Maine Tax Code People's Veto, Question 1 (June 2010)

The Maine Tax Code People's Veto, Question 1 was on the June 8, 2010 ballot in Maine as a veto referendum where it was approved. Voter approval of the measure resulted in the veto of tax reforms approved by the legislature and signed by the governor in 2009.

The petition was originally filed in June 2009 through the People's Veto provision. Originally supporters focused on getting the measure on the 2009 November ballot but in July 2009 they announced that they would instead collect signatures for the June 2010 election.

In mid-June 2009, Maine lawmakers filed an application for a people's veto referendum to challenge a recently enacted tax code overhaul (LD 1495). The overhaul included an income tax rate cut, a broadening of the state sales tax to more items and an increase in the state meals and lodging tax. The overhaul passed the Maine Legislature and was signed into law by Democratic Gov. John Baldacci. The referendum called for voters to repeal the package in its entirety.

If the law was not repealed by voters in June, the tax code changes would have gone into effect January 2011.

Election results

Question 1
Result		Votes	Percentage
a Yes		193,960	60.8%
No		124,928	39.2%

Official election results via the Maine Secretary of State.

Text of measure

The ballot language read as follows:

Do you want to reject the new law that lowers Maine's income tax and replaces that revenue by making changes to the sales tax?

A "yes" vote on Question 1 overturned the law. A "no" vote maintained the tax changes.

Support

Sponsors of the referendum included Republican Party Chairman Charles Webster, Senate Minority Leader Kevin Raye and House Minority Leader Joshua Tardy. In April 2010 the Drycleaning & Laundry Institute joined the list of organizations in support of Question 1 and asked its members to support the veto. According to reports, the Greater Portland Convention and Visitors Bureau also supported Yes on 1.

A group called Vote YES to Reject New Taxes launched a campaign on April 8, 2010 in support of the proposed veto.

Arguments

• Referendum supporters argued that although the overhaul was designed to lower income tax, the package would also broaden the sales tax to include items like car repairs and increase the meals and lodging tax from 7 percent to 8.5 percent. Additionally they said that it eliminates income tax deductions and exemptions from the tax code.

• At a May 18, 2010 Rockport Forum Greg Dugal, executive director of the Maine Innkeepers Association, asked voters to approve the veto. "The largest industry in the state is tourism. So why would we want to alienate people who come here and support our largest industry and our largest employer," he said.

• Curtis Pickard of the Maine Merchants Association argued that while the proposed reforms may cut income taxes, the state expands sales tax and the meal-and-lodging tax in order to compensate for the lost revenue. That he said, he did not agree with. "I don't like short little sound bites. I don't like having to go out there and say '100 new taxes,' but that's what you have to do to get the message across to get people to pay attention that their industry is likely on that list," said Pickard.

• The Greater York Region Chamber of Commerce voted to support the repeal of the new tax laws. President Cathy Goodwin said, "It is an expansion if state sales tax, which would affect numerous new categories of small businesses and their customers." The tax, they said, implements taxes on more than 50 services not currently taxed by the state of Maine. Such taxes include: auto repair, amusement parks, dry cleaning, vehicle towing and limousine services. The new tax law also increases sales taxes on liquor, meals and lodging and car rentals.

Donors

Sen. David Trahan organized a PAC called Still Fed Up With Taxes in support of the tax code referendum. On July 20, 2009, the group announced that they collected more than $7,000 in donations and over $10,000 in pledges. The main campaign PAC - Vote YES to Reject New Taxes - had an estimated $27,180 in cash contributions as of June 2, 2010. The PAC received an estimated $13,840 in in-kind contributions and spent about $8,297 in operating costs.

Below is a chart that outlines major cash contributions to the Vote YES to Reject New Taxes Campaign, as of June 2, 2010:

Contributor	Amount
Maine Association of Realtors	$222,589
Maine Automobile Dealers Association	$5,000
Maine Restaurant Association	$5,000
Maine Tourism Association	$5,000
NFIB - Safe Trust	$2,000

Opposition

A group called No Higher Taxes for Maine launched a campaign on April 8, 2010 in opposition of the proposed veto. "We haven't had tax relief in this state for 40 years. And this is going to bring real tax relief to Maine people," said Crystal Canney, spokeswoman for No Higher Taxes. Also in opposition was the Maine State Chamber of Commerce. According to reports, the organization announced their opposition, a switch in opinion, in May 2010. Previously, in 2009 the chamber asked Gov. John Baldacci to veto the tax reform because according to reports they worried about the effects on the tourism industry.

