BerryBlog

The Case for Tax Fairness, In Pictures

2012-01-30T14:15:00.000-08:00

Restoring tax fairness instead of gutting health care was endorsed in the Maine Sunday Telegram yesterday. It was nice to see this venerable and centrist organization getting on board, in addition to the Legislature's Working Families Caucus and the Maine Can Do Better Coalition. We're making progress.

I played with Excel on Saturday to tell the Story of Tax Fairness in pictures. Some data shocked even me. This is why so many middle-class and working families feel angry and overtaxed. They're not getting back in services what they pay in, because they're being asked to carry the water for others.

Here's the key concept: a simple alternative to the Governor's budget cuts.

That's right. If Maine taxed multimillionaires at the same rate as secretaries and child care workers, we'd have over three times in revenue what the Governor needs to cover his new budget gap.

The next two charts show how unfair our tax code is now, thanks to a massive burden shift to property taxes, and how it's about to get even worse.

For the current biennium, over $110 of $150 million in "tax cuts" were funded by cutting aid to towns and cutting the Property Tax and Rent Reduction. This has been convenient for some elected officials, since they can talk about the "biggest tax cut in Maine history" and then blame town leaders for raising property taxes.

Here's how the overall Maine tax burden stacks up now:

Just when you think the inequality can't get worse, it does.

Here is what next year's (2013) tax cuts hold in store. Expect higher taxes for working families and the middle class, due to the continued shift to property taxes. Also expect massive new cuts for the very wealthy:

Not even my Republican friends want to give MORE to those least in need of charity, while taking away Head Start from kids and health care from low-income adults -- many of whom work full time yet pay one of the highest overall state and local tax rates. The Governor's proposal to do so is nothing short of outrageous.

Mad as a hornet? Do something! Here's one online petition - and here's another. Then fire off a letter to your local paper.

Any questions? Feel free to leave a comment and I'll do my best to answer.

State of the State response

2012-01-28T08:59:00.000-08:00

My off-the-cuff reply to this week's State of the State by Gov. LePage, plus response of two other legislators.

We need to put money back in the pockets of working Mainers and the middle class, not take more away.

False Choices, Real Harm

2012-01-27T17:28:00.000-08:00

Today, just after returning from knee surgery at Mid Coast Hospital, I received the letter below from the hospital's President and CEO. In one page, it nicely sums up the moral and economical bankrupcy of the supplemental budget proposed by Governor LePage.

At the same moment I was reading the letter, the Governor was again threatening to close schools in April if legislators on the Appropriations Committee did not vote immediately to accept his budget.

No to public schools, or no to public health? The harm of either is real -- and the choice is false.

Even the Governor's own inflated estimate of his new budget gap, $221 million, is just half the cost of the new tax cuts scheduled to take effect in 2013. And as I noted earlier this week, the Legislature only needs to roll back some of those cuts -- restoring tax fairness so the wealthiest 1% pay the same rate as the rest of us -- to make the Governor's gap go away.

Public health, public schools, or restored tax fairness? The right answer is yes to all of the above.

Want to tell your legislators and Governor to make the right choice? Here's one online petition -- and here's another. If you have time, fire off a letter to your local paper while you're at it!

Make Tax Cuts Fair, Protect MaineCare

2012-01-24T06:29:00.000-08:00

As it turns out, avoiding the Governor’s massive, deeply unpopular cutsis even easier than I wrotein December, and can be done while reducing taxes for the middle class and workingfamilies. To close the Governor’s new gap,which is probably lower than his own estimate of $221 million, we need only restore fairness to our tax code.

A few weeks ago, it hit me that simply requiring the wealthiest 1% to paythe average effective state and local rate would balance the budget. Since then, my math has beenconfirmed by the Governor’s own staff at Maine Revenue Services, as well as the Maine Center for Economic Policy.*

Bringing the 1% into line with the rest of us would generate at least $140million in each biennial budget cycle. If federal tax offsets are included, the number is roughly $210 million.

Combined with sensible, long-term cost containment and the few bipartisanitems in the Governor’s budget, this measure negates the need to slash thesafety net, protects new tax cuts for the middle class, and helpskeep the state in the black in future years.

According to a recent pollconducted by Public Policy Polling, 73% of Americans, including 66% ofRepublicans, favor President Obama’s “Buffet Rule,” which applies the samelogic of economic justice and opportunity.

Thirty years ago, Governor LePage’s favoritePresident called it “crazy”that a millionaire could pay lower tax rates than a bus driver. Surely we can agree,then, that a Maine multimillionaire need not pay lower taxes than a fishermanor farmer, teacher or pensioner, or a minimum-wage single mom striving for abetter life for her kids.

The time has come to restore tax fairness. Click here to tell Maine’s leaders they need notchoose between schools, seniors, the safetynet, 4,400 health care jobs, and tax cuts for the middle class. We need only restore equal tax treatment – andwith it, equal opportunity to succeed.

--------

*Accordingto MRS, Maine’s wealthiest 1% now pays an average effective state and local taxrate that is 14% lower than the statewide average. Accounting for federal offsets,the gap grows to 22%. The wealthiest 1% includes only 6700tax filers, each making an annual average of $750,786 AGI.

Restoring tax fairness does notmean Maine’s wealthiest 1% can’t use existing deductions, credits, and otherloopholes to bring down their tax liability. They can do so, just so long as they don’t go below what the rest of uspay.

Tax Fairness, Not More Red Tape

2012-01-19T16:03:00.000-08:00

In testimony on LDs 1680 and 1693 today, the Taxation Committee heard overwhelmingly that Maine's Property Tax and Rent Relief Program should not be further constricted, but rather expanded to reach all working families paying higher than average tax rates.

The purpose of this program, also called the Circuit Breaker, is to alleviate the higher tax burden faced by most low- and middle-income Mainers, and to help keep Maine residents in their homes. According to data presented recently by Maine Revenue Services, the bottom 99% of taxpayers pay three times more of their income on property taxes than do the wealthiest 1%. Adding insult to injury, the Circuit Breaker's maximum tax reductions were cut by $400 in the Legislature's last biennial budget.

As if this unfairness were not enough, both bills propose to require additional paperwork to receive the tax reduction.

Testifying against LD 1693, Mrs. Lynne Goodwin testified that she had grown up in Brewer, had been a school teacher her whole life, and now relied on the Circuit Breaker to reduce her property taxes. 72 years old, Mrs. Goodwin said she lived entirely on Social Security. "[The Circuit Breaker] keeps me in my home," she told the Committee. "It takes 4 months of my Social Security to pay my property taxes."

In my four years as a selectboard member, I found the Circuit Breaker program to be extremely helpful to alleviate the high tax burden borne by Bowdoinham's low-income elderly and by young, minimum-wage families. The rebate was available only to Maine residents and taxpayers, helped keep people in their homes, and helped to ensure that property taxes were paid in a timely fashion.

To my father, who owns three small rental apartments, it is also helpful to know that his tenants are more likely to be able to pay their rent thanks to the Circuit Breaker. Adding duplicative paperwork to solve a problem that does not exist would only make things harder for him and harder still for his tenants.

LD 1680, which would require that notarized proof of rent payment be presented along with Circuit Breaker tax filings, overlooks the timing of Circuit Breaker tax reductions, which are awarded one to two years after payment of rent.

At present, Circuit Breaker applications are treated like any other income tax credit or reduction, and are audited annually by Maine Revenue Services. Documentation of paid rent is already required in the auditing process.

LD 1693, which proposes to reduce town poverty abatements automatically based on Circuit Breaker tax reductions, fails to note that the State Supreme Court has already provided towns this latitude in a case decided in 2004. In that case, Sager v. Town of Bowdoinham, a decision made by my immediate predecessors on the Bowdoinham selectboard to adjust an abatement on the basis of a Circuit Breaker refund, was upheld.

According to Maine Revenue Services analysis, both bills are also fraught with technical errors and would create unnecessary red tape. Regular audits are already conducted by MRS, as with all other programs relating to the income tax. Each bill would require additional staff and paperwork. Enacting both bills would result in new annual costs of $150,000 to the state. MRS states that LD 1680 would be "duplicative," and LD 1693 would add "complexity and confusion" to the process. No evidence of significant need was presented for either bill.

If our job is to make Maine's tax code fairer and simpler, then these bills go in the wrong direction.

Those testifying in favor of each bill were far outnumbered by opponents, who represented a broad array of organizations with memberships in the thousands. These included the Roman Catholic Diocese of Portland, The Maine Women's Lobby, The Maine People's Alliance, Pine Tree Legal Assistance, Maine Equal Justice Partners, Preble Street, the Maine Association of Interdependent Neighborhoods, and the Maine Center for Economic Policy. The groups argued that the Circuit Breaker is one of our best means to balance our tax code, that it keeps working, minimum-wage families and fixed-income grandparents in their homes, and that if anything it should be expanded.

What our tax code needs is not more red tape. What it needs is greater fairness to working families.

Treasurer's Housing Plans Penny-Wise, Pound Foolish

2012-01-06T07:46:00.000-08:00

Unfortunately, the State Treasurer's four recommendations for low-income housing in Maine published in today's Press Herald are penny-wise and pound-foolish. The benefits of his approach would accrue to developers, out-of-state oil companies, and politicians, while the costs accrue both to taxpayers and to the elderly, disabled, and minimum-wage families in need of adequate housing.

"1. That MSHA create financial incentives for developers to lower the cost per apartment."

