Maine to decide on absentee voting and ‘red flag’ questions

Maine voters will consider two statewide referendum questions at the November 4 polls. Question 1 would alter the laws governing absentee voting and voter ID requirements, among other changes, and Question 2 would enact Maine's Extreme Risk Protection Order law, which would be used to remove weapons and protect individuals and the public, often known as the "red flag" law. The Secretary of State issues the Maine Citizen's Guide to the 2025 Referendum Election, which is available online at the <www.maine.gov> site.

Question 1 would require IDs at polls, changes to absentee voting

According to the citizen's guide, the changes to the laws governing absentee voting and voter ID requirements, as estimated by the Secretary of State, would cost a little more than $1.3 million for the first year and then about $156,000 for each subsequent year.

A number of changes to absentee voting are being proposed. If approved by the voters, the law would no longer allow people to phone their municipal office for an absentee ballot; would no longer allow for a voter's immediate family member to request an absentee ballot on behalf of the voter; and would repeal the law allowing an immediate family member to return a voter's absentee ballot by mail. It would also require additional voter ID requirements on absentee voter application forms.

The proposed law would require voters to use an "identification envelope" when returning their absentee ballot, which would include filling in a form printed on the outside of the envelope with the voter's driver license or nondriver ID card number or a photocopy of a permitted photo ID, and identify the election for which the ballot is being cast.

The proposed law would end a program under the current law that allows voters who are seniors or people with disabilities to request ongoing absentee voter status. Currently, voters with this status are automatically mailed absentee ballots without having to file a separate application for each election.

Other parts of the proposed law would allow only one drop‑box per municipality, along with other restrictions on placement, and would require approved types of identification to be shown at the polls, along with additional criteria.

Kim Moody, executive director of Disability Rights Maine, wrote in opposition to Question 1, saying, "Nearly half of Mainers used absentee voting in the last election. For many, it is not just convenient, it is essential for their participation in Maine's elections. If this initiative passes, disabled Mainers, who rely upon absentee voting, will lose it. It would prevent voters from calling their town clerk to request a ballot. Secure ballot drop boxes will be limited to one in each town, making it harder for rural voters and people with mobility challenges to return their ballots. It will stop towns from including return postage, even if taxpayers vote to fund it. To put it simply, this measure dismantles a system that has long ensured that disabled voters voices are heard."

Alex Titcomb of Voter ID for ME wrote in support of the referendum, stating, "Every registered Maine voter may still vote absentee, for any reason, just as they can now, by requesting a ballot in‑person, online or via mail in request form. The process remains open and accessible to seniors, people with disabilities, students, working families, service members and all others who choose to vote from home. Voters will be required to show ID when voting, whether in person or by absentee ballot."

'Red flag' law would be enacted

Question 2 would enact the Extreme Risk Protection Order Act, sometimes known as the "red flag" law. The Maine Judicial Branch would require approximately $1.13 million annually to run the program and a one‑time cost of $76,000 for system updates. There could be additional costs to state, county, tribal, municipal or University of Maine System law enforcement agencies for the collection and storage of firearms.

The citizen's guide explains that, under the bill, a petition for an extreme risk protection order, which prohibits the purchase, possession or control of a dangerous weapon, may be sought if a person is suspected of posing a significant danger of causing physical injury to the person or to another person. The bill allows a court to issue an emergency extreme risk protection order without prior notice to the person who is the subject of the requested order. A hearing must be scheduled no later than 14 days after the order is issued.

An extreme risk protection order may be terminated upon the request of the person who is the subject of the order if that person shows by clear and convincing evidence that the person no longer poses a significant danger of causing physical injury to the person or another person. An extreme risk protection order may be renewed for an additional period of up to one year.

Nacole Palmer of Safe Schools, Safe Communities wrote in support of the referendum, saying, "Extreme risk protection orders empower families to go directly to a court and temporarily prevent someone, who a court deems dangerous, from accessing deadly weapons. In the case of Lewiston, had this measure been in place, perhaps one of the many warnings about the would‑be shooter would have resulted in action and the tragedy could have been prevented."

Governor Janet Mills is opposed to the referendum, stating, "If I thought Question 2 were good public policy, I'd be the first to support it – but Maine's current gun safety law is one of the most effective laws of its kind in the nation, carefully drafted to be constitutional. It has resulted in more than 1,100 court orders to remove weapons, far more compared to most other states that have so‑called red flag laws."