Other endorsements included former Gov. Angus King and the Maine Today Media chain. Maine Today Media owns the Portland Press Herald, the Kennebec Journal and the Waterville Sentinel.

Gov. Baldacci announced his opposition to Question 1 and urged voters to vote "no" on the proposed veto during his weekly radio address.

Rep. John Piotti, the original sponsor of the legislation, defended his tax proposal at a Rockport Forum on May 18, 2010. Piotti argued that the current tax system was broken. Of the tax reform, which is on hold until the June vote, he said, "It is designed to take in the same amount of money we do now, just in a smarter manner."

Arguments

• Opponents of the referendum said the overhaul package will reduce the tax burden on Maine residents by $55 million. Additionally, they argued that it would lower the top income tax rate from 8.5 percent to 6.5 percent for income up to $250,000, and the top income tax rate for incomes above $250,000 from 8.5 percent to 6.85 percent.

• Maine State Chamber of Commerce president Dana Connors said,"Lowering the income tax rate had been something that the Maine State Chamber of Commerce had long advocated for. We hope the law is given the opportunity to work, and we are confident that it will help businesses here in Maine while attracting additional investment to this state from other parts of the country." The Bangor Region Chamber of Commerce and the Greater Portland Regional Chamber of Commerce also opposed the proposed veto.

• Rep. John Piotti argued that if the issue had not been placed on the statewide ballot Maine residents would already be paying less in taxes. This he said was a result of "misguided politics." According to Piotti by the time voters vote in June, "the delay caused by placing this issue on the ballot will have already cost Mainers over $20 million in savings and hundreds of new jobs! We can't afford to pass up that kind of opportunity anytime, but especially not now."
  • In support of the state tax reform Piotti said, "The new law lowers the top income tax from 8.5% to 6.5% (on income under $250,000) and to 6.85% (on income over $250,000). But most Mainers will pay far less than 6.5%, due to a system of new household credits. Income taxes will drop for over 95% of Mainers. At the same time, the new law expands Maine's narrow sales tax base in order to stabilize revenues and export more of the tax burden to nonresidents. But in the end, the new system puts more money back in the pockets of Mainers. Nearly 90% of Mainers see an OVERALL tax cut (once both sales and income taxes are included)."

• Wick Johnson, owner of Kennebec Technologies, said he liked that the tax reform cut the income tax rate for almost all Mainers by two percent. "You can't have economic development in a climate that totally discourages economic development. Nobody in their right mind who expects to be a high income person would start a business in Maine at this point in time," said Johnson.

Donors

The main campaign PAC - No Higher Taxes for Maine - had an estimated $337,180 in cash contributions as of June 2, 2010. The PAC spent an estimated $303,741.97 in expenditures to oppose the proposed measure and $132.76 in operating costs.

Below is a chart that outlines major cash contributions to the No Higher Taxes for Maine Campaign, as of June 2, 2010:

Contributor	Amount
Donald Sussman, chairman of Trust Asset Management	$150,000
Daniel Tishman, chairman of Tishman Construction Corp.	$50,000
Sheryl Crockett Tishman	$50,000
Leon Gorman, chairman of L.L. Bean	$25,000
Iberdrola USA Corp.	$15,000

Media endorsements

Main article: Endorsements of Maine ballot measures, 2010

Support

• Foster's Daily Democrat supported Question 1. In an editorial the board said, "The bottom line for voters is that the Legislature didn't do its homework on this tax package. It didn't spend the time needed to measure its true impact. It did not look hard enough at the plight of the average wage earner who will be hit hardest. The Maine Legislature needs to be sent back to the drawing board with a yes vote on Question 1 (People's Veto)..."

