Joint Order, to Amend Joint Rule 215 to Clarify the Language of That Rule
Summary
This joint order would amend Maine’s Joint Rule 215 to clarify the voting threshold for any item requesting the calling of a United States Constitutional Convention under Article V of the U.S. Constitution. The revised language states that such a request requires a two-thirds vote of the members present in each chamber. In practical terms, the bill is a rules change governing how the Legislature would handle any future proposal to call for an Article V convention.
The measure does not change substantive state law outside the Legislature’s internal joint rules, but it would affect the procedural standard applied to constitutional convention resolutions. By specifying the two-thirds requirement, it would make clear that a supermajority of those present in both the Senate and House is needed before Maine could advance such a request. The bill therefore has significance for legislators, constitutional convention advocates, and opponents concerned about the threshold for state participation in an Article V convention.
Impact
If adopted, the order would amend the Legislature’s joint rules rather than the Maine Revised Statutes, clarifying the procedural vote required for any future resolution seeking an Article V constitutional convention. It would apply to both chambers and would set a two-thirds vote of members present as the standard, affecting how such proposals are considered and potentially making it harder or easier to interpret the rule depending on prior ambiguity.
Sentiment
The available voting history suggests the measure was controversial and did not receive majority support, failing on a 16-18 vote. With no committee transcript available, there is no recorded floor or committee debate to indicate broad consensus. The vote outcome implies that support existed but was insufficient to overcome opposition, likely reflecting differing views on constitutional convention calls and the appropriate procedural threshold.
Contention
The main point of contention is the procedural and political significance of Article V constitutional convention requests. Supporters likely favor clarifying the rule so the Legislature has a clear supermajority standard, while opponents may object either to the convention process itself or to codifying a specific threshold in the joint rules. The split vote indicates disagreement over both the substance of constitutional convention calls and the institutional rules governing them.