor big business over the health and well-being of Maine people."

More funding for schools
Question 2 would add a 3% tax on individuals with a taxable income over $200,000 to provide more funding for public schools.
In support of the measure, Robert Walker of Citizens Who Support Maine's Public Schools writes that the initiative, known as Stand Up for Students, would generate an estimated $157 million more dollars for schools statewide. He notes that, at present, a person earning $40,000 a year has to pay the same top tax rate in Maine as a person making $1 million. "Maine's wealthiest residents had their income taxes cut twice in recent years. These tax cuts mean less money coming from the state," he writes. Many towns have had to make tough choices to raise property taxes or cut back on school funding. "Many Maine families are struggling. It's only right to ask the wealthiest Mainers to pay their fair share to fund our public schools," he states.
In opposition, Dana Connors, president of the Maine State Chamber of Commerce, argues that under the initiative the additional money raised "must be spent on salaries for teachers and other school personnel," and cannot be spent on any other school needs. "It usurps local control by dictating to local school boards where the money must be spent, not where the local need exists." He adds, "More than one third of the state's local school districts would receive zero additional dollars raised from this new tax. That's right. Towns like Cape Elizabeth, Falmouth and Scarborough get millions, while towns like Sedgwick, Greenville and West Bath get nothing." He maintains that the state "should find a better way to give all our Maine students the education opportunities and experience they deserve."

Background checks on gun sales
Question 3 would require background checks prior to the sale or transfer of firearms between individuals not licensed as firearms dealers, with some exceptions for family members, hunting, self-defense, lawful competitions and shooting range activity.
David Farmer of Mainers for Responsible Gun Ownership writes that requiring criminal background checks on all gun sales is the single most effective policy for reducing the number of deaths from gun violence. In places that already require background checks on all handgun sales, 48% fewer law enforcement officers are killed with handguns; 46% fewer women are shot to death by intimate partners; and there are 48% fewer gun suicides. He writes, "Mainers know that support for the Second Amendment goes hand in hand with keeping guns away from dangerous people -- and that closing loopholes in the background check system is a common-sense policy that respects the rights of gun owners while helping to prevent crime and save lives."
In opposition to the initiative, Todd Tolhurst of Gun Owners of Maine Inc. writes: "While this initiative may sound good on the surface, it will not accomplish the goal of keeping firearms out of the hands of criminals, but it will make unwitting criminals out of ordinary Mainers. Criminals routinely avoid background checks by having others purchase firearms on their behalf. That's why, according to federal statistics, background-checked dealer sales are the #1 source of traced crime guns, not private sales." He writes that the bill would create criminals out of "ordinary Mainers" because of "traps" in the list of exceptions for background checks. "The so-called hunting exception, for example, does not allow you to lend a rifle to your neighbor at home to hunt in the morning. That would be a crime." He writes, "Even if you favor background checks, this bill is fatally flawed."

Raising the minimum wage
Question 4 would raise the minimum hourly wage from $7.50 to $9 in 2017, with annual $1 increases up to $12 in 2020. Also, the direct wage for service workers who receive tips would be raised from half of the minimum wage to $5 in 2017, with annual $1 increases until it reaches the adjusted minimum wage, which would occur no sooner than 2024.
In support of the measure, Amy Halsted of Mainers for Fair Wages writes: "This initiative is particularly important for women, who make up 6 in 10 of the 181,000 Mainers who will see a raise. For single moms struggling to provide for their families on a salary of $300 a week for full-time work, even a small raise is a lifeline." It would also boost wages for one in four workers over the age of 55, "many of whom can't afford to save for retirement," and for EMTs, firefighters and home health aides, who make less than $12 an hour. For service workers, even with tips they make an average of $8.72 an hour. "They're twice as likely to fall under the poverty line and nearly three times as likely to rely on food stamps to feed their families." She argues that the initiative "will create stronger communities by putting money into the pockets of workers who will spend it locally."
Opponents argue that a $12 minimum wage is too high, would hurt small business owners and would discourage new businesses from coming to Maine. Peter Gore, vice president for government relations for the Maine State Chamber of Commerce, comments, "It is going to increase the cost of doing business on an ongoing basis year after year and is going to be particularly detrimental to small businesses in rural areas, to restaurants and to innkeepers who have restaurants attached." Governor Paul LePage has argued that the proposed increase "would put us back 25 years; it would be devastating. It's going to bring us up to $12 in four years, highest in the nation. You can't attract people if you are the highest minimum wage."

Ranked-choice voting
Question 5 would provide ranked-choice voting for the offices of U.S. senator, U.S. representative, governor, state senator and state representative. 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. The process would be used in races in which more than two candidates are running.
Richard Woodbury, chair of the Committee for Ranked Choice Voting, writes: "We need a system that works C 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." He adds, "This simple change to the way we elect Maine's leaders gives you the freedom to vote for the candidate you like the best without feeling like your vote is 'wasted' -- and without worrying that you will help to elect the candidate you like the least."
In opposition, Gordon Weil of Harpswell, the former head of a state agency, has written: "Ranked-choice voting is more expensive than either the current election system or any accepted alternative to plurality elections in which the candidate with the most votes wins. And the proposed system is undemocratic and far more vulnerable to tampering than the current system." He adds, "In the current system, a runoff or a top-two primary, voters can understand the consequences of their choices. In ranked-choice voting, voters cannot foresee the effect of their second- and third-choice votes."

Transportation bond issue
Question 6 is a $100 million bond issue for highways, bridges, ports, harbors, marine transportation, railroads, aviation, and bicycle and pedestrian trails. It would be used to match an estimated $137 million in federal and other funds.
While funding is not specifically targeted for the Port of Eastport, Chris Gardner, executive director of the Eastport Port Authority, says there could be some funding for multi-modal projects for which the port authority might apply in the future.