Maine Question 1, Limit Annual Increase in Government Spending and Require Voter Approval for Tax Increases Initiative (2006)
| Maine Question 1 | |
|---|---|
|
|
|
| Election date |
|
| Topic Ballot measure process and Revenue and spending limits |
|
| Status |
|
| Type Indirect initiated state statute |
Origin |
Maine Question 1 was on the ballot as an indirect initiated state statute in Maine on November 7, 2006. It was defeated.
A "yes" vote supported limiting annual government spending increases to include the rate of inflation and the cost of population growth, and requiring voter approval for all increases in taxes and fees. |
A "no" vote opposed limiting annual government spending increases to include the rate of inflation and the cost of population growth, and requiring voter approval for all increases in taxes and fees. |
Election results
|
Maine Question 1 |
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Result | Votes | Percentage | ||
| Yes | 247,175 | 46.10% | ||
|
|
288,971 | 53.90% | ||
Text of measure
Ballot title
The ballot title for Question 1 was as follows:
| “ | Do you want to limit increases in state and local government spending to the rate of inflation plus population growth and to require voter approval for all tax and fee increases? | ” |
Ballot summary
The ballot summary for this measure was:
| “ |
The bill proposes to restrain the growth in state and local government by imposing expenditure limitations on state and local government and by requiring a procedure of voter approval of tax and fee increases. Under this bill, growth in annual expenditures of the General Fund, the Highway Fund, quasi-governmental organizations, Other Special Revenue funds and local district governments are limited according to increases in population and inflation. Growth in budgets of school administrative units and state-level educational institutions is limited according to increases in inflation and student enrollment. For the General Fund and Highway Fund budgets, revenues exceeding the expenditure limitation must be distributed by directing 20% of that excess to a budget stabilization fund and 80% of that excess to a tax relief fund. The budget stabilization funds may be used only in years when revenues are not sufficient to fund the level of expenditure permitted by the growth limits. The tax relief funds must be used to provide tax relief through refunds proportional to individual income tax personal exemptions claimed in the previous tax year or a decrease in motor fuels taxes. For quasi-governmental agencies and state agencies that manage Other Special Revenue funds, the managers of those funds must report excess surpluses to the Legislature with a plan for refund of those revenues. Under this bill, an increase in revenue would be possible only by a 2/3 vote of each House of the Legislature or the legislative body of a local district or the governing body of a quasi-governmental agency and the approval of the voters of the jurisdiction, if applicable. | ” |
Full Text
The full text of this measure is available here.
Support
Supporters
- Tom Zimmerman
- Bill Becker, President and CEO of The Maine Heritage Policy Center
- Brian Parke, Treasurer of TaxPayerBillofRights.com PAC
- Citizens' Alliance of Maine
- Mainers for Tax Relief
Arguments
Tom Zimmerman argued that Maine had ranked first in taxes in the United States since 1997 and that this was a contributing factor to young people leaving the state and a poor job climate. He argued that the measure would break the "stranglehold that high taxes have on Maine by limiting growth of spending at each level of government."[1]
Bill Becker, President and CEO of The Maine Heritage Policy Center, supported the bill to reduce high taxes and because it gave voters final approval on new or increased taxes and fees.[1]
Brian Parker, the Treasurer for the PAC TayPayerBillofRights.com, argued that the measure would make the government operate more efficiently on fewer funds and that no cuts would be required, yet taxes would be reduced.[1]
Campaign contributions
The following lists campaigns and their total funds raised to support this measure:[2]
- Taxpayerbillofrights.com: $497,621
- Citizens Alliance of Maine: $4,040
- Mainers for Tax Relief: $1,455
- Total: $503,115
The overall total raised to campaign for and against this measure was $2,583,034.
Opposition
Opponents
- Donald Strout, Town Manager of Corinth, Maine
- Donnell P. Carroll, Executive Director of Southern Maine Emergency Medical Services Council
- AARP-Maine
- Citizens United to Protect Our Public Safety Schools & Communities
- Citizens Who Support Maine's Public Schools
Arguments
Donald Strout, the town manager of Corinth, Maine, argued against the measure on the basis of it giving the state too much power in deciding taxes. He said,
| “ |
TABOR is artificial. It cuts where there shouldn’t be cuts and it allows too much growth where there should be restraint. That is what happens when you put a formula in charge and not Maine people. [3] |
” |
| —Donald Strout | ||
Donnell P. Carroll, the Executive Director of the Southern Maine Emergency Medical Services Council, argued against the measure because it infringed on local control by not allowing local communities to changing or amending its restrictions.[1]
Jud Dolphin, the state director of AARP-Maine, voiced the AARP's opposition to the measure by saying, "AARP opposes arbitrary tax and spending limits that cannot maintain health and educational services or respond to emergency needs."[1]
Campaign contributions
The following lists campaigns and their total funds raised to support this measure:[2]
- Citizens United to Protect Our Public Safety Schools & Communities: $1,361,235
- Citizens Who Support Maines Public Schools: $718,684
- Total: $2,079,919
The overall total raised to campaign for and against this measure was $2,583,034.
Path to the ballot
An indirect initiated state statute is a citizen-initiated ballot measure that amends state statute. There are nine (9) states that allow citizens to initiate indirect state statutes.
While a direct initiative is placed on the ballot once supporters file the required number of valid signatures, an indirect initiative is first presented to the state legislature. Legislators have a certain number of days, depending on the state, to adopt the initiative into law. Should legislators take no action or reject the initiative, the initiative is put on the ballot for voters to decide.
In Maine, the number of signatures required for an indirect initiated state statute is equal to 10% of the total votes cast for governor in the last gubernatorial election prior to the filing of such petition. As an indirect process, the Legislature has until the end of the legislative session to approve the initiative after signatures are certified. If the legislature approves the initiative and the governor approves it, the measure becomes law. If the legislature does not approve the initiative, or if the governor vetoes the measure, it goes to voters for approval. A simple majority vote is required for voter approval.
See also
External links
Footnotes
- ↑ 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 Cite error: Invalid
<ref>tag; no text was provided for refs namedSOS - ↑ 2.0 2.1 Follow the Money, "Ballot Measure Summary of QUESTION 1: State Spending Cap," accessed May 8, 2014
- ↑ Note: This text is quoted verbatim from the original source. Any inconsistencies are attributable to the original source.
 |
State of Maine Augusta (capital) |
|---|---|
| Elections |
What's on my ballot? | Elections in 2025 | How to vote | How to run for office | Ballot measures |
| Government |
Who represents me? | U.S. President | U.S. Congress | Federal courts | State executives | State legislature | State and local courts | Counties | Cities | School districts | Public policy |
