An Act to Change the State's Method of Allocating Electoral Votes from a Congressional District Method to a Winner-take-all Method Contingent on the State of Nebraska Changing its Method of Allocating Electoral Votes
Summary
LD 1356 would change Maine’s method of allocating presidential electoral votes from the current congressional-district system to a winner-take-all system, but only if Nebraska first changes its own electoral-vote allocation method to a winner-take-all or otherwise at-large system for at least three of its five electoral votes. Under current Maine law, presidential electors are allocated partly by congressional district and partly statewide; this bill would instead require all of Maine’s electors to be chosen statewide, with the statewide winner receiving the full slate of electoral votes.
The bill also makes conforming changes to the statutes governing certification and casting of presidential electors. It would direct the Governor to certify the statewide and district vote totals under the new framework, and it would require the electors to cast their ballots for the candidates who won the statewide vote. The measure is expressly contingent and would not take effect unless Nebraska changes its law and the Secretary of State provides formal notice to legislative officials. It also includes a delayed effective date tied to adjournment of the Legislature.
Impact
If enacted and triggered by Nebraska’s action, LD 1356 would substantially revise Maine’s presidential-elector allocation statutes by eliminating the congressional-district split and replacing it with a statewide winner-take-all method. That would affect how Maine’s electoral votes are awarded in presidential elections and would override the current system that can award one elector per congressional district plus two at-large electors. The bill would also require related administrative updates for vote certification and elector instructions.
Sentiment
Based on the bill’s sponsorship and the absence of recorded committee testimony or votes in the provided materials, the measure appears to be a strategic partisan election-law proposal rather than a consensus reform. Its contingent structure suggests it is intended to respond to Nebraska’s electoral-vote rules, and the bill text itself frames the change as conditional and reciprocal. No formal vote history or committee record is provided here, so there is no documented public sentiment beyond the bill’s introduction and sponsorship.
Contention
The central point of contention is the method of allocating presidential electors: supporters of winner-take-all may view it as a reciprocal response to Nebraska and a way to align Maine’s electoral votes with the statewide popular vote, while opponents may prefer the existing congressional-district method because it can preserve more local representation and can allow split electoral votes. The bill’s contingency on Nebraska’s law also reflects a political strategy that may be controversial because it ties Maine’s election rules to another state’s actions. No committee debate is included, so specific arguments from legislators or stakeholders are not available in the record provided.
Applies to Congress for Article V Convention of States to require balanced federal budget, impose term limits, and revise method of awarding electoral votes.