Opposition

• The Bangor Daily News opposed to Question 1. The editorial board said, "The tax reform bill is a complex piece of legislation, and it is easily demonized by those who highlight parts and ignore others. This plan makes Maine more competitive with other states for business development, and eases the burden on almost all of us. It must not be derailed."
• The Sun Journal opposed to Question 1. "If Question 1, the repeal of tax reform, passes Tuesday, it will represent a victory for demagoguery over dispassionate truth. And you will likely be cheated out of paying lower taxes for years to come. The people urging a "Yes on One" vote Tuesday have, in their TV ads, desperately tried to beat a complex issue into a cynical, emotional sound bite — ordinary people getting "short-changed" by the wealthy," said the editorial board.
• The Journal Tribune opposed Question 1. In an editorial the board said, "We can’t support a “Yes” vote on Question 1, and encourage voters to weigh the issue carefully before supporting this veto. Tax reform won’t help everyone, but if each household and business could take the time to calculate its own self-interest, this version of tax reform would become more popular." However, the board goes on to say, "Tax reform has been a hard sell. If it becomes necessary to try again, we’d like to see legislators spread the net sales tax net more broadly, rather than targeting only certain businesses to bear this new burden."

Television ads

Yes on One ad, 5-24-10

See also: Maine Question 1 (2010), supporters, TV ads

Support: In May 2010 the Maine Association of Realtors purchased air time for two television ads in support of repealing a tax reform law. According to reports the organization spent $197,511, though a committee called "Save the Mortgage Interest Deduction Ballot Question Committee." The first television ad in support of Question 1 was released May 8, 2010. The ad's background was a wedding and highlights all of the taxes due to the new tax reforms and their impact. It ended with "Speak now or forever pay new Maine taxes. Vote Yes on One." A second ad was released May 19, 2010. Like the first ad, the second - "Vote Yes on Blues" - featured all the taxes due to the new tax reforms. Two additional ads were released on May 24, 2010. The first ad opened with "If Question One does not pass on June 8 it means another government bailout for the wealthy and Maine people get shortchanged again. In fact as Maine's wealthiest 1% get tax cuts you will end up paying...It's just not fair." The second ad released in late pay features a similar message to all previously released tv ads - the taxes imposed by new tax reforms, as well as a focus on the notion that Maine's wealthiest would receive tax cuts while other Mainers wouldn't.

See also: Maine Question 1 (2010), opponents, TV ads

Opposition: In May 2010 opponents released their first television ads. One ad showed a woman trying to coax her pet lobster to move. The ad said that "Mainers know a bad idea when we see one. Like Question One, a plan to raise income taxes in a bad economy." The second ad used the same statement but showed a man strapping a car seat for his young child to the back of his motorcycle. Two more ads were released May 28, 2010 by No Higher Taxes for Maine. The first ad featured Wick Johnson, Kennebec Technologies president, who said he "knows how rough this economy has been." He asked voters not to be swayed by "special interests" and said, "If Question One passes and our income taxes go up it could crush any hope of recovery. But if we say no to question one we can rebuild our economy and attract new jobs. Raising income tax rates by 30% in a weak economy is a job killer. It's that simple." The second television ad featured the same message with John Cashwell, managing director of Portage Chip Mill, as the spokesperson.

No on One ad, 5-12-10

Controversy

On May 28, 2010 opponents of Question 1 accused supporters of running misleading ads. However, supporters argued that opponents are the ones running misleading ads. According to the television ad it described the legislatively-approved tax reforms as "another government bailout for the wealthy." However, opponents argued that the claims of how many people would receive tax deductions through the tax reform was false in the television ad. "It’s simply not true. Independent research from the nonpartisan office of the Maine Revenue Service shows all levels of income benefit from the tax relief bill. It’s unfortunate that during a campaign the truth is not the first rule but, in the case with the Yes on 1 campaign, it is not even an afterthought," said Christopher St. John of the Maine Center on Economic Policy.

However, Sen. David Trahan, a leader of the campaign to repeal the tax reform law, argued that opponents' television ads are "stretching the truth." Trahan noted that according to No on 1 ads voting "yes" would increase income taxes, when in fact income taxes would remain the same, he said. The tax reforms haven't gone into effect because of the referendum, therefore the income taxes have not yet been affected, argued Trahan. He also said that opponents have "over-inflated" their numbers of who would see a decrease in taxes.

Polls

See also: Polls, 2010 ballot measures

Legend      Position is ahead and at or over 50%     Position is ahead or tied, but under 50%

• A poll conducted from April 28 through May 7 by Critical Insights revealed that approximately 43% of registered voters would not vote to overturn tax reforms, while 38% are would vote yes and 19% are undecided. According to the pollster 600 registered voters were polled during phone interviews. The poll had a margin of error of plus or minus 4 percentage points.

