5.14.24 - Letter To Legislature

Stare or MAINE Orrick oF THE GovERNoR 1 State House Station AucusTA, MAINE et Tit 04333-0001 May 14,2024 ‘The 131st Legislature of the State of Maine State House ‘Augusta, Maine Dear Honorable Members ofthe 131st Legistature: ‘am writing to inform you tat I have decided not to sign the 35 bills that were enacted and sent to me on May 10, 2024 and to explain why. This is not a decision that I have reached lightly, especially given that I see velue in ~and would support ~ many’ of these bills otherwise First, asa former member ofthe House of Representatives, I have prea respect forthe institution of the Legislature. I also resect the work of ris legislature, which has been highly productive and has produced many notable achievements ~ including significant investments in housing, storm relief, mental health, public safety, education, child protection, and more ~all of which will do a lot of good for the people of Maine, I also have great respect for the passion and commitment of individual lawmakers who worked haed throughout the legislative session in an effort to see their bills through to enactment, ‘This decision is not to question any of that; nor is it a reflection of the substance or the problems that each ofthese bills attempts to solve, My objections to these bills fall nto two categories: First, as an initial mater ~ and as I have previously expressed ~ I have concems about the long term fiscal impact of some of these bills, particularly in light of flattening revenues and the need tosustain the existing commitments we have made to important programs, like 55 percent of school funding, MaineCare provider rates, and school meals for K-12 students, among others. The ‘additional spending in the eracted bills ~ while certainly less than the total ofthe bills passed off the Appropriations Table ~ would cost more money in future years that we would have to square against existing programs. That is adiseussion beter had in the context ofthe forthcoming biennial ‘budget. Second, and more fundamentally, I object to the Legislature enacting dozens of additional bills After its aclinrnment dealin — on clay reserved forthe consideration of vetoes. The Legislature hhas great discretion when it comes to the manner in which it considers and enacts bills, subject ‘nly to Constitutional limitations. In this ease, however, it did not adhere to its Consttutionally directed adjournment deadline. The Maine Constitution requires the Legislature to enact statutory limits on the length of the First and Second Regular Sessions. The Legislature enacted such a statute (3 MRS. § 2), whichexplicitly sets forth those linitations, providing thatthe Second Regular Session “shall adjourn no later than the 3rd Wednesdey in April” That date fell on April 17° of tis yea. ‘The Legislature did, in fac, adjourn that day, and at that time considered an order (S.P. 1007) adjourning until the Presiding Officers determined there was a need to “conduct other business ot ‘consider objections from the Governor.” (emphasis added). The House of Representatives did not pass that Order with a 2/3 majority Ifthe Legislature wishes to extend the Session, it has two options available, It could either amend the adjournment statute, wh ch would require emergency legislation approved by 2/3 of each body, ‘or comply with options thatthe statute itself frovides for additional time. For example, the statute allows the Legislature to extend the session for up to five legislative days if each body votes by a 2/3 majority todo so (it may do soto times), and provides that the “2nd regular session may also be extended for one additional legislative day for the purpose of considering possible objections ‘of the Governor.” In this ease, the Legislature complied with neither of those two options. It never amended the adjournment statute, and itnever voted by a 2/3 majority to extend the Session to conduct other ‘business. Instead, it simply aroceeded to conduct other business on veto day, and it did so after an ‘adjourament order that would have permitted it to “conduct other business” filed to obtain 2/3 support. In my judgment, the Constitution eannot be interpreted to permit the Legislature to ignore its Consttutonally require adjournment statute by a simple majority vote. Otherwise, the Constitution's requirement # establish an adjournment deadline in statute would be meaningless, and the statutory adjournment deadline would have no practical eect, While there is some precedent for business being conducted on veto day, to our knowledge, that business has been very limited and has only occurred without objection ~ meaning with atleast the implied consent of 2/3 of both the House and Senate, The consideration and enactment of dozens of additional spending bills on veto day, without support from 2/3 of each body, appears te be without precedent in tie history of the Maine Legislature. Operating inthis way leaves me gravely concerned because itis an erosion of important norms that are central to the conduct of| public business and the ereation of public policy. Signing any of these bills, no matter how much I may see value in some of them, would send the ‘message thatthe Legislatureis allowed to flout its own self-imposed and Constiutionally-imposed limitations, which would crete a precedent for future legislatures todo the same, and subject the bills to the threat of serious legal challenge. Constitutional norms, no matter how inconvenient and even when they may be an impediment to achieving good policy aims, nonetheless provide important institutional safeguards. While well> intentioned, the Legislature's decision to consider and enact dozens of additional spending ‘measures on Veto day withoat clear constitutional authority erodes longstanding norms and would create a destabilizing precedent that may be used by future legislatures to achieve aims not so desirable %,My decision not to sign these bills is intended to protect this norm, to reject what would be a harmful precedent, and to rovide an institutional check that, while difficult inthe short-term, is beneficial for the long-term conduct of business and the éreation of public policy. 1 remain committed to examining the important isues that these bills attempt to address during the next legislature, Sincerely,

5.14.24 - Letter To Legislature

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

5.14.24 - Letter To Legislature

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

5.14.24 - Letter To Legislature

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

You might also like