WHEREAS, children and young people across the State of Maine experience grief after the death of an important person in their life, which profoundly impacts their social, emotional, mental, and social well-being; and

WHEREAS, it is estimated that 1 in 10 children in Maine will experience the death of a parent or sibling by the age of 18, a life-altering event that requires compassionate support from families, schools, organizations, and communities; and

Hello, this is Governor Janet Mills and thank you for listening.

On October 25, 2023, the folks at Just-in-Time Recreation and at Schemengees Bar and Grille in Lewiston were just doing what many Maine people do all the time. They were bowling with their kids. They were enjoying a cold beer and a game of cornhole after a long day at work. They were spending time with family and friends when their lives were shattered by gunfire. Eighteen people lost their lives to a senseless act of violence and many others were injured, their loved ones enduring a pain beyond comprehension.

I read a eulogy once that described grief as “the enormity of the room whose doors have now quietly shut.” In the days after that Lewiston tragedy -- when the door to the future was slammed shut for 18 beloved people, our friends, neighbors, family -- our grief felt too great to bear.

Two years later, October 25 remains a difficult day for our state, as it will be for a long time to come. Sometimes loss can be a very lonely experience, especially if other people don't know what to say or what to do to help ease the heartache. But there are people who can help. The Maine Resiliency Center is available to support anyone impacted by the Lewiston tragedy. You can learn more about how to connect with staff via their website, MaineResiliencyCenter.org. If you need to talk to someone right away, you can call the Maine Crisis Line at 9-8-8. And remember, you're not alone.

As we mourn and pay tribute to those we lost two years ago, I hope all Maine people will support the victims’ loved ones, and all those who were injured by showing the love that we have in our hearts for each other.

The same love for each other that Jason Walker, Michael Deslauriers, and Joe Walker demonstrated that night two years ago when they rushed the shooter in a courageous attempt to stop him and lost their lives. And when Tom Giberti instinctively ushered a group of children out the back door of the bowling alley, getting shot up himself, shot seven times in the legs while saving those young lives. And when Mike Roderick turned the lights off at Schemengees to obscure the shooter's vision.

The same love for each other that first responders exemplified when they came from far and wide to help, and which every doctor, nurse and health care worker at Central Maine Medical Center proved when they answered the call of duty and did everything they could to save lives.

The same love for each other that ASL interpreters from near and far displayed when, while reeling from the loss of four of their own, they stepped up to make sure that critical information got to those who are deaf and hard of hearing.

And it's the same love that ordinary people across the State of Maine showed all of us when they put a blue heart in their window, when they placed flowers at a memorial, when they wrote a thank you card, when they did a small act of kindness for someone who needed it most.

The enormity of our grief is surpassed only by the magnitude of our love for each other, the people of Maine. Although nothing can lessen their loss, today we grieve with the families of the victims and the survivors of the Lewiston tragedy so that no one feels alone. We open our hearts to those who were injured and to those who are still struggling with the aftermath of that night. And we offer unending gratitude to the people whose heroic actions saved lives and set us on the long and winding road to healing.

This is Governor Janet Mills. God bless you and God bless the memories of those we lost. And God bless the state of Maine. Thank you.

Hello, this is Governor Janet Mills, and thank you for listening.

You know, as governor of this great state, I took an oath to uphold the Constitution. Embodied in that sacred document is the idea that our country is not governed by any single individual, but by that great equalizer, the rule of law.

A few decades ago, you'll remember that principle was in great danger. Our nation watched as the moral compass of the law was diverted from its North Star by the pranks and practices, the crimes and cover ups, of those who valued political loyalty over their duty to the court and their duty to the Constitution. The President of the United States was forced to resign. Prominent lawyers lost their license to practice law, their very livelihood; and the Attorney General of the United States actually went to prison, all because of the national scandal we refer to very simply today as "Watergate."