This means paying developers more to cut corners -- leading to greater long-term cost for the public. As our State Treasurer first and as a private developer second, Mr. Poliquin should fight to defend the existing competitive bidding process instead.

"2. That MSHA continue the board-initiated elimination of expensive and unnecessary building standards, like solar hot water heaters."

Solar hot water is highly cost-effective, saving money while also reducing Maine's dependence on oil. MSHA should be increasing its long-term savings and energy independence initiatives, not reducing them.

"3. That MSHA explore non-traditional strategies to provide the most cost efficient low-income housing."

MSHA has already explored and realized many long-term savings initiatives. If Mr. Poliquin has specific "non-traditional" ideas other than the two ideas mentioned above, he should name those ideas and bring these to his next MSHA Board Meeting.

"4. That MSHA require the executive director to report to the board, as is done at every other quasi-independent authority."

The Director's independence from a politically-appointed board is about running MSHA like a business, sending a signal to Wall St. and bond rating agencies that Maine keeps politics out of its banking, loaning, and underwriting decisions.

Maine can do better, simply by preserving the integrity of its current approach to affordable housing.

MHPC Again Defies Economic and Policy Reality

2011-12-19T14:57:00.000-08:00

What the Maine Heritage Policy Center sent out to news channels today, masquerading as a study, was yet another partisan press release defending the budget recently presented by Governor LePage -- who relies on MHPC for policy guidance -- and relying on the same failed economic assumptions that justified the disastrous 2001 Bush tax cuts.

If MHPC agrees with Democrats that jobs should be the priority, they should be working today to help pass the bipartisan, two-month payroll tax cut extension over the objections of Congressional extremists. Instead, they are again promoting new, trickle-down tax giveaways to the very wealthiest on the backs of young children, veterans, the disabled, and senior citizens.

Why are MHPC's economic assumptions fundamentally flawed?

Credible job creation projections, such as those used at the Congressional Budget Office and in major bond rating agencies, recognize that tax reductions for the wealthy tend to be invested internationally, while tax reductions for the middle class tend to be spent locally, creating more local jobs. In contrast, MPHC's analysis instead relies on a single average of $215 for all taxpayers, assuming these benefits to the wealthy will trickle down.

To accurately estimate job loss or gain from the 2013 tax cuts, MPHC would have needed to break down the actual benefits to each income group. These include:

$2,810 to the wealthiest 1% (over $360K AGI)
$123 to the middle 20%
$7 to the bottom 20% (incl. min. wage earners)

Also starting in 2013, they give an average windfall of $43,500 to those inheriting estates worth over $1 million.

Who benefits in Maine's current tax code - and how is it changing?

Even before these new tax reductions take effect, Maine Revenue Services notes that the lowest overall rate for total state and local taxes is currently paid by the wealthiest 1%, while the highest overall rate is paid by the poorest 20%.

To create jobs, help the middle class, and protect investments in Maine's people and infrastructure, Democrats last June presented an amendment to the state budget that would have reduced taxes for 16,000 more Maine families, while leaving more than enough in state coffers to cover the Governor's more recent budget gap. The amendment was voted down, mainly along party lines.

The increases MHPC fears are imaginary. In fact, they are simply defending new tax reductions, primarily for the wealthiest Mainers, which the state can no longer afford.

Gov's Reverse Robin-Hood Tax Statements Get Burden Backwards

2011-12-16T17:26:00.000-08:00

In his weekly address tomorrow, Governor LePage reportedly claims there are more "welfare" recipients in Maine than taxpayers. In other words, even as the Governor proposes to deny health care to full-time minimum wage earners, veterans, and seniors on a fixed income, he is now also accusing them of not paying taxes.

In fact, all Maine residents pay taxes -- and the poor and middle class pay a far higher rate than the wealthy.

If you buy something in a store, you pay taxes. If you pay rent or own property, you pay taxes. If you drive a car, you pay taxes. Yet for his own reasons, the Governor only defines income taxpayers as taxpayers.

The Governor's own staff at Maine Revenue Services report that all Maine families pay taxes. In addition, they report that the highest overall state and local tax rate is paid by the poorest 20% of Mainers. This is because taxes like sales, property, excise and fuel taxes vary far less than incomes. For the very wealthy, much income goes to investments and is taxed at half the rate as earned income.

MRS itself also reports that the richest 1% of Mainers pay a rate that is by far the lowest, while lower income individuals pay by far the highest tax rates. This fundamental unfairness exists now -- even before the new income and estate tax changes take place in 2013.

The Governor's false claims are beyond the pale. Once again, he has chosen to demonize the poor and disparage the middle class.

Can Governor LePage not tell a taxpayer when he sees one? Or is he just too intent on providing new giveaways to the wealthy on the backs of the elderly, veterans, disabled, working poor and young children to let the truth get in his way?

Someday -- maybe this Christmas -- I sincerely hope the Governor will listen to his idol Ronald Reagan, who once remarked that it was "crazy" that a bus driver should pay a higher tax rate than a millionaire. As Reagan knew, what's good for the middle class and for working families benefits us all. It's also the right thing to do.

How to Address the Governor's New Budget Gap

2011-12-14T04:19:00.000-08:00

The simple answer to the Governor's new budget gap is not to cut child care, Head Start, Drugs for the Elderly, or health coverage for 65,000 Mainers, but to call off the future tax changes enacted as part of the last biennial budget and to restore fairness to Maine's tax code.

Starting in Jan. 2013, the new Republican tax changes give an average annual income tax reduction of:

$2,810 to the wealthiest 1% (over $360K AGI)
$123 to the middle 20%
$7 to the bottom 20% (incl. min. wage earners)

Also starting in 2013, they give an average windfall of $43,500 to those inheriting estates worth over $1 million.

Even without these changes, Maine Revenue Services notes that the lowest overall rate for total state and local taxes is currently paid by the wealthiest 1%, while the highest overall rate is paid by the poorest 20%.

Keeping our tax code as it is -- or better yet, making it fairer to the middle class and working poor -- will save more than enough to close new budget gaps, and will also head off future state cuts and local tax increases.

The Governor's new budget proposal voids the delicate compromise negotiated in June, which protected the programs he now again proposes to cut. Costing $200 million per year and over 4,400 Maine jobs, these are giveaways Maine people can not afford.

Yet another "Christmas Past" proposal from the Governor makes no sense either morally or economically. If enough legislators walk away from this chapter, we can instead let Tiny Tim's family again sit down with Scrooge at the same table.

The choice is not a hard one. All Mainers deserve both a decent shot at prosperity, and a basic guarantee of human dignity.

Richmond-Dresden Bridge Replacement Secures Federal Funding

2011-12-12T12:51:00.000-08:00

Richmond-Dresden Bridge (lower left) Photo by Point of View Helicopter Services

Today,the Obama administration awarded funding to replace the Richmond-Dresdenbridge. I applaud the administration's decision, as well as the efforts of our Congressional delegation and Maine Department of Transportation (MDOT).

ManyMaine bridges and roads have seen little attention since the job-creation pushof the 1930s, under FDR, and are now in need of replacement. Since theLegislature decided last spring to cut funding for roads and bridges in comingyears, we are now more dependent than ever on federal assistance of this kind. This year alone, Maine's construction firms are bracing for a drop of more than a third in overall funding of road and bridge work.

Atleast twice in recent years, the swing span of the bridge has been stuck in theopen position. Richmond’s volunteerfirefighters have had to pull the span closed using trucks, winches, and other firefightingequipment. In addition, the low, narrowbridge requires taller trucks to drive on the center line to cross. In a typical day, over 3,000 vehicles use the bridge to cross the Kennebec River's main channel above Merrymeeting Bay.

Built in 1931, the bridge will be replaced by a span high enough to allow marine traffic to passsafely underneath. MDOT Commissioner Bernhardt, who visited our area with me lastspring, plans to start construction next year, with the hopesof the replacement bridge ready for traffic in 2015.

Keep the Clean Elections, Baby -- Lose the Bathwater

2011-12-05T08:20:00.001-08:00

A Response to Doug Rooks' Op-Ed in Today's Sun Journal

I agree, and so do most Mainers, that the apparent move afoot at the State House to hobble Maine's Clean Elections system is not a good thing.

Having had a leadership PAC twice and run as a Clean Elections candidate three times, I would also support a ban on all leadership PACs -- except that the Supreme Court will not allow that. So the only constitutional option ever put forward is a discriminatory ban. This ban would apply only to Clean Elections candidates, since we must subject ourselves to higher, voluntary standards in return for public financing.

Maine Citizens for Clean Elections does not support the perennial "discriminatory ban" bill for two very good reasons. First, it does not solve the real issue. Leadership PACs with no donation limits would still exist. Second, it would surely drive future leaders away from Clean Elections, ultimately jeopardizing Maine's entire system of public financing.

More in keeping with the spirit of Clean Elections would be a competitive, publicly-funded leadership fund. I'd be the first to opt in. But there isn't one, because would be costly and would go beyond what voters originally enacted.

I am proud that every dollar my leadership PAC has received or spent is listed online, and that most donations are from people (not the Citizen's United kind). I am also proud that my PAC has helped my caucus compete against massive, anonymous, out-of-state Super-PACs. And since I have been a Clean Elections candidate, not one of my expenditures has helped my own campaign for reelection.

If we don't stay focused and united, we lose both the baby and the bathwater. Our best chance to preserve Clean Elections is to guard jealously what Maine voters enacted, fund it adequately, and find one new U.S. Supreme Court justice who knows that money does not equal speech.

