Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Ranked Choice Voting topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Senate advances ranked-choice clarification in LD 1666, asks Maine high court for advisory opinion
Summary
After floor debate over whether LD 1666 would change the meaning of 'plurality,' the Maine Senate accepted a minority 'ought to pass' report on LD 1666 and passed a joint order asking the Maine Supreme Judicial Court for an advisory opinion on how plurality is determined under ranked-choice voting.
The Maine State Senate on the floor accepted a minority 'ought to pass' report on LD 1666, a bill that clarifies how ranked-choice voting (RCV) interacts with statutory and constitutional language, and approved a joint order asking the Maine Supreme Judicial Court for an advisory opinion on whether the RCV tabulation method conforms with provisions of the state Constitution.
Senator Timberlake, urging support for the pending motion opposing the bill's passage as drafted, warned that LD 1666 "attempts to redefine longstanding democratic terms" and said "words in the statute matter," arguing that a change to the meaning of "plurality" should be addressed as a constitutional amendment rather than by statute. Timberlake said the measure risks altering voters' trust in consistent rules.
Senator Rennie, who spoke in favor of the bill and later presented the joint order requesting a court opinion, said LD 1666 "aligns our statutory language with this broad, legal consensus" and framed the change as clarifying that ranking is a preference used in tabulation, not an immediate separate vote. Rennie argued the request for a solemn advisory opinion is intended to resolve legal questions about whether the RCV tabulation process produces a plurality consistent with several constitutional provisions.
On the floor the majority 'ought not to pass' report failed (13 in favor, 19 opposed). The Senate then accepted the minority 'ought to pass' report as amended (19 in favor, 13 opposed), moved the bill to engrossment and sent it down for concurrence. Senator Perce later moved to reconsider the Senate’s action on LD 1666; that motion failed by the same margin (13–19).
Following passage toward engrossment, Senator Rennie presented and read a joint order asking the Law Court to answer whether the RCV method specified in LD 1666—where a vote is not determined until final tabulation and the candidate with the highest continuing ranking after final tabulation is determined to have the plurality—conforms with cited sections of the Maine Constitution. The joint order passed and was sent down for concurrence.
Next steps: LD 1666 will proceed as an engrossed bill and be transmitted for concurrence; the joint order asking the Supreme Judicial Court for an advisory opinion has been adopted by the Senate and awaits the court’s response. The Senate adjourned until the next scheduled session.