Lawyers and law firms are again under tremendous pressure to bow to the demands and financial threats from political powers in D.C. The administration issued executive orders that targeted various law firms by name. Those executive orders suspended security clearances for employees of the firms, barred access to government buildings, and contact with government officials, and terminated government contracts with those firms – all because they once represented clients with whom the president disagreed.

The Administration attacks the court itself when it fails to get its way, using name calling and accusing individual judges of "hating America" and of suffering from a "sick ideology." This is a danger to the separation of powers and to the judiciary itself. Governing by intimidation by any party or person is not what the founders meant when they wrote the Constitution. It is, in fact, the very thing they most feared when they divided power among three co-equal branches of government.

In April, Reagan appointee Judge Harvie Wilkinson III described the recent assault on the legal system and the rule of law with some eloquent but disturbing words: “Now the branches come too close to grinding irrevocably against one another in a conflict that promises to diminish both,” he wrote. “...The Executive may succeed for a time in weakening the courts, but over time, history will script the tragic gap between what was and all that might have been, and law in time will sign its epitaph.” 

Now, in addition to law firms and lawyers, there have been many other threats targeted against businesses, colleges, scientists and researchers; unions, and veterans; threats to social security, health care, medical research, and education. Threats towards cities, states and countries, large and small.

You know, the law is neither red nor blue. It is not owned by any political party, and it is not the tool of any one individual in power. The law, simply, is the greatest achievement of our society. It's the thing that protects all of us, especially the weak and the vulnerable, those who cannot stand up for themselves. And if we stop believing in that great equalizer, the Constitution, if we give up, if we lose faith, then we lose the very thing that protects every one of us at a time when we need it most.

We all must be vigilant to preserve the Constitution of the United States and of this state. We have got to stand up for the rule of law. And whenever and however you do stand up, believe me, you will count for more than you think. Our country will stand taller, our country will be stronger, and the rule of law will thrive.

This is Governor Janet Mills, and thank you for listening.

WHEREAS, on October 18, 1775, a British Naval Fleet commanded by Captain Henry Mowat bombarded the town of Falmouth – now Portland – in retaliation for its support for Patriot activities during the early stages of the Revolutionary War; and

WHEREAS, the attack, which lasted throughout the day and left Falmouth ablaze, began with a heavy naval bombardment and was followed by a landing party of British soldiers; and

This is Governor Janet Mills, and thank you for listening.

You know, Maine people are proud of our high voter turnout. We treasure our civic right and our civic responsibility to cast a ballot. It's the way we make our voices heard, and it's the way we determine the future of our communities, our state, and our nation. Maine is proud to lead the nation in voter participation because of our proud history of safe and secure elections.

Whether you vote in person at the polls on Election Day, as I like to do, or by absentee ballot, you can trust that your vote will be counted fairly. But that fundamental right to vote is under attack from Question 1 on the ballot November 4th.

Proponents of Question 1 say it's a way to make voting more secure, but our voting is secure already, and there's no evidence of widespread voter fraud. I say this as a former District Attorney and your former Attorney General. We've investigated these allegations time and time again, and there is no evidence of widespread voter fraud in Maine.

So what is this 15-page detailed bill trying to do here? I tell you, this bill just makes it harder for Maine people to vote. Look, voting absentee is safe, it's secure, and widely used across Maine. In the last election, more than 40 percent of Maine people voted by absentee ballot. And during the pandemic in 2022, roughly 60 percent of voters voted absentee. That includes seniors who have a tough time sometimes leaving their homes, folks who live in rural towns far from polling places, people with disabilities, active duty military, people who have unpredictable work schedules -- like many of you -- and people like first responders who can't count on the schedule to let them vote during regular business hours. Question 1 would make it harder for all these folks to exercise their right to vote.

Question 1 will ban pre-paid return postage for absentee ballots, even when the town votes to do it. It will stop voters from requesting an absentee ballot by phone or through a family member. It will end ongoing absentee voter status for seniors and voters with disabilities. You know, roughly 60 percent of seniors vote absentee, and it will limit the number of secure drop boxes. Those drop boxes are carefully designed to be locked and secure, with keys only to the appropriate municipal official. This bill would change all of that.