Bill to stop sales tax fraud will be considered

2011-11-17T10:43:00.001-08:00

Criminals can be very good at inventing new ways to hurt the rest of us.

With the help of Rep. Gary Knight, my colleague from Livermore, I was able today to convince most Republican and all Democratic legislative leaders to allow my "zappers" bill in for the upcoming emergency session.

If you don't already know about zappers, the press release below will help. Like my recent bill on bath salts, this is an effort to help Maine stay one step ahead of the criminals.

Woody Guthrie said "some'll rob you with a six-gun, and some with a fountain pen." Woody didn't know about Zappers -- but our neighbor Quebec sure does. They lose about $417 million per year from restaurant tax fraud alone.

Bill to stop sales tax fraudwill be considered

Measure wouldprohibit "Tax Zapper" software

AUGUSTA - A bill to prohibit "tax zapper"software that allows businesses to under-report their taxable sales will beconsidered by state lawmakers when they reconvene in January. The measure wasapproved for a hearing today from the Legislative Council, which is made up oflegislative leaders from both parties.

"Given the loss of $417 million in neighboringQuebec to this specific type of fraud in just one fiscal year, we need to getahead of this problem," Berry said. "These sophisticated tax-evasion programs should be outlawed inMaine."

Berry told lawmakers that experts believe billions infraud are being committed in individual states each year, with about $10million occurring in Maine.

The Canada Revenue Agency has found that one in threerestaurants audited have used zappers, robbing others taxpayers of about $1million per incident. Quebec has beenespecially hard hit, identifying over230 zapper cases in just one year.

Legislative leaders had originally voted against allowingthe measure to be heard next session during a meeting last month of theLegislative Council. Rep. Berry asked the legislative leaders to reconsidertheir decision today during an appeals hearing of the Council.

"State tax officials have expressed growing concernsabout this," said Rep. Berry. "We have an opportunity to preventfraud and get ahead of the curve."

Berry worked with the Republican House Chair of theTaxation Committee, Rep. Gary Knight, R- Livermore Falls, to convincelegislative leaders that this issue needed immediate attention form stateofficials.

The proposal was one of 15 bills that were approved to beconsidered. The Legislative Council heard appeals on 63 bills.

Receiving 2011 Prevention Award from the Maine Alliance to Prevent Substance Abuse

2011-11-04T11:06:00.000-07:00

Today I was honored to be the 2011 Prevention Award recipient at the annual convention of the Maine Alliance to Prevent Substance Abuse.

With me in this photo (L-R): Joel Merry, Sagadahoc Sheriff, Susan Kring, Executive Director of MAPSA, myself, my wife Adelaida Gaviria, and Heidi Tucker and Rebecca Miller of ACCESS Health.

As I said in accepting the award, my work on "bath salts" policy, early childhood, and other prevention initiatives has been inspired by Adelaida, who is from Colombia and who has lost many family members and loved ones due to the drug wars.

As an educator for twenty years, I believe our prevention and education messages should shift from being about "me" to being about "we." The world is a smaller place today.

Young people still need to know the health and safety effects drugs can have on them personally, but also need to know that staying clean keeps the blood of others off their hands. For many teens, positive peer pressure is often more effective when it is about protecting others, not protecting one's self.

Intervention with expectant families and new families can also be more effective because it is about "we" not "me." New parents -- even addicts -- want the best for their child. Through effective home visitation, we can literally alter the course of history and break the cycle of addiction. That is why I have fought, and will continue to fight, for adequate investment in proven programs such as Head Start and home visitation.

Fairpoint Failures, Lawsuit Hold Lessons for Maine Prosperity

2011-11-03T08:18:00.000-07:00

“At the length truth willout.” -- William Shakespeare, from the Merchant of Venice

Yesterday, news emergedthat Fairpoint Communications wassuing Verizon forselling it on a bad deal for Fairpoint investors. Sadly, a raw dealfor Fairpoint investors was also a raw deal for Maine residents andbusinesses. This was an easy future to foretell-- even in 2007 whenthe deal came before Maine’s Legislature.

Maine’s electrical workers’union, IBEW, and Maine businesses like GWI testified that the proposed takeoverwas like a minnow attempting to swallow a whale, and that the deal wasstructured primarily to maximize profits for Verizon as they abandoned Mainerswho had paid dearly for the very infrastructure now beingsold.

Some policymakers listened-- but not enough. Senator Nancy Sullivan (D-York) introduced LD1866, a bill that simply required that utility mergers worth over $50 millionbe approved by the Public Utilities Commission using a slightly higher standardthan used in the past. Rather than the usual “do no harm” standard,the PUC would need to find a "net benefit" in the merger for Maineresidents and businesses.

To many of us, it seemedthat every well-paid lobbyist in Augusta fought Sen. Sullivan’s bill. TheMaine Chamber of Commerce and many local chambers -- with Verizon and Fairpointas major members – helped their fight. In the end, all Republicansand a few Democrats in both House and Senate voted against the bill.

Here are the House and Senate roll calls. Y means passthe bill; N means kill it.

When LD 1866 came to theHouse floor, I was a wet-behind-the-ears freshman legislator on the Utilitiesand Energy Committee. Realizing that my own committee chair wasinexplicably not speaking up for his own (our own!) position, I was forced tolead off the debate. From my very impromptu floor remarks:

We are not talking about afree marketplace: we are talking about utilities. And what we havein front of us is a proposal for an arranged marriage.

Fairpoint and Verizon haveproposed an arranged marriage to all of us and to our constituents. Theywant to go into our homes, and to bill us now under a new arrangement, underterms that we do have the right to have a say in. The new companywill be our default carrier. Anything that happens here will be onour heads, for good or for bad.

The bill simply says thatany merger of this size, magnitude, and importance should advance the economicdevelopment and information goals of the state we have all agreed to, shouldresult in a net benefit to ratepayers, and should be consistent with theinterests of the new utility’s own investors.

There are serious concernshere about whether Fairpoint, a tiny company with junk bond status, can infact, take on $1.7 billion in debt, which would be turned over under thisarrangement by Verizon, and the poles and wires which in fact are not at allthe sole property of Verizon, but which have been paid for by our ratepayers,by our state.

Let’s not take this lyingdown, and let's not assume that all is right with the world and Maine canremain competitive until we have done our homework.

But Maine’s arrangedmarriage to Fairpoint went ahead. Maine's economic competitiveness andFairpoint's are now connected at the hip. We now need Fairpoint to succeed, just as we need its Maine competitors tosucceed. Market failure is not anoption.

Yet it is not enough towish our minnow husband good luck in his fight against our leviathanex.

We must also remember thatin the future, we do NOT have to make Maine a doormat for every suitor whocomes along. And often, it is not the lobbyists but working families andsmall Maine-based businesses -- like IBEW and GWI -- who speak thetruth.

In the end, the truth willout. We will be on the right side of history, or we will not. So our job as policymakers is to get it rightthe first time. Marry Maine well, or don’t marry it at all.

And to the public, thelesson is simple. Pay attention to whatis happening in Augusta. Maine’s legislatorsare remarkably accessible, and do listen when contacted by constituents. Through your own involvement, you can help toadvance our prosperity and make sure Maine people and businesses get the dealsthey deserve.

Why Voting Yes on Four is a No-Brainer

2011-10-18T02:25:00.000-07:00

Voting Yes on Question Four this fall should be a no-brainer, much like voting Yes on One. For those wanting to understand this question, here is an email I received this morning, and my answer.

On Mon, Oct 17, 2011 at 3:17 PM, M wrote:

Seth,

The following is cut and pasted from Ellsworth American’s website. My question is what are the salient points on this proposed constitutional amendment? What advantages or disadvantages will be experienced by the average Mainer if this is passed? It seems to me that the Legislature is already redistricting in the year following the national census. At least that’s what occurred in 2001 and 2011. Any insight will be appreciated.

Thanks,

M

“Question 4 — a proposed constitutional amendment — asks voters whether they favor amending the constitution of Maine to change the years of redistricting the Maine Legislature, U.S. congressional districts and county commissioner districts.
If approved, redistricting would occur for the Legislature that convenes in 2013 and also for the Legislature that convenes in 2021 and every 10th year thereafter.
“Maine’s constitution currently provides that legislative districts must be reapportioned based on census data every 10 years, starting in 1983,” according to information from the Office of the Maine Attorney General.
As it stands, redistricting occurs in the third year after the federal 10-year census. The proposed amendment would move the year of redistricting up to the first year following the census. Redistricting based on the 2020 federal census would occur in 2021, rather than 2023, and every 10 years thereafter.
A “yes” vote approves the constitutional amendment. A “no” vote rejects the constitutional amendment.”

Hi M! Hope you're well. Actually the Constitution has us wait until the third year after, but a lawsuit forced a change this year only for the US House seats. If you're elected you will help redraw lines for Maine Legislature in 2013.

Bumping it up means districts will be more equitable sooner. The idea is one person one vote.

More importantly, it codifies what Dems have practiced all along - 2/3 majorities for redistricting. Normally I do not support 2/3 supermajority requirements, but this is a good one since otherwise the majority party fox (whether R or D) would be in the henhouse, and gerrymandering would ensue as it almost did this year.

So for the average Mainer, the change is better insurance that your vote will always be worth the same as a vote in the district next door, and that your district lines will be drawn not by one party, but by both -- or failing agreement, by the Law Court.

The entire Legislature voted to support this change.

