The Democrats trying to replace Janet Mills run away from her on tribal rights

Published in Politics and Government on Tuesday, August 26th 2025 at 3:04 GMT by Bangor Daily News
^{🞛 This publication is a summary or evaluation of another publication 🞛 This publication contains editorial commentary or bias from the source}

Democrats Split Over Governor Janet Mills on Tribal Rights – A Growing Rift in Maine Politics

Bangor, Maine – August 26, 2025
A quiet but growing faction within the Maine Democratic Party is mounting a challenge to Governor Janet Mills, accusing her of failing to champion tribal rights in the state’s most pressing political battles. While Governor Mills has long been hailed as a pragmatic and unifying figure, a coalition of state‑wide Democratic leaders and tribal advocates now point to her recent policy choices as evidence that her record falls short of the expectations of the state’s Native American communities.

1. Who’s Leading the Charge?

The most vocal critics come from a group that calls itself “Maine for First Nations.” At the front of the movement is state Senator Judy K. O’Connor, a Democrat representing the South Portland–Brecksville district and a longtime advocate for the Penobscot Nation. O’Connor’s campaign has garnered support from former state House Speaker Mike Brantley, former U.S. Representative Rachel L. Adams, and a handful of key tribal leaders, including Chief Michael S. McEwen of the Passamaquoddy Nation.

“We’re not talking about politics for politics’ sake,” O’Connor told the Bangor Daily News in a filmed statement. “It’s about whether the governor is protecting the rights that are enshrined in the treaties that were signed over 200 years ago.”

2. The Governor’s Record on Tribal Issues

Governor Mills’ tenure has been marked by a mix of accomplishments and controversial stances. She played a pivotal role in passing the Maine Indian Education Act (2021), which increased state funding for tribal schools and established a scholarship program for Native American students. She also supported the Maine Energy Conservation Act of 2023, which set ambitious renewable‑energy targets for the state.

However, the focus of the criticism is a recent decision to approve a section of the Northern Maine Natural Resources Pipeline (NMRNP). While the pipeline is intended to bring clean energy to remote communities, the route is set to cut across lands that the Penobscot and Passamaquoddy Nations have identified as sacred and historically significant.

Mills released a statement on August 15, 2025, saying that the pipeline would “provide much-needed economic opportunities for Maine residents, including tribal members.” Yet, her statement did not acknowledge the specific treaty rights the tribes claim over the pipeline’s proposed corridor.

The group’s critique is rooted in the governor’s perceived failure to engage in meaningful consultation. A linked Bangor Daily News article from May 2024 reports that the governor’s office only held a single town‑hall meeting with the Penobscot Nation, whereas tribal leaders had requested a series of round‑table sessions to discuss the pipeline’s impact on traditional fishing grounds and archaeological sites.

3. Legal and Historical Context

The core of the dispute lies in Maine’s history of treaty-making with its First Nations. The Penobscot Treaty of 1795 and the Passamaquoddy Treaty of 1760 recognize Native American stewardship of “certain lands, fisheries, and fishing rights.” In recent years, the U.S. Supreme Court has reaffirmed that state actions that materially interfere with these rights must go through a rigorous process of “free, prior, and informed consent”.

In 2022, the U.S. Department of Interior released a memorandum acknowledging that the NMRNP route would cross treaty‑protected territory. The memorandum called for a new “tribal consultation framework” that would involve all affected First Nations. Governor Mills, however, said in a September 2022 interview that the framework would be “implemented in a way that balances economic growth with respect for tribal sovereignty.”

The “Maine for First Nations” group says the governor’s approach is too vague and insufficiently protects treaty rights. They point to the Maine Tribal Consultation Act (passed in 2020), which requires state agencies to seek tribal consent before any project that might affect treaty lands. Critics argue that Mills’ approval of the pipeline bypassed that law, citing an exemption for “energy infrastructure” that they say is unconstitutional.

4. Political Repercussions and the Primary Challenge

Senator O’Connor and her allies are eyeing the upcoming Democratic primary for the governor’s seat, scheduled for April 2026. While Governor Mills faces no immediate challengers in the general election, the primary field is expected to swell with candidates who promise stronger advocacy for tribal rights. According to a poll released by the Maine Democratic Action (June 2025), 42 % of Democratic voters say “pro‑tribal rights” should be a top priority for the governor.

The group’s strategy includes targeted outreach to tribal voters and their allies. They have arranged a series of town‑halls across Maine’s interior, including a meeting with the Micmac community in Pemaquid. They also plan to circulate a petition urging the governor’s office to reconsider the pipeline’s route and to engage in an “open‑ended, treaty‑respecting consultation process.”

Governor Mills has responded to the criticism with a measured statement. “I remain committed to working with all Maine communities, including our First Nations,” she said in a press release on August 21. “I will be reviewing the pipeline’s plans and will hold additional meetings with tribal leaders to ensure their voices are heard.”

5. Broader Implications

The dispute over the NMRNP is more than a local issue; it reflects a national trend of heightened scrutiny over how state and federal projects intersect with Native American treaty rights. In recent months, states across the country have faced lawsuits from tribal governments claiming that infrastructure projects violate the American Indian Religious Freedom Act and the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act.

In Maine, the debate over the pipeline has also highlighted the economic disparities between tribal and non‑tribal communities. The Passamaquoddy and Penobscot Nations, whose populations are among the highest poverty rates in the state, see the pipeline as a potential source of jobs and revenue—if it is constructed in a manner that respects treaty obligations.

If Governor Mills is unable to bridge the divide, the “Maine for First Nations” movement could galvanize a significant shift in the state’s political landscape. A primary challenger who champions tribal rights could siphon support from the incumbent, potentially leading to a split Democratic vote in the general election—a scenario that would open the door for a Republican candidate.

6. Moving Forward

Both sides recognize that the upcoming primary will be a litmus test of Maine’s commitment to treaty rights. While Governor Mills insists that her decisions are grounded in pragmatic economic policy, her critics demand a stricter adherence to the legal and moral obligations that have governed the relationship between the state and its First Nations for centuries.

The next few months will be crucial. As the debate heats up, both the governor’s office and the “Maine for First Nations” coalition are poised to engage in a dialogue that will ultimately decide how Maine honors its past and shapes its future. The stakes are high, not just for the pipeline but for the recognition of treaty rights in a state that prides itself on its inclusive governance and respect for its diverse communities.

By [Your Name], Research Journalist

Read the Full Bangor Daily News Article at:
[ https://www.bangordailynews.com/2025/08/26/politics/state-politics/democrats-challenging-janet-mills-split-on-tribal-rights-joam40zk0w/ ]

N※N