Date of Poll	Pollster	In favor	Opposed	Undecided	Number polled
April 28 - May 7, 2010	Critical Insights	38%	43%	19%	600

Path to the ballot

See also: Maine signature requirements and 2010 ballot measure petition signature costs

The Maine Constitution allowed for a referendum to overturn a law only if opponents could collect at least 10% of the number of people who voted in the last governor’s election - 55,087 signatures. The signatures were required to be submitted by mid-September 2009.

Lawsuit against secretary of state

On November 2, 2009 Still Fed Up With Taxes filed a lawsuit with the Kennebec County Superior Court requesting that the court order Secretary of State Matt Dunlap to finish reviewing signatures for the referendum. The group filed petitions supporting the referendum in September 2009 but state election officials didn't verify the signatures. The verification deadline was October 13, 2009.

Judge rules against secretary

Maine Superior Court Judge Donald Marden ruled in favor with state Republicans that challenged the secretary of state. According to attorney Dan Billings, who represents the Maine Republican party chairman Charlie Webster, who led the challenge: "The legal issue involved was concerning the Secretary of State's legal authority to continue to review and pass judgment on petitions after the 30-day deadline set by state law. And what Justice Marden said is that the statute limited the Secretary of State's authority to 30 days, and because the Maine constitution says any review of petitions has to be done in compliance with state law, after the 30 days passed the secretary of state no longer had any authority to review the petitions."

• On December 21, 2009 the lower state court ruled that should an election official take longer than the allotted time to verify the signatures, the petition would be deemed valid.

Sufficient signatures collected

As of November 9, 2009 supporters submitted a total of 56,107 valid signatures - 1,020 more than the minimum requirement - according to Secretary of State Matt Dunlap.

Petitions challenged

Opponents of the referendum filed a lawsuit, Johnson v. Dunlap, with the Kennebec Superior Court, challenged the certified petitions. According to opponents, Maine's Secretary of State should not have certified the petition for the ballot because two of the notaries that notarized the petitions got married and did not notify the state that their last names had changed. A hearing on the matter was scheduled for January 1, 2010.

Judge validates petitions

On December 23, 2009 Maine's lower state court ruled that despite the challenge, the petitions were valid. According to the judge's ruling, if the notary who notarized the petitions wrote the incorrect information about their own qualifications, the petitions remain valid.

See also

Suggest a link

• 2010 ballot measures
• Maine 2010 ballot measures
• List of People's Veto ballot measures in Maine
• Maine signature requirements
• Laws governing the initiative process in Maine

Support

• Vote YES to Reject New Taxes

Opposition

• No Higher Taxes for Maine

Articles

• Early results reveal approval of most Maine measures including a tax reform veto
• Mainers cast their ballots on tax reform and bond measures
• Maine tax debates increase as June 8 election nears
• Maine ballot measure order set for June 8 ballot
• Maine legislators propose stricter rules for petition circulation
• Judge chooses sides in Maine petition fight
• Maine tax veto under scrutiny, notaries didn't notify state of name change
• Maine tax code people's veto approved for June 2010 ballot
• Maine anti-tax group takes secretary of state to court

External links

• Vote Yes to Reject New Taxes - Yes on One official website
• No Higher Taxes for Maine - No on One official website
• LD 1495 Legislation
• Maine ballot measures for 2010

Additional reading

• Associated Press,"Maine's Voter Turnout Appears To Be Low," June 8, 2010
• Associated Press,"Mainers vote whether to keep or overturn tax law," June 8, 2010
• The Colorado Independent,"A new path for Colorado? Maine votes on new tax structure," June 7, 2010
• Stateline.org,"A tax reform test in Maine," June 7, 2010
• Sanford News,"State's primary is this Tuesday; ballot to include referendum questions and school budget validation," June 3, 2010
• The Free Press,"Lower income taxes, broaden sales taxes? Voters decide June 8," May 20, 2010
• Associated Press,"Maine Voters To Decide Bond Questions," May 16, 2010
• The Free Press,"June Statewide Ballot Questions," May 13, 2010
• Maine Public Broadcasting Network,"Battle Heats up over Maine's Tax Reform Law," May 13, 2010
• Bangor Daily News,"Tax debate comes to small communities," May 13, 2010
• Mainebiz,"Tax reform 101," May 3, 2010
• Morning Sentinel,"Tax issue on June ballot," March 22, 2010

References

Sunshine Review has an article on:

Maine State Budget