I advocate a yes vote.

Hope this helps!

Seth

Word as well as deed: Maine Supreme Court hears oral arguments at Richmond High School

2011-10-14T05:25:00.000-07:00

On Thursday, the nine Justices of the Maine Supreme Judicial Court heard oral arguments in three cases before a highly engaged and attentive audience of hundreds of KIDS RSU high school students, educators and community members.

Afterwards, students who had expressed their desire to have lunch afterwards with the justices in winning essays were able to do so, helping to spark what we hope will be a lifelong interest in leadership. Teacher Jesse Hargrove and principal Deb Fiske were attentive to every detail, making sure students were well prepared and the judges properly welcomed to our community.

The three cases addressed in just two hours dealt with assault and trespassing, an insurance denial, and a landlord-tenant dispute. In each case, the judges demonstrated an impressive command of Maine law and the details of each case. Yet having been a teacher for two decades, I was even more impressed by the students' outstanding questions afterwards to the lawyers. It was clear to all that we were in the presence of both present and future greatness.

I could not have been more pleased that the Court accepted the invitation extended by Senator Seth Goodall and myself to visit Richmond and to remind students in this way that Maine government and Maine's future belong to them. A lawyer himself, Senator Goodall also did an outstanding job of summarizing the case and orienting students to court procedures.

Democracy is not a spectator sport -- and neither is education. Rather than hearing arguments in a stuffy courtroom, with little to no citizen involvement, the Law Court has chosen to bring government directly to the people it serves and in a way that requires no significant extra effort or expense. This is government and education as it should be. I commend both the Court and the students and staff of Richmond High School for upholding our constitution in word as well as in deed.

2011-09-23T10:44:00.001-07:00

Maine to receive $30 million for at-risk infants and toddlers

One of nine states to qualify based on quality planning

AUGUSTA – Maine will be one of only nine states to receive federal expansion grants to expand proven home visitation programs for the families of at-risk infants and toddlers, the Obama administration announced Thursday. Maine’s share will total $30.1 million over four years, and will supplement state and local efforts.

Home visitation helps parents meet the needs of their infants or toddlers through direct visits by qualified professionals such as nurses or social workers.

“All parents want to give their kids the best possible start in life,” said Rep. Mark Eves, D-North Berwick. “Quality home visitation makes sure they know how to do so.”

Maine’s application for these funds was driven by a measure sponsored last spring by Rep. Seth Berry, D-Bowdoinham.

Signed by the Governor in mid-June and entitled “Resolve, to Ensure a Strong Start for Maine's Infants and Toddlers by Extending the Reach of Quality Home Visitation,” Berry's bill required that Maine’s Department of Health and Human Services develop a comprehensive three-year plan for quality home visitation, and seek all available federal and private funds.

“Research shows home visitation to be one of the best means of improving outcomes for children from birth to three, when 85-90 percent of brain development occurs,” said Rep. Berry. “With this grant, Maine takes an enormous step towards helping our kids get the best possible start.”

An additional $1 million per year was granted to Maine to sustain ongoing programs based on documented need. According to census figures also released yesterday, roughly one in four Maine and U.S. children from birth to age five live below the poverty level, which is $18,300 for a family of three. Both in Maine and in the U.S., infants and toddlers are twice as likely to live in poverty as adults.

A member of the Maine Children’s Growth Council, Berry also credited Council members; the grant writing team directed by DHHS Commissioner Mary Mayhew, comprised of Maine Families Coordinator Pam LaHaye and the State Administrator of Maine Families Home Visiting Sheryl Peavey; U.S. Congresswoman Chellie Pingree, and the Legislature and Governor, who not only passed his bill but also rejected proposed cuts to existing home visiting programs in last year’s budget process.

Had the Legislature accepted the proposed cuts to existing home visiting efforts under Maine’s Fund for a Healthy Maine, Berry pointed out that Maine’s application would not have been accepted.

Gone fishin' - but where?

2011-07-27T14:31:00.000-07:00

Every spring, Maine's Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife stocks Maine lakes, ponds and streams with fish. Whether you fish or not, Maine's inland fisheries are an important component of our tourist economy and their impact is considerable.

For those who love fishing, IF&W also makes the list of stocked waters accessible online. To learn more and decide where to fish next, please visit this link:

http://www.maine.gov/ifw/fishing/reports/stocking/index.htm

If you don't fish yourself but know someone who does, please forward them this link. I promise they'll appreciate it!

State to Conserve Local Lands for Farming, Archaeology, and Outdoor Recreation

2011-07-27T13:38:00.001-07:00

Augusta, ME — Rep. Seth Berry (D-Bowdoinham) today announced the three latest grant awards from Land for Maine's Future using voter-approved funds to protect lands around Merrymeeting Bay. Local projects to be funded include Marshfield Farm in Bowdoinham, an archaeological site in Dresden, and lands for outdoor recreation and conservation in Bowdoinham, Topsham and Woolwich.

"Thanks to the collaboration of landowners as well as local and state groups, as well as the foresight of voters, Maine and Merrymeeting Bay will forever benefit from these acquisitions," said Rep. Berry. "It is crucial to the economy and people of our area that Land for Maine's Future be able to continue its work of protecting what makes Maine such a special place."

Under this year's budget, no bond questions were sent to voters for Land for Maine's Future or for other investments. In addition, Governor LePage has announced plans to phase out the State Planning Office, where the Land for Maine's Future program is administered.

Marsh Field Farm, a 58-acre plot on Center's Point abutting the Merrymeeting Bay Wildlife Management Area, has some of the most productive agricultural soils in the state. The farmland is currently leased and managed by a commercial organic lettuce grower. Their product is sold in large chain grocery stores throughout New England as well as local market vendors in Maine. Marsh Field Farm is in close proximity to other working farms: at least 12 farms in Bowdoinham and 20 or more in Bowdoin, Dresden, and Richmond. The agricultural easement will remove financial pressure to subdivide these 58 acres.

Across the bay in Dresden, a 4.3 acre parcel being protected is part of a series of adjacent properties that together form one of the most significant prehistoric archaeological sites in the state. Acquisition of this parcel completes protection of the known archaeological site. It is to be acquired by fee by the Friends of Merrymeeting Bay and owned by The Archaeological Conservancy. Field testing on this parcel found evidence of two overlapping archaeological sites; a revolutionary war era structure foundation and an artifact-rich, prehistoric encampment dating to 5,000 – 8,500 years ago. The parcel also contains rare plant species that will be protected by a conservation easement held by the Friends of Merrymeeting Bay.

The latest round of grants also funds the protection of 307 additional acres, including three properties in Bowdoinham as well as smaller properties in Topsham and Woolwich, under a proposal from the Kennebec Estuary Land Trust. These acres will be owned and managed by the Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife as contiguous additions to the Merrymeeting Bay Wildlife Management Area. The lands to be conserved contain high quality habitat for waterfowl and wading birds, deer wintering, and a dozen of rare plant species. These lands also support traditional outdoor recreation of hunting, trapping, fishing, water access, and hiking, and provide scenic open space.

“These lands and the others the board selected are some of Maine’s most special places,” said Don Marean of Hollis, Chair of the Land for Maine’s Future Board and a former Republican State Representative. “I have visited some of these places since I was a boy and am delighted that my grandchildren will be able to enjoy them as well. The Land for Maine’s Future Program not only preserves Maine’s outdoor recreation heritage, but keeps working lands that support a big part of the state’s economy,” he said.

This month, the Land for Maine’s Future Board selected 22 projects statewide that will conserve 76,000 acres of undeveloped land along Maine’s pristine rivers and lakes, in her vast forests and mountain lands, aside her rugged coast, and within her scenic farm country. The LMF Board allocated $1.4 million for six farmland projects and $5.6 million for 16 conservation/recreation projects.

Additional projects funded include a heritage trail corridor along the Androscoggin River, an addition to the state’s most-visited park, Camden Hills State Park, the last remaining dairy farm in Fayette, and Atlantic Salmon spawning habitat in Burnham that also provides canoe and kayaking access to Twenty-five Mile Stream. The Board’s action commits all of the available state funds for farmland and conservation/recreation. $1.2 million remains for future water access projects.

The Land for Maine's Future program seeks to conserve recreational and ecological lands along with working lands for farms, forests, tourism, and working waterfronts that are the foundation for Maine’s natural resource-based economy. The program is funded with bonds approved by the Maine Legislature and the state’s voters.

Since its inception in 1987, the Land for Maine’s Future has helped acquire more than 532,000 acres with more than 1,000 miles of shorefront and 158 miles of rail-trails, as well as valuable islands, rivers, mountain tops, and wildlife habitat, plus a quarter of a million acres of working, commercial forestland and 8,000 acres of farmland sustaining the state’s rural economy.

Visit with Chellie in her DC office - is there anyone more available to her constituents?

2011-07-14T15:37:00.000-07:00

MAINE COMPASS: Democrats pushed for affordable tax cuts for more working Mainers | The Kennebec Journal, Augusta, ME

2011-07-06T15:04:00.000-07:00

MAINE COMPASS: Democrats pushed for affordable tax cuts for more working Mainers | The Kennebec Journal, Augusta, ME

2011-06-17T14:39:00.000-07:00

Charter Schools Not a Magic Bullet for Maine

As a state legislator and a longtime educator, I look forward to the vote on charter schools this week. For me, this week’s vote on LD 1553 will sum up over half of my life.

