AUGUSTA — Three Republican state lawmakers and a longtime conservative activist are readying a ballot initiative to overturn a new law that would allow asylum seekers to receive General Assistance for as long as two years.

The effort, known as a people’s veto, is the latest development in a controversy that roiled the State House last week as lawmakers clashed with Gov. Paul LePage over his failure to veto 70 bills within the 10-day period outlined in the Maine Constitution. The asylum-seekers bill was one of the measures that became law despite the governor’s assertion that the veto window hasn’t closed.

Related Headlines

• City of Portland: Many ‘seekers’ of asylum have not applied

Stavros Mendros

A group of eight portraits that first appeared in May on a black plywood wall next to Congress Street has become part of the citywide conversation about whether Portland should continue providing aid to asylum seekers. The black-and-white portraits show eight men and women of different ethnic backgrounds, each labeled “Mainer.” The portraits bear the signature of Pigeon, a street artist. 2015 Press Herald File Photo/Gordon Chibroski

As the debate unfolded last week in Augusta, Stavros Mendros, a conservative activist and former legislator from Lewiston, filed an application for a people’s veto referendum that, if successful, would overturn the asylum-seeker law. The application was filed Friday with the Secretary of State’s Office, according to documents obtained by the Portland Press Herald.

The law would apply to about 1,000 people from foreign countries, including many central African nations, who entered Maine legally on visas and have applied or intend to apply for political asylum to avoid persecution in their homelands. About 900 of those asylum seekers live in Portland, with smaller numbers in Lewiston and other communities.

Those who are seeking asylum often need General Assistance vouchers to help them get shelter and other basic necessities because they are not eligible for other benefit programs and are prohibited from holding jobs until six months after they apply for asylum.

BACKUP IF COURT DENIES LePAGE

Mendros, an activist associated with previous ballot campaigns, is affiliated with Maine Citizens Coalition, a conservative group established in 2013. Mendros said Monday that the organization could become involved in a campaign if the ballot initiative advances.

He said he filed the application in case the Maine Supreme Judicial Court rules against LePage’s interpretation of the Constitution that he has more time to veto bills. On Friday, Attorney General Janet Mills disputed the governor’s argument that the Legislature had adjourned, saying the proposal is now law, along with 18 other bills. The governor repeated his argument Saturday, allowing 51 more bills to become law because he declined to issue vetoes.

The dispute centers on whether the Legislature “adjourned” for the year on June 30 or simply “recessed” until July 16. LePage has indicated that he plans to request a court ruling to determine if he or the Legislature is correct.

Adrienne Bennett, LePage’s spokeswoman, said Monday that the administration was not prepared to comment on the court request, known as a “solemn occasion.” A spokesman for the Supreme Judicial Court said Monday that no requests had been received from the governor’s office.

“I think the governor has a strong argument, but I don’t know how the courts are going to rule,” Mendros said. “If the court rules that he’s right then we end (the people’s veto). … I’m confident that he’s going to prevail, but it’s always good to have a Plan B. I put it in just in case the ruling comes down and we have no option.”

Three state lawmakers, Rep. Deborah Sanderson, R-Chelsea, Rep. Randall Greenwood, R-Wales, and Sen. Eric Brakey, R-Auburn, also signed the people’s veto application. Sanderson is a vocal ally of the governor and an outspoken critic of the state’s welfare system. Brakey was the lead sponsor of L.D. 369, a bill that, as originally drafted, would have prevented asylum seekers from receiving General Assistance while awaiting their work permits. The bill was amended and eventually passed by the Legislature to allow asylum seekers to receive aid for up to two years.

The law was set to go into effect 90 days after the Legislature adjourns for the session, which is expected to occur Thursday. However, Secretary of State Matt Dunlap said Monday that the application for the people’s veto means the amended law will not go into effect until the effort to overturn it is either decided by voters or the referendum fails to gain enough support to get on the ballot. The signatures of 61,123 people – 10 percent of the votes cast for governor in the 2014 election – would be required to get the question on the ballot.

HOT-BUTTON STATE ISSUE PERSISTS

It’s unclear if the veto initiative will achieve the signature threshold in time to get on the November ballot. Although the Maine Constitution stipulates that a people’s veto campaign has 90 days after statutory adjournment of the Legislature to submit the required signatures, the referendum question must be certified 60 days before Election Day. If the veto initiative doesn’t make the November ballot, and enough signatures are collected within the 90-day period, the question could appear in the June 2016 election.

Mendros is confident that the campaign would obtain the signatures it needs.

In 2011, a coalition of progressive activists gathered over 68,000 signatures in little over a month during a successful effort to overturn a law that repealed Maine’s same-day voter registration. That effort was backed by more than 1,000 volunteers.

General Assistance for asylum seekers has been a hot-button issue ever since LePage made it part of his re-election campaign last year. The governor’s position – and Democrats’ opposition to it – also was featured in a controversial political ad produced by the Republican Governors Association, which spent over $5 million helping re-elect LePage. The ad accused LePage’s Democratic opponent, former U.S. Rep. Mike Michaud, of supporting welfare for “illegal immigrants.” Although the ad was heavily criticized for its inaccuracies, it was regarded as one of the most effective of the 2014 gubernatorial campaign because it tapped two issues – welfare and immigration – that elicit visceral responses from voters.

The governor has continued using the same rhetoric this year. In June, LePage’s political machine, run by his daughter, Lauren LePage, initiated a series of robocalls targeting Republican and Democratic state senators for endorsing a two-year budget deal that included General Assistance funding for asylum seekers.

In those calls, Lauren LePage said that Republicans, including Senate President Mike Thibodeau, were siding with “liberal Democrats” to provide “taxpayer funding for illegal aliens.” The calls made six references to “illegal aliens” and “welfare,” at one point combining the two terms to describe General Assistance funding as “illegal alien welfare.”

SMALL TARGET FOR A REFERENDUM

Such rhetoric may foreshadow a people’s veto campaign.

Last Wednesday, the Sun Journal newspaper reported that Lewiston Mayor Robert Macdonald, a strong supporter of LePage, was involved in drafting L.D. 369.

“I am telling you, I am extremely teed off here,” Macdonald told the newspaper. “If 369 gets passed, well, Lewiston taxpayers have been back-stabbed.”

The bill’s enactment has been met with a different reception in Portland, where City Councilor Jon Hinck dubbed LePage’s failure to veto the measure “accidental compassion.”

The bill, which provides assistance for up to 24 months, passed both houses of the Legislature, but not by the two-thirds margin that would have been needed to overcome a veto. If the law takes effect, it would apply only to “a person who is lawfully present in the United States or who is pursuing a lawful process to apply for immigration relief.”

The Maine Peoples Alliance, a liberal advocacy group, condemned the people’s veto effort by Mendros in a statement Monday.

“Never before has a referendum been suggested to unfairly target such a small group of vulnerable people and such a tiny amount of money in the state budget,” the alliance said. “The campaign these Republican operatives are proposing could easily cost more than the assistance itself.”

Related Stories