Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Legislative Process Concept Drafts topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
House debate on ‘concept drafts’ transparency; joint order sent to rules committee after 72-66 vote
Summary
A joint order from Representative Smith that would eliminate the Legislature’s use of “concept drafts” was debated on the House floor and referred to the joint rules committee after a 72-66 vote. Supporters said concept drafts undermine transparency; others urged the rules committee’s previously approved restrictions be given time to work.
The Maine House of Representatives on Jan. 21 debated a joint order from Representative Smith (Palermo) that would repeal the Legislature’s use of “concept drafts,” and the chamber voted 72-66 to refer the order to the Joint Select Committee on Joint Rules for further consideration.
Representative Smith said the public has reason to distrust the process when bills appear without language. “The people of Maine think we are hiding something,” she said, arguing that concept drafts “have taken this transparency away and allowed bills to appear under the cloak of darkness.” Smith asked the House to move to “completely rid the legislature of concept drafts.”
Supporters framed the measure as a transparency reform. Opponents and some members who supported earlier rule changes urged patience and additional committee work. Representative Moonen (Portland) told colleagues the Joint Rules Committee had already voted unanimously to impose stricter deadlines for concept-draft language and to kill concept drafts if sponsors miss those deadlines. “It was a strong first step,” Moonen said, and he asked the House to send the joint order to the rules committee so that the committee could consider additional changes and implementation details.
Representative Greenwood (Wales) requested a roll call prior to the final vote; the clerk recorded the result as "72 having voting the affirmative, 66 in the negative." The referral motion was made by Representative Moonen and prevailed, meaning the joint order will receive further review in the Joint Select Committee on Joint Rules rather than being enacted by the full House at this session.
Why it matters: concept drafts are used early in bill development and, according to proponents of repeal, can deprive the public of meaningful notice and opportunity to testify. The rules committee’s work could produce binding deadlines, automatic cancellation for noncompliance, or other procedural changes; referring the order means the committee will consider the scope and specific rule language before the House takes further action.
What remains unresolved: Representative Smith’s motion sought full repeal; the House’s referral means no change to current practice has been enacted yet. Moonen said committee chairs from both chambers have discussed scheduling and that the committee may meet “mid-session,” but no meeting date was set on the floor.
The House proceeded to other business after the referral vote; the joint order will return if or when the Joint Select Committee on Joint Rules reports back to the Legislature.