Think about it like this: if you're a senior or a single parent, someone with disabilities, someone with a busy and unpredictable schedule, like a nurse or first responder, Question 1 would only make it harder for you to cast your vote. That's why I will be voting no on Question 1 this November.

Look, we've seen attacks on voting in Maine before. Remember back in 2011 when Republicans in the legislature enacted a law signed by Governor LePage to eliminate same day voter registration, claiming it would minimize fraud? Well, people turned out in droves to overturn that bill. Nearly 60 percent of Maine people voted to overturn it through a People's Veto, protecting same day voter registration.

Our elections are already safe, secure, and trustworthy. The right to vote is at the foundation of our democracy. Let's not make it harder for Maine people to exercise that important freedom. Reject Question 1 at the ballot box on November 4th.

This is Governor Janet Mills, and thank you for listening.

WHEREAS, regular screenings to detect both breast and lung cancer early when treatment can be most successful saves lives; and

WHEREAS, breast cancer is the most frequently diagnosed cancer among women in the U.S. and in the State of Maine; and

WHEREAS, Maine rates of lung cancer diagnoses and death are significantly higher than the U.S. average; and

WHEREAS, breast cancer deaths in Maine women have declined in recent years due to research breakthroughs and early detection and treatment; and

WHEREAS, in honor of the brave men and women who protect the life and property of Maine people, the State of Maine and its citizens observe the first Saturday in October as Firefighter’s Recognition Day in accordance with 1 MRSA § 135; and

WHEREAS, Maine has over three hundred thirty fire departments across the state dedicated to keeping our communities safe through fire response, medical emergencies, search and rescue, fire prevention, and code enforcement; and

Hello, this is Governor Janet Mills, and thank you for listening.

In the wake of complaints about customer service, and billings, and extended power outages, I introduced landmark legislation a couple of years ago to hold our electric utilities accountable and make sure that they deliver safe, reliable, and affordable service. That measure, which the legislature passed and I signed into law, requires CMP and Versant Power to ask for public input and to release a plan every five years outlining how they're going to build a more affordable and reliable electric grid in Maine.

Public input is important because utilities need to hear from Maine people about how the moves they're making as a company are going to impact the lives of everyday folks they serve. Yet last month, before completing their plan, CMP went to the Maine Public Utilities Commission to ask for a rate increase of roughly $1.4 billion over five years – in other words, for more money out of the pockets of Maine people.

Well, for starters, that request is not only unprecedented, it's unacceptable. It's out of touch with the reality of the high costs that Maine people are already paying. Every day I hear from older people on fixed incomes, and from small businesses, and people in rural Maine who are struggling with the high cost of electricity, groceries, housing and health care. Driving up their electric bill even more isn't going to help them make ends meet.

Look, I know that investing in the grid is important. We need to strengthen the electric grid and reduce outages in the long term, and there's no doubt that upgrades are needed. But we have to let the utilities know the impact that these huge requests have on the pockets of Maine people. CMP should have finished their plan for improving the grid, and should have talked to Maine people about it first. In light of all this, I've directed the Department of Energy Resources to intervene in opposition to CMP's request, in order to safeguard the interests of Maine ratepayers and to uphold the requirements of Maine law.

The Public Utilities Commission is holding two public hearings, one on October 14th in Freeport and one on October 15th in Hallowell, to get public feedback about the rate increase that CMP is requesting. I urge people to attend and let CMP hear their voices. I urge CMP to listen to the people and reconsider this misguided approach. And if they do not, then the PUC should deny this unreasonable rate increase.

My administration will continue to support policies that appropriately diversify our energy sources, and that help Maine people transition to more efficient heating and cooling technologies, and weatherize their homes, all to save money. In the meantime, we'll continue to demand accountability from utility companies to provide the affordable and reliable service that Maine people deserve – without breaking the bank.