I've worked in education reform for over two decades. I spent the first decade at the heart of the public charter school movement; the second half teaching and parenting in Maine schools, as well as training other teachers. Both the national data and this experience will decide how I vote.

My charter school roots are strong. My first professor and mentor at Brown in 1987, Ted Sizer, was one of the leaders of national school reform at that time. His work, based partly on John Dewey, united hundreds of schools internationally -- including many of the first public school charters. Working for Ted as an undergrad in 1988-91, I was able to travel the country and visit many schools, and to help organize annual international forums where educators came together and shared best practices.

My first teaching job was at an internationally famous public charter school in East Harlem called Central Park East Secondary School, led by MacArthur genius award winner Deborah Meier and explored in the movie High School II. People visited from around the world daily to see what we were up to.

After that, I helped start another public progressive "school within a school" in northern Manhattan, which became rated as one of NYC's best middle schools. I also served on the board of the Center for Collaborative Education, and completed a Master’s at Teachers College.

Ironically, much of what the best urban charters are doing is to create a rural, small-school feel where every child is well known and respected for who they are. As it turns out, the research shows that kids learn better when you treat them as humans.

I loved New York City and the public charter schools I taught in there. Had my wife and I not been priced out of the 2000 real estate market and moved home to Maine sooner than we expected, I might be there still raising my kids in the same inner-city schools where I taught. But Maine was always home. Its draw was inexorable.

I have loved teaching in Maine, though the pay is about 30% lower. Public schools and teachers here are every bit as resourceful and dynamic as in the best charters. In many respects, they already know what others are just now discovering.

Maine kids do well by most reliable measures. The SAT is not a good comparison because all our kids now take it -- not just the college bound ones. On the most recent ACT, our high schoolers do 5th best in the nation overall. On the most recent NAEP, our younger students are also among the best.

Considering that teacher pay here is between 44th and 47th worst in the nation, those results are impressive.

By far the most comprehensive study to date of charter schools, a 2009 review by an economist from Stanford University, finds that charter schools do worse overall than public schools. To be specific: 17% of charters do better, 46% the same, and 37% do worse.

This poor track record is startling: charters should by definition do better. They attract the lion's share of federal and private foundation dollars, in some cases even doubling their budgets. They can typically expel problem students far more easily. They also commonly siphon talented and motivated teachers, families, and students from the regular schools. Kids whose families don't care, or don't know, are left behind.

To many longtime scholars of public education, charter schools have become simply a new way to undermine the mission of public education. If you haven't read Diane Ravitch lately, former Assistant Secretary of Education under George Bush, I encourage you to read her recent reflections on charter schools generally and on Waiting for Superman specifically.

In rural Maine, there are also unique problems with adopting even a well designed charter model. Overhead costs have been tough lately as student population declines. You still need to run the same buses, heat the same buildings, and (to a point) keep the same staff. More charters in rural Maine would accelerate this problem of overhead cost.

For schools of over 500 students, L.D. 1553 would allow almost 30% of the students and the local monies to be siphoned off within just three years, and an unlimited number after that.

The Charter Commission is another area of concern with L.D. 1553 as written. An independent commission is established that may authorize up to ten charter schools over ten years. These schools may be unlimited in size, and may include virtual schools. The commission can also retain up to 3% of the budget of the charters to run its own affairs.

The commission's qualifications to oversee up to ten schools are determined solely by the State Board of Education. Three members come from the State Board itself, and the other four are chosen by the Board with no legislative or public approval required. Currently, three of the ten adult members of the State Board have experience in K-12 teaching or administration.

L.D. 1553 would authorize 99% of all local and state tax dollars to follow the child to charter schools authorized by the commission -- without approval from local taxpayers or school boards. These include federal Title 1 dollars, which other schools only qualify for if they reach a certain proportion of free and reduced lunch. The sending school unit must also provide co-curricular activities to the charter school students.

Under current law, one or more local school units can already set up innovative, alternative schools that accomplish much of what the charter bill envisions, but with local approval. An important difference is that charter school employees may not have the same benefits, or even be part of the Maine Retirement System.

Maine already has an excellent magnet school, Maine School of Science and Mathematics, to which we could easily add a couple of good programs like the agricultural school proposed for the Goodwill-Hinckley School in Fairfield. If our goal is to help along two or three outstanding projects like Goodwill-Hinkley’s, however, there is no need to open up ten new charter schools that are supervised by a questionable commission, and with no local approval.

The hasty process for LD 1553 is likely to blame for most of its imperfections. While the bill was expected to be held over until next year, that agreement changed suddenly last month. It had a hasty, after deadline hearing at which many requirements were waived by legislative leadership. Of 13 committee members, only two were able to attend and hear from the public. Due to the short notice of public hearing, many interested members of the public may not have been able to attend.

The best-case scenario for charters in rural Maine is that a couple will be fantastic, and the rest will accomplish relatively little -- all at a cost to everyone else. If we want to do better in our K-12 system, the research tells us we need to spend less time on assessment design and more on staff development and curriculum, invest in and coordinate our strong, recent early childhood efforts, and improve building and district-level leadership.

I voted for a more limited charters bill two years ago. If LD 1553 is going to pass with my vote, however, it will need to be amended. Local approval should be required, or the charter commission significantly redefined. The number of schools authorized should be more limited. Virtual schools, until better proven elsewhere, should not be allowed. Absent those improvements, I lean away from the bill altogether. The latest research, the unique challenges of charters in a rural state, and the hastily written language of LD 1553 argue strongly against it.

Rep. Seth Berry lives in Bowdoinham, and is currently on leave from teaching in M.S.A.D. 75.

NOTE: Two days after this op-ed was written, L.D. 1553 was passed by the Republican-led Maine House and Senate. It now awaits the Governor's signature.

Constituent Survey: Gas Tax Indexing

2011-03-29T16:14:00.001-07:00

Dear Bowdoin, Bowdoinham and Richmond Neighbors:

As you know, this is the time of year when rims are bent and tires popped driving on the frost heaves of Maine roads. In our area, I am especially concerned about the state of Route 24, Route 197, and Route 201.

On April 12^th, I have invited Maine’s new Commissioner of Transportation to ride these roads with me. I am also working with Senator Seth Goodall to bring attention to the state of our roads, and the related costs in vehicle maintenance as well as safety that result from skimping on proper, structural repairs.

If you share my concerns about our roads, there are two ways you can help.

1) Maine Better Transportation Association is currently hosting a photo/video/story contest for the title “Worst Road in Maine.” If you can submit photos, videos or stories to their contest, it may help bring attention to the worst section of road in our area. To do so, go to www.facebook.com/FixMaineRoads or to www.mbtaonline.org.

2) Tell me where YOU stand on funding for our roads. Do you support or oppose the Governor’s proposal to stop indexing the gas tax to inflation?* In a few weeks, I will need to vote on this important measure. Your input will help!

For complete survey, click here.

*Most state highway funding comes from the gas tax, which increases at the rate of inflation. Every 8 years, the inflation factor alone accounts for about 1 ½ years’ worth of state highway funding.

Many thanks,

Seth

2011-02-04T05:27:00.001-08:00

Respect Parents, Reject Cuts to Young Children in Governor's Supplemental Budget

As early as Tuesday, Maine's Legislature will act on a Supplemental Budget proposed by Governor LePage. In doing so, it will decide whether to remove important steps in the ladder of opportunity for Maine's young children. One of these is the proposal to remove parent choice with respect to when their developmentally delayed children can enter Kindergarten.

While most parents choose to send their children to kindergarten if they are 5 years of age by October 15th, some parents choose to keep them out for one additional year. Often born in summer or fall, these children may in their parents' view need the gift of time to be more successful and to avoid the need for expensive remediation. Because they know their children best, parents generally make the right choice.

Children with pronounced developmental delays early in life especially need this gift of time, but would effectively be denied that additional time under the Governor's proposed budget cut.

At present, children who are receiving early intervention services for developmental delays through Child Developmental Services (CDS), and whose parents opt for an additional year, can continue receiving those services. Under the Governor's proposed Supplemental Budget, these at-risk, young children would no longer receive services unless they entered Kindergarten immediately.

Maine can do better -- both for its children and for its taxpayers. When a child starts right and needs fewer developmental supports, it has a positive, ripple effect that leads to greater success for the individual, at reduced expense to the taxpayer and the K-12 school system.

Parents know their children best. As policymakers and providers who care about Maine's future leaders and workers, we would do well to continue supporting this crucial parental choice.

Sue Mackey Andrews and Rep. Seth Berry

Sue Mackey Andrews is President of Solutions Consulting Group, LLC and past Director of Child Developmental Services. Rep. Seth Berry has taught at the secondary level for 20 years, and represents Bowdoin, Bowdoinham and Richmond in the Maine House. Both serve as members of the Maine Children's Growth Council.

2011-01-08T03:59:00.000-08:00

Very pleased this week with the coverage of our day for Infants and Toddlers at the State House on Thursday, including the release of a new report on school readiness. Two quibbles: 1. I am not hoping to start but am already part of a bipartisan movement towards increased early childhood investments, and 2. the money I hope to leverage in the near term comes not from the federal recovery and reinvestment act of 2008, but from the Affordable Care Act of 2010 -- also known as Obamacare. Besides saving money overall and covering thousands more Mainers, the ACA brings over $10M to Maine to help increase prevention and wellness through home visitation for at-risk infants, letting well meaning but uncertain moms and dads get off on the right track. Let's hope it is not repealed, or overturned!

