Now that Question 1 on Maine’s 2025 has been rightly vanquished (64.1% to 35.9%), a few words from us in memoriam.

This referendum question, part of a national conservative push, is such a useful and multifaceted example of misuse of the citizen-initiated process that it should be taught in schools.

Purporting to “secure elections,” its proponents were content to popularize the shorthand “voter ID.” A voter ID requirement at the ballot box in Maine was, voters themselves were quick to understand, just one of a pitiful, cynical bundle of the question’s proposed legislative changes.

Contrary to what political adversaries of Shenna Bellows will maintain, this dubious question’s wording didn’t need any massaging or editorializing by the secretary of state’s office to be deeply unpalatable to the electorate.

Rep. Laurel Libby said the question had been “weaponized.” A conservative podcaster who gave an interview to this newspaper last week was indignant to the end: “They might as well have worded it. ‘Do you want to murder puppies?'”

Alas for these two and anybody still of the same mind, a complete and undressed list of Question 1’s enterprising contents (simply not enough space on the paper, surely) would have been more than enough to alarm the average voter.

A deeply underwhelming “October surprise” in the form of 250 blank ballot papers allegedly tucked into an Amazon delivery to a woman in Penobscot County seemed to many the stuff of satirical television and, appropriately, did little to move the needle.

By preying on baseless fears and stoking creative concerns about election fraud, the question’s backers presumably hoped they could cow Mainers into supporting their novel and unreasonable limits on voting and absentee voting. No such luck.

It’s a relief that common sense prevailed and that Question 1 was swiftly shown the door. It’s a real shame that we had to bother with it in the first place.