Opinion ID: 2349660
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: jurisdiction

Text: [¶ 3] Our Constitution requires that [e]ach House shall be the judge of the elections and qualifications of its own members. Me. Const. art. IV, pt. 3, § 3. It is clear from other sections of the Constitution that Article IV, Part 3, Section 3 governs only general elections to the House and the Senate. See Me. Const. art. II, § 4 (The election of Senators and Representatives shall be on the Tuesday following the first Monday of November biennially forever....); Me. Const. art. IV, pt. 1, § 5 (The Governor shall examine the returned copies of such lists [of votes tallied by the municipal election officials] and 7 days before the first Wednesday of December biennially, shall issue a summons to such persons as shall appear to have been elected....); Me. Const. art. IV, pt. 2, §§ 4, 5 (similar procedure for the Senate). Although general elections are required and provided for by Maine's Constitution, primary elections are not referred to in the Constitution, and are creatures of statute. [¶ 4] In addition, Article IV, Part 3, Section 3 uses the term members. Primary elections do not determine Senate and House members, but only determine the nominee of a political party. See 21-A M.R.S.A. § 1(32) (1993) (`Primary election' means the regular election for the election of nominees of a party for the general election.). Moreover, according to the language of Article IV, Part 3, Section 3, it is only the members of the incoming Legislature that have the exclusive authority to judge the elections and qualifications of its own members. Me. Const. art. IV, pt. 3, § 3; see also Opinion of the Justices, 394 A.2d 1168, 1171 (Me.1978); Opinion of the Justices, 35 Me. 563, 572 (1854). [¶ 5] Accordingly, Article IV, Part 3, Section 3 of the Maine Constitution does not vest exclusive authority in the Legislature over legislative primary recount appeals and does not prevent us from assuming jurisdiction over these appeals.
[¶ 6] We look to the language and history of 21-A M.R.S.A. § 737-A(10) to determine whether we have jurisdiction to resolve ballot disputes in primary elections. Section 737-A(10) provides: For all elections, except for the Senate and the House of Representatives, if there are enough challenged or disputed ballots to affect the result of an election, the Secretary of State shall forward the ballots and related records for that election to the clerk of the Supreme Judicial Court. The Supreme Judicial Court shall determine the result of the election pursuant to procedures adopted by court rule. The decision of the Supreme Judicial Court is final and must be certified to the Governor by the Chief Justice. For all elections to the Senate and the House of Representatives, each House shall establish procedures for recount appeals. In construing a statute, we seek to give effect to the legislative intent by examining the plain meaning of the statutory language. Gallant v. Bartash, Inc., 2002 ME 4, ¶ 3, 786 A.2d 628, 629 (quotation marks omitted). The phrase all elections is not defined in title 21-A. Title 21-A, however, does define any election. 21-A M.R.S.A. § 1(2) (1993) (`Any election' means primary and general elections and referenda, whether regular or special.). The phrase any election is used once in section 737-A. 21-A M.R.S.A. § 737-A (A losing candidate in any election who desires a recount....). Therefore, section 737-A generally applies to primary elections. [¶ 7] The phrase any election, however, is not used in section 737-A(10). It can logically be argued that there is no practical distinction between the words all and any. See NEW WORLD DICTIONARY OF THE AMERICAN LANGUAGE 36 (2d ed. 1978) (defining all as any; any whatever); id. at 62 (defining any as every). Accordingly, the language of section 737-A(10) that states For all elections to the Senate and the House of Representatives could be interpreted to include primary elections. [¶ 8] Other statutory language, however, leads to a different result. Title 21-A M.R.S.A. § 723(1) (Supp.2003) states that [i]n a primary election, the person who receives a plurality of the votes cast for nomination to any office, as long as there is at least one vote cast for that office, is nominated for that office.... (Emphasis added.) In any other election, the person who receives a plurality of the votes cast for election to any office, as long as there is at least one vote cast for that office, is elected to that office.... 21-A M.R.S.A. § 723(2) (Supp.2003) (emphasis added). There is a distinction, then, between nominations for an office, which is the function of a primary election, and elections to [or for] the Senate and the House of Representatives. 21-A M.R.S.A. § 737-A(10); see also id. § 723(2). Therefore, we could alternatively interpret the language of section 737-A(10) as allowing the Court to assume jurisdiction over legislative primary recount appeals because primary elections are not elections to or for an office in the Senate or the House, but are only nominations of a political party to seek election to an office. Because the language of section 737-A(10) is reasonably susceptible of different interpretations, it is ambiguous. Korhonen v. Allstate Ins. Co., 2003 ME 77, ¶ 9, 827 A.2d 833, 836. Because there is ambiguity in section 737-A(10), we look to the history of the statute and the policy behind its enactment. See Pennings v. Pennings, 2002 ME 3, ¶ 13, 786 A.2d 622, 627; Mundy v. Simmons, 424 A.2d 135, 137 (Me.1980).