2010-09-14T06:08:00.000-07:00

Bowdoinham Celebrates!

2010-09-14T06:07:00.000-07:00

New Energy and Savings for ME

2010-08-20T21:32:00.000-07:00

This morning, Seth Murray of Healthy Homes ME came knocking on my door to save me some money.

By doing work on my home -- keeping him, his helper Bob, and a team of local contractors employed.

And by reducing my dependence and our country's dependence on fossil fuel.

Adelaida and I already have a very energy-efficient home, which is rare in Maine where the buildings are old, leaky and oil-dependent. Yet even we believe we can save at least 25%, and maybe more than 50% off of our annual energy bills. At the end of each month, we will have more money in our pockets than before -- even while we are paying off the low-interest loan needed to finance the work.

Best of all, the State of Maine is helping us to do this and can do it for you as well.

Since I became House Whip, the Maine Legislature has passed over a dozen new laws to support energy efficiency and home weatherization. We consolidated several energy conservation programs into the Efficiency Maine Trust - a single program run by an independent board of directors. We also passed laws to encourage significant private investment in energy conservation by families and businesses, including rebates, tax credits and financing opportunities for upgrading energy systems.

Efficiency Maine’s Home Energy Savings Program provides up to $4,500 for approved energy efficiency projects, and an extra $1,000 until 8/31, with new incentives from Efficiency Maine’s Home Energy Savings Program. To sign up, just call 1-866-376-2463 or email efficiencymaine@efficiencymaine.com.

This is a limited-time opportunity with stimulus funds from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. Eligible residences include one-to-four unit structures, up to a maximum of three stories. Qualifying Maine homes must be heated year-round. Home energy audits and efficiency improvements must be performed by an approved contractor.

Efficiency Maine’s Renewable Energy Incentive Program provides direct cash incentives for wind energy systems, as well as professionally installed solar heating or electrical systems. Please note: your building must be connected to the power grid to receive renewable energy incentives from Efficiency Maine. Thousands of Maine families and businesses have already “gone solar” and started saving money. Wind can also be a viable source of electricity in certain areas.

Maine State Housing Authority’s Weatherization Program and Central Heating Improvement Program (CHIP) provide grants to low-income homeowners and renters to reduce energy costs by improving home energy efficiency. Weatherization improvements may include insulation, weather stripping, caulking, and some safety-related repairs. CHIP grants may be used to repair or replace central heating systems.

The Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP) provides money to help low-income homeowners and renters pay for heating costs. You may be eligible for assistance if your total household income falls within 230% of the federal poverty guidelines or 75% of the state area median income, whichever is less. Eligibility for households with incomes between 200% and 230% of the federal poverty guidelines is limited to those households with a member who is susceptible to hypothermia, such as elderly, a child under the age of two, or with a doctor's diagnosis.

If your heat is included in your rent, you may still apply for LIHEAP.

In 2009, The Legislature set aggressive goals to cut Maine’s dependence on fossil fuels, to weatherize all Maine homes and half of Maine businesses and to significantly cut the use of electricity use, natural gas and heating fuels in the next 20 years. We got off to a fast start: in 2009 alone, 929 businesses completed 1,438 energy-efficiency projects — a 53 percent increase from the previous year. As a result, Maine businesses avoided $49 million in energy costs. More savings to Maine's economy are on the way.

To find out more about these programs visit Efficiency Maine at: www.efficiencymaine.com, or Maine State Housing Authority at: www.mainehousing.org.

Adelaida and I are hoping for solar electric and solar hot water panels, as well as a thermal hot water system running through our woodstove. We may replace the old oven, freezer and washing machine. We may weatherize, caulk and button up some windows for the winter. Whatever we do, it will be cost-effective and guaranteed to save us money every year, for years to come.

I'll keep you posted on our progress.

2010-08-03T16:29:00.000-07:00

Downeast success

The Amtrak Downeaster, a train that runs from Portland to Boston, set new records for number of passengers served and ticket revenues in fiscal year 2010.

I am proud that Maine helped to extend Downeaster service to Brunswick, in partnership with the federal government.

2010-08-03T15:40:00.000-07:00

What’s Been Going on with Maine’s Pension Fund?

Just as many of those nearing retirement in Maine have found that their private 401(K) or similar plan has far less than it did a few years ago, Maine’s public pension fund for teachers and retired state workers is also depleted due to the Great Recession that began in early 2008. This means the State needs to make up the difference, just as many retirees must now do more with less as well.

The issue has been widely reported, but poorly understood. The key point is that the market shrunk the state’s nest egg for teachers and other state workers, just as it shrunk the nest egg for those in the private sector.

Sadly, some are attempting to distort the picture for political gain – ironically attempting to use the tough news to return us to the same failed policies that led to the Great Recession in the first place. So in the interest of fuller understanding, here is a more balanced and complete set of facts. I want to thank the staff of the House Majority Office and my friend Rep. Emily Cain of Orono for help compiling this information.

Paying debts incurred prior to 1995: so far so good

In 1995, after many years of abuse of the state pension fund under Gov. John McKernan, the legislature approved putting a constitutional amendment on the ballot that set a date certain for paying off the pension debt: the year 2028, more than 30 years away. The ballot question was approved by 70 percent of the voters. Since passage of the constitutional amendment the Legislature has met the obligation to pay of the Unfunded Actuarial Liability (UAL) by 2028.

Market losses since 2008 mean tightening budgets -- again

As the stock market has its ups and downs the General Fund budget obligation rises and falls. Members of the Appropriations and Labor committees learned last week that market losses will require the state to find an additional $287 million dollars to balance the pension fund over the next two years.

Critics and observers have said the obligations to pay for state employee pensions may crowd out funding for other items in the General Fund Budget. Key stakeholders have called it the next budget crisis and media reports have repeated the sound bite. Some are exploiting the issue and painting it as a problem that has suddenly come to light, conveniently ignoring the fact that the Legislature has been working to address the UAL for years. While the upcoming biennial budget will have substantial pressures placed on it from many sectors, the Legislature has taken responsible actions in recent years to address the UAL issue and is in a better position to tackle this problem because of it.

Additional background:

The Legislature has recognized the problem and has already begun taking steps to correct it.

· A taskforce to evaluate, analyze and develop solutions to the problem was formed during the recent Legislative session, and issued a report in March to the Labor and Appropriations committees.

· The Appropriations Committee has been reviewing the report and has met since the close of session to address the matter.

· The report details seven alternatives to the current system. These range from keeping the current plan, switching to Social Security for new hires, and variations of defined benefit or defined contribution plans.

· All seven plans would cost the state more than the current system and do not take into account the future solvency of the Social Security system.

Since 1995, Maine has been responsibly making the payments and was in fact on track to pay off the debt prior to the market crash.

· Since passage of the constitutional amendment in 1995, the State of Maine has always kept its payments consistent with the constitutional obligation to pay off the UAL by 2028.

· The amount of the General Fund obligation to pay down the UAL is subject to the performance of the stock market.

· Unlike retirement plans in the private sector, the state has the same obligation regardless of the market volatility.

o The pension system’s board assumes a 7.75 percent return on the millions it has invested. For many years, it met and even exceeded that rate of return. But the 2008 stock market crash ended up reducing the pension system’s returns in fiscal year 2009 by 18.7 percent and 11.1 percent the following year.

· Compared with other states in the same situation, Maine is ahead of the game.

o A Pew Research report released in February 2010 says almost all state pension plans are underfunded. Two states — Illinois and Kansas — have set aside less than 60 percent of the money they'll need to pay benefits. Six others are underfunded by a third or more. According to the Pew report, Maine was determined to be a “strong performer” when addressing the UAL for retiree pensions.

o The Pew Center’s study also found that the Maine Public Employee Retirement System is more than 80 percent funded, the mark that is considered by the federal Government Accountability Office as an important benchmark.

o By ramping up funding in recent years and appropriating more than 100 percent of the required contribution to address the UAL Maine is in better position than most states.

· The pension fund liability was inherited from the McKernan administration which failed to make payments to the fund during the governor’s term.

What can Maine do to prevent this from happening again?

First, we need to recognize that there is no silver bullet solution.

· We must make the payments we can and bring stakeholders together to come up with solutions based on the careful analysis of the commission’s report during the next legislative session.

· Changing the current benefit structure will not address the Unfunded Actuarial Liability. More importantly, funding for current/future obligations is a fraction of the cost of addressing the past, chronic underfunding.

Maine’s current plan is less expensive than the alternatives

· Maine current Defined Benefit Plan is based on a cost to the state of 5.5 percent of the employee’s salary – this is in addition to mandatory employee payroll deductions of 6.5 percent of their salary for the retirement system.

· Switching to Social Security would increase the required contribution from the state to 6.2 percent an increase of 0.7 percent.

· Many private sector plans are a combination of a Social Security and a 401(k) match. The Maine Public Employees’ Retirement System report looked at a standard private sector matching rate of 3 percent - bringing the cost to State Government up to 9.2 percent of an employee’s salary.

We can’t short change the thousands of teachers, police, firefighters, and other state workers who are currently in the system.

We must develop a retirement plan for the future that parallels our economic development strategy to attract and keep young talent.

· Old work trends have changed rapidly while the current system remains antiquated. We must make the retirement system more portable and provide the flexibility to the younger generation in the workforce.

· There is no perfect system, but we can always do better. Most importantly, we need to recognize that what is fiscally responsible is not always what is most politically popular. For instance, it would have been more prudent during the late ‘90s and early 2000s to make advance payments on the UAL, and to build up the State’s Rainy Day fund. These things did not occur.

