[link removed]


** Utility and fossil fuel money lurks behind Maine Question 1 attack on absentee voting ([link removed])
------------------------------------------------------------

By Dave Anderson on October 22, 2025

The Republican State Leadership Committee, the top donor behind the Question 1 ballot referendum that would make it harder for Maine voters to cast absentee ballots, has raked in money this year from the utility and fossil fuel industries.

Voter ID for Maine is the ballot committee backing Question 1 on Maine’s ballot. Roadside signs supporting Question 1 promise “Secure Elections” in Maine, but make no mention of the
myriad changes ([link removed]) that Question 1’s backers want to make to absentee voting in Maine.

“It would make it hard for Mainers who rely on absentee voting to cast their ballot, including elderly people, people with disabilities, Mainers in rural communities, and Mainers who are out of state on Election Day,” according to Save Maine Absentee Voting ([link removed]) , the ballot committee that’s urging Maine voters to vote no on Question 1.

Question 1 is opposed by a broad coalition ([link removed]) that includes ACLU Maine, Disability Rights Maine, the League of Women Voters of Maine, and the Natural Resources Council of Maine.

If approved by voters, Question 1 will eliminate Mainers’ ability to request an absentee ballot over the phone and have family members pick up and drop off absentee ballots. Seniors over 65 and disabled voters will no longer be able to sign up to automatically receive absentee ballots in the mail each election. Absentee ballot drop boxes would be limited to one per municipality, and two days of absentee voting would be eliminated.

Question 1 will “adversely impact people with disabilities, older Mainers, rural voters and voters without transportation,” according to public comments from Disability Rights Maine that are included in Maine’s official “
Citizen’s Guide to the Referendum Election ([link removed]) .”

Mainers must currently provide a form of ID when they register to vote, and are not required to show their ID when voting in person or absentee. Question 1 would require voters to provide a Maine driver’s license or state-issued non-driver ID, passport, or military ID when they vote. While Mainers can register to vote using other forms of ID, including birth certificates, social security cards and student IDs, Question 1 would prohibit Mainers from using those other forms of ID ([link removed]) when they vote.

Maine Public Radio reports ([link removed]) that absentee voting is “so popular that roughly 45% of Maine voters cast absentee ballots during the November 2024 elections.”

The RSLC PAC contributed $500,000 of the $565,766 ([link removed]) raised by Voter ID for Maine as of the end of September. Voter ID for Maine is due to file a pre-election campaign finance report with the state by October 24, which may reveal additional funding.

In April, the RSLC PAC filed a quarterly report ([link removed]) with the Maine Commission on Government Ethics and Election Practices. The RSLC PAC reported it had contributed $200,000 to Voter ID for Maine in January, followed by an additional $200,000 in February and $100,000 in March. The quarterly report ([link removed]) filed in Maine names “General Treasury Transfer” as the only source of funding for the RSLC PAC during that time.

A mid-year report ([link removed]) that the RSLC PAC filed with the Federal Election Commission in August, however, more clearly names the “Republican State Leadership Committee” as the only contributor to the RSLC PAC during that time. The Republican State Leadership Committee is registered with the IRS as a tax-exempt 527 political organization based in Washington, D.C., and can raise unlimited money from corporations.

The Energy and Policy Institute reviewed another mid-year report where the 527 arm of the RSLC reported its contributors and expenditures ([link removed]) to the IRS, and found the RSLC received multiple six-figure contributions from utility and fossil fuel companies during the first six months of this year. The IRS report also confirmed that the 527 arm of the RSLC was the source of the contributions received by the RSLC PAC during the first quarter of this year.

Avangrid contributed $100,000 to the RSLC in May. Avangrid is the parent company of Maine’s largest electric utility, Central Maine Power, and also owns utilities in Connecticut, Massachusetts, and New York.

Avangrid’s contribution came after campaign finance filings and local media
first revealed ([link removed]) the RSLC PAC as the top contributor to Voter ID for Maine in April. The utility company also contributed ([link removed]) $310,000 to the RSLC from 2022 to 2024, and has contributed ([link removed]) money to both Republican and Democratic 527 groups in recent years.

Subsidiaries of Vistra Corp., which owns a methane gas-burning power plant in Maine, contributed $120,000 to the RSLC between January and March. Vistra contributed another $25,000 to the RSLC in May and made an in-kind contribution of event supplies valued at $950 on May 19, when the RSLC hosted a golf retreat in Missouri.

Calpine, which also owns a methane gas plant in Maine, contributed $20,000 to the RLSC in March. NextEra, the owner of an oil-burning power plant in Maine, contributed $12,500 between January and March, and another $5,000 in May.

Avangrid ([link removed]) , NextEra ([link removed]) , Vistra, and Calpine ([link removed]) have each spent millions of dollars to influence the outcomes of energy-related ballot questions in Maine during recent elections.

Elsewhere, the RSLC is spending money to support Republican candidates in this year’s state legislative and gubernatorial elections in New Jersey and Virginia. Dominion Energy, Virginia’s largest utility, contributed $100,000 to the RSLC in April. PSEG, the largest electric and gas utility in New Jersey, made two contributions in January totaling $65,000 to the RSLC, which last week launched a new ad campaign ([link removed]) blaming Democrats for rising electricity bills in the state.

The RSLC’s mid-year report to the IRS ([link removed]) also included several contributions totaling $70,000 that the American Gas Association, the trade association for for-profit gas utilities, made on March 11. The Edison Electric Institute, the trade association for for-profit electric utilities, made two contributions totaling $20,000 on February 20.

Other investor-owned utility companies that contributed money this year to the RSLC included American Electric Power and Duke Energy.

Billionaire Charles Koch’s petrochemical company, Koch Industries, contributed $235,000 to the RSLC via several contributions made in March and June, and the Koch group Americans for Prosperity made two contributions totaling $75,000 on January 22.

The RLSC also received hundreds of thousands of dollars from Chevron, Marathon Petroleum, and the American Fuel and Petrochemical Manufacturers.

“Question 1 has come to Maine as part of a national attack on voting rights funded by out-of-state donors and organizations connected with the fossil fuel industry who are also funding disinformation campaigns against climate action and new sources of homegrown clean energy,” Pete Didisheim of the Natural Resources Council of Maine
wrote in a blog ([link removed]) recommending Mainers vote no on Question 1.

The Virginia-based Lexington Fund, a dark money group tied to right-wing political money man Leonard Leo ([link removed]) , is also a top donor to the RSLC ([link removed]) . Leo owns a mansion in Maine.

The Energy and Policy Institute reviewed campaign finance reports filed by Save Maine Absentee Voting and found no indication of utility or fossil fuel industry funding for the ballot committee opposing Question 1.


** Recent EPI articles and press:
------------------------------------------------------------
* Utility-funded Republican and Democratic groups try to leverage rising utility bills in New Jersey’s race for governor ([link removed])
* KSDK: Data center developers launch new Missouri coalition, but don’t share the power-hungry developments’ risks ([link removed])

Get in touch. Do you have a question or want to provide information?
Contact us ([link removed])
[link removed]
[link removed]
[link removed]
[link removed]
[link removed]
[link removed]
mailto:[email protected]

View this email in your browser ([link removed])

Copyright (C) 2025 Energy and Policy Institute. All rights reserved.
You are receiving this email because you opted in at our website via our Contact Us page.
Our mailing address is:
Energy and Policy Institute
P.O. Box 337
El Verano, CA 95433
USA
Want to change how you receive these emails?

You can update your preferences ([link removed]) or unsubscribe ([link removed])