Sometimes elections produce murky or contradictory results, but not last Tuesday’s in Maine. Voters were clear and decisive in providing instructions for the Legislature, which convenes in January. We’ll soon see if lawmakers were listening attentively.

Much of the energy was focused on Question 1, the people’s veto that repealed the Legislature’s attempt to end Election Day voter registration, a practice begun as an uncontroversial “good government” measure 38 years earlier.

Because the law was supported only by Republicans, and opposed by every Democratic lawmaker, the campaign began on a partisan note, but as the returns demonstrated, by an overwhelming 60 to 40percent margin, Mainers resented the attempt to roll back voting rights. Returns were remarkably consistent, with traditionally Republican Knox County registering the broadest support for repeal.

Like the rejection of restrictions on public employee unions in Ohio and the unprecedented recall of the Arizona Senate president who led an anti-immigration campaign, Maine’s vote rejected overreaching by majority Republicans. After their sweeping victory in 2010, it’s understandable the GOP would want to reverse some current policies, but targeting a longstanding election practice that encouraged voting was peculiar. It may even have boosted turnout this time – more than 40 percent, above average for an off- off-year election, particularly one with only four questions on the statewide ballot.

GOP talk that it may now take up a carryover bill to require all voters to show photo ID is sheer silliness. The reason the bill, LD 199, was carried over is that, while it narrowly passed the House, the Senate balked. Three GOP senators who voted for ending Election Day registration – Roger Katz, Richard Rosen and David Trahan – opposed the more onerous photo ID requirement, and the Question 1 results are unlikely to make them change their minds.

Voters also turned decisively against gambling with the other two referendum questions. There was a huge margin against a Lewiston casino that was a relatively late entry, but a combined plan for slot-machine “racinos” in Biddeford and Calais also failed decisively. Given the approval of an Oxford casino in 2010, the results are a bit of a surprise, but Gov. Paul LePage may have caught the public mood when he predicted there wasn’t enough gambling business to support three new operations. A Lewiston casino would have been a significant threat to Oxford, which is expected to open next year.

New betting operations weren’t particularly popular even in home towns. Lewiston offered only 56 percent support for its own casino, and while Biddeford was slightly more favorable, the 60 percent margin there was lower than a previous municipal vote favoring relocation of the Scarborough Downs track. Only in Calais, 4-1 in favor, and surrounding Washington County, by 2-1, showed any real enthusiasm.

One significant gambling expansion did pass muster in Bangor, site of the racino that brought big-time gambling to Maine. As in 2003, when the racino question snuck through while an Indian tribal casino was being shellacked, Bangor’s racino effectively became a casino through a little-noticed bill, LD 1418, passed in June by the Legislature.

Expanded gambling at Hollywood Slots was not particularly controversial, passing the House 83-61 and the Senate, 21-12. Nor was it partisan. The 12 Senate “no” votes were divided equally between Republicans and Democrats. Still, given that every other gambling proposal has had to run the referendum gauntlet, it seems odd lawmakers gave the green light to a Bangor casino. The required local referendum passed easily on Tuesday, to no one’s surprise; Bangor’s take from Hollywood Slots is now being invested in a replacement for the aging Bangor Auditorium.

The bill’s rationale was that it would put Bangor on a par with Oxford, whose referendum passed by just 4,000 votes after an almost identical measure was rejected in 2008. But that’s just the problem. Gambling in Maine now rides the shifting currents of referendum elections, and it’s high time the Legislature came up with a better scheme.

There will be an opportunity to do that in 2012. The decisive defeats of Questions 2 and 3 should deter any other gambling supporters from gathering signatures. In both 2010 and 2011, any legislative plan would have been on the ballot as a competing measure. This may be the last, best chance to create a relatively rational statewide system.

Finally, voters narrowly approved Question 4, a constitutional amendment, really a housekeeping measure, conforming Maine to a U.S. District Court ruling moving up congressional redistricting by two years. Amendment votes are often close, for unknown reasons. Perhaps, having been so decisive elsewhere, voters want to preserve some mystery concerning their intentions for 2012.