[¶ 9] From 1913 to 1961, separate statutes governed recounts in general and primary elections. The statute governing general elections specifically limited the Governor and the Executive Council's role in recounts in elections to the Legislature. See R.S. ch. 7, § 53 (1916); R.S. ch. 8, § 55 (1930); R.S. ch. 5, § 50 (1944); R.S. ch. 5, § 50 (1954). The role of the Governor and the Executive Council was limited to the examination and correction of returns. They had no authority to decide whether any ballots cast in an election of a Representative to the Legislature shall be counted or rejected. Opinion of the Justices, 143 Me. 417, 422, 88 A.2d 151, 154 (1948). [¶ 10] The statute governing recounts in primary elections, however, did not include the same limitation on the authority of the Governor and the Executive Council. See P.L. 1913, ch. 221, § 16; R.S. ch. 7, § 16 (1930); R.S. ch. 4, § 30 (1944); R.S. ch. 4, § 31 (1954). Thus, in primary elections, even those primary elections for the House of Representatives and the Senate, the Governor and Council made the final determinations in recounts. Id.; see also Opinion of the Justices, 124 Me. 453, 470, 126 A. 354 (1924) ([The Governor and Council] are made by the Legislature the tribunal to pass upon the results in primary elections....). [¶ 11] In 1961, the provisions governing recounts in all elections, primary and general, were combined. P.L. 1961, ch. 360, §§ 127-132. After a recount, a candidate could appeal to the Governor and the Council, provided that: This subsection does not apply where final determination of the election of a candidate is governed by the State or Federal Constitution. Id. § 127(IV)(A). Therefore, jurisdiction of the Governor and the Council to decide recount disputes was limited only by the Constitution, which, as discussed above, grants exclusive jurisdiction over general election disputes to the Legislature. Me. Const. art. IV, pt. 3, § 3. [¶ 12] In 1975, when the Executive Council was abolished, the Commission on Governmental Ethics and Election Practices was given the jurisdiction to handle recounts. P.L. 1975, ch. 621, §§ 1421-1424. Initially, the Commission had jurisdiction to make a final determination in election disputes when the Federal and Maine Constitutions permitted, and was charged with submitting its findings of fact and opinion to the body vested with final determination powers in all other elections. Id. § 1423(3). The same Legislature amended section 1421, P.L. 1975, ch. 759, §§ 2-4, and subsequently, the Commission made findings of fact and opinion on the final determination of election results in primary, general and special elections for county, state or federal offices, id. § 2. If the disputed election was an election for governor, legislator, or a federal office, the Commission was to submit its findings of fact and opinion to the body vested with final determination powers. Id. § 4(A). In all other elections, the Commission was to submit its findings of fact and opinion to the Governor, who was then charged with making a final determination. Id. § 4(B), (C). [¶ 13] Thus, the Legislature has consistently made a distinction between primary and general elections when determining what body has jurisdiction over final recount determinations.
[¶ 14] Following a ballot-tampering scandal in 1992, a Special Commission to Review the Electoral Process made a series of recommendations to amend the statutory scheme governing election recounts. The Commission proposed legislation that sent all recount appeals to the courts for resolution: 10. Appeal to court. If there are enough challenged or disputed ballots to affect the result of an election, the Secretary of State shall forward the ballots and related records for that election to the clerk of the Supreme Judicial Court. The Chief Justice of the Supreme Judicial Court shall determine the result of the election pursuant to procedures adopted by court rule. The decision of the Chief Justice is final and must be certified to the Governor by the Chief Justice. L.D. 1477, § 35 (16th Legis. 1993). The Commission also proposed an amendment to the Constitution. L.D. 1474 (16th Legis. 1993). The proposal to amend the Constitution, however, died between the Houses. See 2 Legis. Rec. House H-1410 (1993). [¶ 15] The Attorney General issued an opinion that two provisions of the bill would violate the Constitution. [1] In response, Representative Gwadosky commented as follows: Recently, upon enactment, we were contacted by individuals who were concerned about two provisions which they thought would make this bill essentially unconstitutional and we have an opinion from the Attorney General which in fact indicated that there were two provisions of the bill that needed to be adjusted and this amendment now to the Committee of Conference Report Amendment which was unanimous is to address those two provisions. The first deals with an unconstitutional provision in the original bill that would have allowed the Chief Justice of the Maine Supreme Court the authority to determine recounts and election proceedings of the House and Senate members. As you may have remembered in the original bill, 1477, there was reference to recounts and the appeals going to the Supreme Judicial Court. There was also a separate bill, L.D. 1474, which was an amendment to the Constitution because you have to in fact amend the Constitution to make that change. That bill was defeated and the reference now to the Supreme Court had to be struck from this provision. 2 Legis. Rec. House H-1410 (1993) (emphasis added). As a result, the Legislature adopted the current language of section 737-A(10). [¶ 16] Representative Gwadosky's comments indicate that the Legislature's intent, when enacting the amendment to section 737-A(10), was to address the constitutional problems raised in the Commission's proposed bill, in particular, the attempt to give the Supreme Judicial Court jurisdiction over recount appeals in general elections to the Senate and the House of Representatives, which is prohibited by Art. IV, Part 3, Section 3, of the Maine Constitution. Because, however, the Constitution does not prohibit giving the Supreme Judicial Court jurisdiction over recount appeals in primary elections to the Senate and the House, and Representative Gwadosky's comments refer only to constitutional concerns, the only rational conclusion is that the intent of the Legislature was to give the judicial branch jurisdiction over recount appeals in all primary elections. [2] [¶ 17] Because of the strong legislative history suggesting that the Legislature did not intend to reserve to itself jurisdiction over recount appeals in primary elections, we conclude that we have jurisdiction over such appeals.