It will take some time to clean up the messes of the early 1990s and the failed federal fiscal policies that led to the current recession, but working together, little by little, we can do it.

With Rep. Linda Valentino and General John Libby to honor Maine's women veterans

2010-07-28T13:45:00.000-07:00

Buy your season pass to Swan I. today!

2010-06-27T10:00:00.000-07:00

Swan I. water view

2010-06-27T09:58:00.000-07:00

Hiking on Swan I. with the kids

2010-06-27T09:54:00.000-07:00

Family picnic on Swan Island - Kennebec in background

2010-06-27T09:53:00.000-07:00

Swan Island, South end and Dresden farmlands

2010-06-26T13:51:00.000-07:00

Note Merrymeeting Bay and Atlantic Ocean in the distance.

Little Swan Island at lower right.

Photo: Ó Point of View Helicopter Services

Kickstart Summer with a Swan I. Season Pass!

2010-06-26T13:22:00.000-07:00

Swan Island from the north - Richmond harbor on right.

Photo: Ó Point of View Helicopter Services

Swan Island is on the National Register of Historic Places for many reasons. If you've ever visited, you haven't forgotten it. I am proud to say it is right here in my district, and that the first-ever season pass is now available -- letting you visit whenever you please.

Until recently, access to Swan Island required a reservation and the company of a guide. Now that I have just one family season pass for only $75, my sons, wife, parents and I can all pack a picnic and visit anytime with our canoe, kayak or sailboat. All six of us on one pass!

The new, self-access, anytime season pass is a first step in what many of us hope will be the rejuvenation of efforts to protect, preserve, and use the island to its fullest potential. The pass makes it easier than ever to visit, and also helps defray the costs of maintaining trails, mowing fields, and keeping a dock open. Located right across the Kennebec from Richmond and only two miles from Exit 43 in I-295, Swan Island's 1700 acres of wildlife preserve can become an economic motor for our area much like the Maine Wildlife Park in Gray, which is also managed by Maine IF&W.

With a newly clean Kennebec River and a deepwater harbor -- a harbor where many 5-masted ships were once built and launched, and where the famed Kennebec River ice was stored in sawdust and shipped as far away as Singapore in the 1800s -- you can now come by land or by water anytime. While visiting, you can also enjoy Richmond's shops, art galleries, and pubs, and even camp overnight at Swan Island's excellent family camping facility.

To buy your family an anytime season pass, or to learn more about this stunning place where you can step back into Maine's history and enjoy magnificent views and hiking trails, click here. Kick start your summer and bring the family to Swan Island today!

First-in-nation health care protections signed into law

2010-04-20T07:57:00.000-07:00

Obama in Portland

2010-04-04T17:15:00.000-07:00

Nice to have good seats. I've seen the Rolling Stones and many other popular shows, but never have I seen such an enthusiastic crowd!

Working together gets the job done

2010-03-31T07:14:00.000-07:00

I was pleased to see this editorial last night in the Times Record. A new Representative from Yarmouth, Rep. Walsh Innes deserved every word of praise for her work on this first-in-the-nation bill. When I first suggested the idea to her only 18 months ago, little did I know how far and how gracefully she would run with the idea!

=================

Working together gets the job done

Reprinted with permission from Times Record Editorial pages
Tuesday, March 30, 2010 2:12 PM EDT

Here’s a stellar example of bipartisanship working as it should: It’s LD 1631, “An Act to Provide for the Responsible Recycling of Consumer Products,” a bill sponsored by Rep. Melissa Innes, D-Yarmouth, that was signed into law last week by Gov. John Baldacci.

The political stereotypes that too often are used in Washington, D.C., to polarize an issue and thereby create gridlock — namely, that Democrats are “pro-environment/anti-business” and Republicans are “anti-environment/pro-business” — could have been brought into play on this issue.

Indeed, the initial version of the bill was opposed by the Maine State Chamber of Commerce and Maine Merchants Association as being too broad in scope and providing far greater authority to the Maine Department of Environmental Protection than Maine’s business community felt comfortable about. That easily could have led to the stereotypical polarization, with Democrats lining up in support, and Republicans in opposition.

But it didn’t play out that way, and when LD 1631 came up for a vote it was approved with overwhelming bipartisan support. Importantly, it also had won the backing of the Maine State Chamber of Commerce AND the Natural Resources Council of Maine.

How this came about should be instructive for our dysfunctional Congress in Washington:

Step 1: Instead of demonizing the initial critics of her bill, Rep. Innes listened to their concerns.

Step 2: She assembled the various stakeholders — business leaders, environmental groups and government officials — and asked them to identify the common ground elements of her bill they all might agree upon.

Step 3: The stakeholders responded in good faith, building trust among each other as they worked toward consensus.

Step 4: Innes’ bill was amended to reflect the consensus that had been reached. On Feb. 19, the Legislature’s Natural Resources Council Committee voted unanimously in support of the new version of the bill, which sailed through its House and Senate votes.

Here’s what this first-in-the-nation law is expected to do:

— It establishes a framework to systematically identify new “product stewardship” programs for those products that might pose problems when they are discarded and enter the waste stream.

— As already is occurring for electronic waste (e.g., computers, TVs, laptops, printers, cell phones, etc.) and mercury-containing products (e.g., light bulbs and some thermostats), products singled out for “product stewardship” will require manufacturers and producers to collect and safely recycle or dispose of products when they’re no longer needed.

— In turn, product stewardship is expected to create incentives for manufacturers to create products that can be recycled.

As Matt Prindiville, clean production project director at the Natural Resources Council of Maine, stated at the signing: “Giving the manufacturers the responsibility for final disposition, you internalize the cost of collection and recycling into the price of the product.”

For businesses, the new law now gives them the assurance that instead of being subjected to product-by-product legislation, Maine now has a comprehensive approach to determine which products are most important to address.

It’s being characterized as a “win-win” for business and the environment.

All the more so because it didn’t get derailed by partisan gridlock.

Four generations

2010-03-25T03:54:00.000-07:00

On Tuesday, the Maine Legislature started our day commemorating the Holocaust and Yom HaShoah, the Day of Remembrance. I was honored to meet Noemi Ban, an 80-something year old great-grandmother to whom I am related distantly and by marriage. With me in this picture, including Noemi, are four generations of her family.

When liberated from Auschwitz, Noemi weighed only 58 pounds.

Below is the full text of the legislative resolution.

JOINT RESOLUTION COMMEMORATING THE HOLOCAUST AND HUMAN RIGHTS CENTER OF MAINE'S LEGISLATIVE AWARENESS DAY AND
YOM HASHOAH, THE DAY OF REMEMBRANCE

WHEREAS, from 1933 to 1945, 6,000,000 Jews were murdered in the Holocaust as part of a state-sponsored, systematic persecution and annihilation program of genocide, and millions of other people suffered as victims of Nazism, such as the handicapped, political dissidents and many others for racial, ethnic or national reasons; and

WHEREAS, the people of the State of Maine should always remember the atrocities committed by the Nazis so that such horrors are never repeated, and the history of the Holocaust offers an opportunity to reflect on the moral responsibilities of individuals, societies and governments; and

WHEREAS, the people of the State of Maine should always remember those who liberated the Nazi concentration camps, some of whom lost their lives and others of whom have experienced lifelong emotional suffering, as holding an honored place in our history; and

WHEREAS, the people of the State of Maine should continually rededicate themselves to the principle of equal justice for all people, remain eternally vigilant against all tyranny and recognize that bigotry provides a breeding ground for tyranny to flourish; and

WHEREAS, the national community, pursuant to an Act of Congress, will be commemorating the week of April 11, 2010 through April 18, 2010 as the Days of Remembrance of the Victims of the Holocaust, including the Day of Remembrance, known as Yom HaShoah, April 11, 2010; and

WHEREAS, it is appropriate for the people of the State of Maine to join in this international commemoration, and March 23, 2010 has been designated as the Holocaust and Human Rights Center of Maine's Legislative Awareness Day; now, therefore, be it

RESOLVED: That We, the Members of the 124th Legislature now assembled in the Second Regular Session, on behalf of the people we represent, pause in solemn memory of the victims of the Holocaust and in honor of the survivors, rescuers and liberators; that we urge one and all to recommit themselves to the lessons of the Holocaust through the Holocaust and Human Rights Center of Maine's Legislative Awareness Day and the international week of commemoration; and that we express our common desire to continually strive to overcome prejudice and inhumanity through education, vigilance and resistance; and be it further

RESOLVED: That suitable copies of this resolution, duly authenticated by the Secretary of State, be transmitted to the Holocaust and Human Rights Center of Maine and the United States Holocaust Memorial Council in Washington, D.C. on behalf of the people of the State of Maine.

Moving forward

2010-03-19T06:00:00.000-07:00

Reprinted from the Times Record editorial, 3/16/10

Last Thursday the Maine House of Representatives unanimously passed legislation sponsored by Rep. Seth Berry, D-Bowdoinham, that focuses on improving our state’s energy efficiency.

LD 1647, An Act To Enhance Maine’s Clean Energy Opportunities, enhances competitive funding for programs administered by the Efficiency Maine Trust that help businesses and homeowners improve their energy efficiency. There’s a twofold benefit: 1.) It helps homeowners and businesses reduce costs and save energy; 2.) It creates new jobs for businesses providing weatherization, retrofits and audits; or which sell and install solar-paneled roofing and other alternative sources of heat and power.

