Secretary of State Matthew Dunlap says he’ll decide by next week whether a referendum proposal on taxes and welfare submitted by the Maine Republican Party should be broken into pieces. His deliberations should be pretty short, as state law makes it clear that a referendum question should focus on just one issue.
Last month, the GOP submitted a lengthy proposal to the secretary of state’s office seeking to reduce and eventually end the state’s income tax and further restrict welfare benefits. Party Chairman Rick Bennett said at the time he hoped the wording of a referendum question would be something simple, such as “Do you want to reform welfare and reduce taxes?”
State law makes it clear that these two, unrelated issues require separate ballot questions.
Regarding the wording of citizen’s initiatives, the law says: “The secretary of state shall advise petitioners that the proper suggested format for an initiative question is a separate question for each issue.”
That is pretty straightforward, but the statute goes on to say: “In determining whether there is more than one issue, each requiring a separate question, considerations include whether: (1) A voter would reasonably have different opinions on the different issues; (2) Having more than one question would help voters to better understand the subject matter; and (3) The questions are severable and can be enacted or rejected separately without negating the intent of the petitioners.”
Tax rates and welfare are clearly two separate issues. As presented in the GOP proposal, tightening the eligibility for TANF and food stamps is not contingent upon lower income taxes and vice versa. The GOP document makes no effort to link the two issues; they are merely presented together.
Comparing the GOP proposal to Question 1 on this November’s ballot, as Republican Party Executive Director Jason Savage did this week, is a nonstarter. Each item in Question 1 deals with campaign finance and disclosure, which is one issue.
Second, a voter could reasonably have different opinions on lowering the state income tax and adding new restrictions to welfare benefits. In fact, a voter could have differing opinions on the nine individual requirements and restrictions on TANF, food stamps and general assistance that the GOP has included in its proposal.
Because the issues of welfare and income tax rates can stand on their own, they are severable. Separating them does not negate the GOP’s intent to take these issues directly to the voters because they have been rejected by the Legislature.
For these reasons, bundling the issues into one question would violate the standards set out in law.
The two issues were bundled together for political reasons. Tax changes have repeatedly been defeated at the ballot box, so the proposal to cut the state’s income tax likely wouldn’t fare well as a standalone question.
Welfare, on the other hand, is a hot-button issue for many, especially Republican, voters. A 2014 poll done by the University of New Hampshire for the Portland Press Herald found that 72 percent of Republicans said welfare did more harm than good. Only 27 percent of Democrats said this.
State law is clear: The question submitted by the GOP must be split up.