This is Governor Janet Mills, and thank you for listening.

WHEREAS, for over 20 years, the President of the United States and Congress have designated October as Cybersecurity Awareness Month as a dedicated time for public and private sectors to work collaboratively to raise awareness about the importance of taking daily action to reduce cyber risks when online and using connected devices; and

Hello, this is Governor Janet Mills, and thank you for listening.

A 21-year-old woman threatens to kill herself with a gun. A 37-year-old man threatens to kill his ex-girlfriend's boyfriend and himself and any responding police officers. Well, these are just a couple of real-life examples of the more than 1,100 times that Maine's Extreme Risk Protection Order law has been used to remove weapons and protect individuals and the public. But this successful law is at risk from a question on the November 4th ballot.

Question 2, the so-called "red flag" measure, has been billed as strengthening gun safety measures—but in reality, it will undermine the safety of the public, and here's why.

Look, in my first year in office, we brought together law enforcement, behavioral health people, advocates from all sides to draft a powerful measure that allows a court to order the removal of dangerous weapons from someone who poses a risk to themselves or others, and it got a widely bipartisan vote in the Maine Legislature. So, look, our law is not some cookie-cutter measure copied and pasted from another state. It was written by and for Maine people, carefully crafted to include important due process safeguards that protect both the public safety and the rights of the individual. Now, police are using that law at a rate far more than once a day, and far exceeding the use of other so-called "red flag" laws in other states. That's because police are accustomed to the law and they understand their obligations to use it, especially after the tragedy in Lewiston and the Independent Commission's conclusion that the law could have and should have been used to prevent it.

So how does it work?

Suppose someone you know is talking suicide, or your neighbor is threatening people, or a cousin borrowed your gun but is acting strange. Well, you call the police and you report it. The police investigate and take the person into protective custody, and have the person speak to a mental health professional. The police then take all the information they have from whatever source, and request a judge order the person to give up their weapons. Simple as that. But Question 2 would create a new, separate and confusing process that will undermine the effectiveness of the law and endanger public safety along with it.

So how are the two different?

Our current law requires police to initiate the process to remove weapons based on all the information available to them, while Question 2 would allow a family or household member to initiate it on their own without further investigation. Well, on its face, I guess I understand why that seems appealing. Why not provide another avenue to remove a weapon?

Well, first, because involving law enforcement, as our law does, takes the burden off of you as a family member for turning someone in who is close to you. Question 2, on the other hand, as a practical matter, would shift the responsibility of pursuing a court order on your shoulders and put you on the front lines of a dangerous situation which risks your safety.

Second, law enforcement have access to much more information, and they know the court system, so they can navigate it more easily and successfully remove weapons. Question 2 would have civilians navigate that system on their own. I don't want to see anyone walk away from the process because they're overwhelmed, or can't figure it out, or feel intimidated. That just means that weapons might remain in the hands of dangerous people.

Third, involving law enforcement provides another important level of due process, and that strengthens the current law's constitutionality. Question 2 would lower that legal standard and diminish the protective buffer of the police, which puts the law at much greater risk of being struck down.

Here's the bottom line for me -- and I say this as someone with decades of experience as a former private attorney, a district attorney, attorney general, and now as governor -- if there is a potentially dangerous situation, I want the police involved as soon as possible because it's their responsibility, not yours, to deal with dangerous people.

Look, if I thought Question 2 were good public policy, I'd be the first to support it -- but Maine's current gun safety law is one of the most effective laws of its kind in the nation, carefully drafted to be constitutional. It has resulted in more than 1,100 court orders to remove weapons, far more compared to most other states that have so-called red flag laws.

Our Maine law is successfully saving lives every day, and that's why I ask people to reject Question 2 at the ballot box on November 4th.

This is Governor Janet Mills and thank you for listening.