PORTLAND, Maine (AP) — Recent years have seen Maine’s elections conduct largely free of issues, yet Republicans are advocating for significant changes in voter regulations. Despite verified instances of voter fraud being exceedingly rare, the political landscape is shifting, aiming to impose stricter requirements on voters.
On the November 4 ballot, Maine is set to present Question 1, which would mandate voter identification and limit absentee voting—a popular method used by nearly half of local voters in the last presidential election.
In contrast, Texas voters will decide if a new constitutional amendment should clarify that non-U.S. citizens are ineligible to vote, a measure proponents assert is necessary to bolster election security and is already legally enforced. Critics, however, argue such measures underscore a narrative that noncitizen voting is a widespread problem, when it is statistically insignificant.
In Maine, Question 1 proposes requiring voters to present ID at the polls, reducing the number of absentee voting days, and continuing a trend seen in several Republican-controlled states across the country. Governor Janet Mills has publicly opposed the changes, emphasizing that they could undermine Maine constituents' voting rights.
Supporters of the voter ID proposal, which include influential conservative group Dinner Table PAC, claim these initiatives are essential for safeguarding elections against perceived vulnerabilities. They aim to attract voters concerned about election integrity leading into the upcoming elections.
Additionally, there are investigations underway in Maine following the unexpected discovery of unmarked ballots that were found bundled in an Amazon order, further fueling discussions around election integrity and process.
In Texas, the proposed amendment aligns with similar measures adopted in thirteen states since 2018, addressing the fears of illegal voting by noncitizens, though empirical evidence shows this to be an uncommon issue. The proposed addition to the Texas Constitution would explicitly classify noncitizens within existing restrictions on voter eligibility.
Critics point out that both the Maine and Texas initiatives are solutions seeking problems that do not exist. Advocates for voting rights argue these proposals can hinder access to ballots and propagate the false narrative of widespread voter fraud. As debates unfold, voters will face the tasked decision of balancing election security with the fundamental right to vote.






















