The BDN Opinion section operates independently and does not set news policies or contribute to reporting or editing articles elsewhere in the newspaper or on bangordailynews.com.
Amy Fried is a retired political science professor at the University of Maine. Her views are her own and do not represent those of any group with which she is affiliated.
In the 2022 elections in Maine and elsewhere, conservatives promoted culture war concerns by attacking public schools, making false, highly negative claims of “grooming,” a term that refers to sexual abusers’ manipulation of potential victims. Like the predicted big red wave that never materialized nationally, these campaign messages did little in the Pine Tree State.
Still, the right’s failure shows how political parties and advocacy organizations try to shape what an election is about and how right-wing groups used Maine organizations as a cover for their plans.
According to a recent investigation by the New York Times, “national activists formed a loose network of think tanks, political groups and Republican operatives in at least a dozen states. They sought funding from a range of right-leaning philanthropies and family foundations, and from one of the largest individual donors to Republican campaigns in the country. They exchanged model legislation, published a slew of public reports and coordinated with other conservative advocacy groups” in three Southern states and Maine.
A key group was the Claremont Institute, an organization that characterized the over 81 million U.S. citizens who elected Joe Biden as president as “not Americans in any meaningful sense of the term.” A prominent Claremont member, John Eastman, was indicted for helping Donald Trump try to substitute fraudulent electors for legitimate ones in order to stay in the White House after losing the 2020 election. These sorts of things are why it’s been called an “anti-democracy think tank.”
Claremont’s Scott Yenor and others were involved in Maine endeavors before the 2022 election. According to the New York Times, “the group also teamed with Republican political operatives” and was linked to the Maine Policy Institute, which put out reports under its name.
But as Thomas Klingenstein, the chair of the Claremont Institute admitted in an email, the paper on K-12 schools co-authored by Yenor and published by the Maine Policy Institute used information that was “anecdotal” and it was difficult to know what was “actually happening on the ground.” In other words, it was a junk study.
Undeterred by a lack of real evidence about education in Maine, Klingenstein then helped fund nearly $3 million in campaign ads against Gov. Janet Mills about schools. Again laundering a national group’s project through a group with “Maine” in its title, the Times noted that this expensive electoral effort “was spearheaded by a national advocacy group called the American Principles Project, which in turn operated through a front group called Maine Families First.”
Meanwhile, Claremont associates privately admitted their stated claims and views were not what they really believed. While planning efforts against diversity initiatives, an email from Yenor stated that “Bans on [critical race theory] and its associated ideologies are a lot of smoke or boob-bait for the bubbas.” In another email, Yenor said he believed that “Our sexual culture will not be healed until we once again agree that homosexuality belongs in the closet and that a healthy society requires patriarchy” but then chose not to reveal these views publicly.
Ultimately the plan to elect Republicans in Maine with culture war messages failed in 2022. Gov. Mills won re-election resoundingly and Democrats made gains in both state legislative chambers. In other states and elections, right-wing book banners have not done well recently.
While these efforts failed, they show us how national groups with undisclosed, unpopular goals can work through front groups in states.
They also tell us a larger story about political campaigns, which is that there’s always political conflict over what any election is about. These right-wing culture warriors wanted elections to hinge on hyped-up claims about public schools. But Maine voters, who have first-hand knowledge about what teachers and principals are doing and who think people should live their authentic selves, did not take the bait.
Looking forward, the 2024 elections will be about so much — a choice between well-known presidential candidates, the parties’ governing competence, and many different policy issues. The future of our democracy will also be on the ballot. Candidates, political parties, grassroots organizations and big-pocketed groups will focus on many different things. But ultimately each of us will have a voice to determine what the election is about and which direction we go.