Berry’s bill is another step in the right direction as Maine moves to reduce its dependency on oil and other fossil fuels that contribute to global warming. The Maine Senate should follow the House’s lead and approve this sensible and necessary legislation.

Legislation protects consumers at fractional cost to insurance companies

2010-03-09T10:30:00.000-08:00

By Rep. Seth Berry, D-Bowdoinham, and Rep. Meredith Strang Burgess, R-Cumberland

It’s hard to have sympathy for insurance company representatives who complain about their profits – especially in this economy when everyday citizens are truly suffering.

That’s why we were surprised to read a recent column in this newspaper from one such industry representative complaining about a bill that would prevent health insurance companies from limiting lifetime insurance caps. The column argued that this bill would significantly drive up insurance costs in Maine.

Well, that’s just not true. Based on a survey of carriers in Maine, the Bureau of Insurance has concluded that these important consumer protections will impact premiums by a fraction of one percent.

The cost of eliminating those caps would be minimal—but the amount of difference it makes for those Maine families is immeasurable.

Insurance premiums don't have to go up. Maine's health insurers - already one of the most profitable industries in the state - will choose whether or not to pass this small cost onto their policyholders. That decision, unfortunately, is not in our hands.

Anthem is one of the largest providers in Maine. Last year its parent company, WellPoint, grossed $62 billion in total revenue and was ranked the 32nd largest company on the Fortune 500 list. Recent news reports show that the company’s profit margin increased from 4 to 7 percent.

With assets in that amount, they should hardly be pleading poverty – particularly when it comes to adding a small consumer protection to those who are already paying for insurance.

What good is insurance if it doesn't cover you when you are sick? Caps on annual and lifetime benefits go directly against the real purpose of insurance, which is to cover your medical bills when you or a loved one is sick.

In Maine, health insurance companies have lifetime limits as low as $45,000 and as high as $5 million. The most common limit is $3 million. According to information provided by the Maine Bureau of Insurance, Anthem decided this year to limit the amount of care people could get, changing a majority of its plans from having no lifetime caps to having $3 million caps. This change happened despite National Health Reform efforts to eliminate lifetime caps.

Eliminating lifetime limits would not only help families who face high medical costs, but would also result in savings for state and federal governments. Independent financial analysis found that the government could save billions of dollars if people could maintain their private insurance rather than be forced onto Medicaid or into receiving hospital free care.

This is not a partisan issue, nor is it simply an issue in Maine. In fact, U.S. Senator Olympia Snowe supports greatly increasing the current limits as part of the national healthcare debate.

We can’t continue to help Maine move in the wrong direction for our hard working families.

The most common condition reported as meeting a lifetime or annual cap in Maine is cancer. The cost of cancer drugs is rising at 15 percent per year, as new and expensive drugs hit the market. Some of these drugs may cost $100,000 or more for a single course of treatment. Eliminating annual or lifetime caps would directly benefit Mainers battling cancer and fighting other chronic diseases such as hemophilia, Cystic Fibrosis, Parkinson’s and Multiple Sclerosis.

While the insurance industry claims Maine’s legislature and our mandates to protect consumers have driven up costs and are of greatest concerns to their clients, Maine is has one of the lowest rates of uninsured across the country. We consider that a success.

In Maine, insurance companies are required to offer a policy to any person regardless of their health status because of strong legislative protections. Insurers in other states, however, may deny coverage to people based on their health status, their gender, or even what community they live in. This practice just doesn’t fit with our values here in Maine.

We fight on behalf of consumers time and time again – from those who are pay their premiums monthly to those who are most vulnerable in our society.

This session we are working on important legislation to make sure private insurance companies cover children with Autism – a mandate that exists in many states across the country and will be a minimal cost for insurers. The change in legislation would save taxpayers about $250,000, yet only cost private insurance payers less than $2 every year. We are also considering legislation to require insurance companies to cover the cost of the latest technology in prosthetics, benefiting hundreds of Maine veterans and the disabled.

We legislate on behalf of those Maine people that sent us to Augusta to protect them, not the bottom line of a $62 billion company.

250th Anniversary of Pownalborough

2010-02-13T09:32:00.000-08:00

Celebrated the 250th Anniversary of the incorporation of the Town of Pownalborough today, which at the time included everything from Swan Island to Georgetown and west to the Monsweag. Impressive ceremony complete with cannon fire and politicians imported from the future.

Jay Robbins, a Richmond resident who I am proud to represent, was the master of ceremonies. Good fun!

Guessing the State of the State

2010-01-18T11:48:00.000-08:00

Today I received this message from a reporter:

Representative Berry,

I'm writing an article today to preview this week's State of the State address.

What do you think the Governor has to accomplish Thursday? That do you think he'll talk about? What tone do you expect him to strike? What does his lame-duck status mean in terms of the speech?

I'd be very interested in your thoughts.

I have not talked to the Governor or his staff about the speech, and have no crystal ball, so this was strictly guesswork. My specialty. Here's my best guess.

I'd look for the Governor's remarks to focus on recovering from the recession, and making ourselves stronger in the long run by harnessing Maine ingenuity and resourcefulness. I hope he will remind the federal government of the need to preserve state and local services like schools, and remind us all that we are bound to assist those in need and to give every kid a chance to succeed.

I would hope that as a legacy speech -- his last State of the State -- this one will also put his eight years into historic perspective. By that I mean deeper historic perspective. Maine started as arguably the poorest colony, and the most war-torn over the first hundred years if not more. We have had a long, slow but continuing climb, sometimes in fits and starts, from that rocky beginning. We have had many waves of immigration, including the Governor's own Lebanese and Italian ancestors. How has our history shaped us as a people? What are our unique strengths the Governor feels we should build on? How must we redefine our relationships with government, prenatal-to-adult education, transportation, the energy grid, and so on to prosper more in the future?

I'm sure we'll hear about budget austerity, shared sacrifice in tough times, and preparation for a strong recovery. We'll certainly be reminded of our great energy opportunity, both with renewables and efficiency. My guess is we'll hear less about health care or protecting the environment, though I think these may in fact be some of this Governor's greatest legacies.

We'll find out at 7 pm Thursday how far from the mark I was!

Seth

2010-01-15T10:04:00.000-08:00

Rep. McCabe helps to celebrate state parks

2010-01-15T09:57:00.000-08:00

Proclamation recognizes 75^th anniversary of state parks

AUGUSTA - State Rep. Jeff McCabe, D-Skowhegan, joined Governor John Baldacci and Elizabeth Townsend, Acting Commissioner of the Department of Conservation, as the Governor proclaimed 2010 as Maine State Parks Year on Jan 14.

McCabe, a member of the Agriculture, Conservation and Forestry Committee, congratulated the Governor and Townsend on thedepartment’s hard work and for the creation of the “Take it Outside” program, the first-time camper program and for being a leader in the Maine “Stay—cation.” “Take it Outside” is an initiative led by Gov. Baldacci to encourage Maine's children and families to reconnect with nature.

“We have 48 state parks and historic sites,” said McCabe. “We have created a park system where our families can enjoy a high level of service at each park – clean bathhouses, nice group shelters, and excellent camping sites at wonderful locations, all at a very reasonable cost. Our state parks are open, accessible and offer experiences to people of all abilities.”

McCabe currently serves as director of Lake George Regional Park, a 320-acre park which is located in the towns of Skowhegan and Canaan. Lake George Regional Park is a day-use park owned by the State of Maine and leased by the towns of Skowhegan and Canaan. The park offers swimming, fishing, picnicking, a public boat launch, a multiuse trail system, playing fields and group use facilities.

“I am very proud to be a member of the Maine Legislature, a group of lawmakers who, 75 years ago, looked into the future and saw that the people of Maine needed our state parks and acted to create them,” said McCabe. “I hope for my children and their children they will be here for at least another 75 years.”

For more information about Maine’s State Parks, visit the Department of Conservation’s Web site at http://www.maine.gov/doc/parks/index.html.

Source: www.housedemocrats.maine.gov

Rep. Cornell du Houx garners support from fellow legislators for clean energy jobs legislation in U.S. Senate

2010-01-13T20:56:00.000-08:00

AUGUSTA – State Rep. Alex Cornell du Houx is asking all his fellow state legislators to join a nationwide effort calling for energy action now in the U.S. Senate. Cornell du Houx and over 100 Maine legislators signed a letter joining more than 1,000 state legislators from across the country calling on the U.S. Senate this week for action on clean energy jobs legislation.

The Coalition of Legislators for Energy Action Now (CLEAN) is working with the White House to support pending federal climate change legislation that will bring jobs and economic opportunity to Maine. The state legislators in Maine have called on the support of U.S. Sens. Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins in particular.

“The Maine Legislature passed legislation last year with the same goals as this federal legislation,” said Cornell du Houx. “The people of Maine are already experiencing job creation and the benefit of having more homes weatherized and thus lower energy costs due to our commitment to weatherize every house in the state. This federal legislation is necessary to help Maine and other states have the resources to create even more jobs and the types of energy assistance that will make the U.S. energy independent and secure.”

A letter signed by more than 1,000 legislators from states in every corner of the country will be sent to Congress and President Obama next week. Lawmakers from coal states, representing urban and rural economies, from the East Coast, the West Coast, and the plains states, raised one collective voice this week urging swift, decisive action from the United States Senate. Lawmakers say action is necessary for the future of America and the recovery of our economy.

“I am incredibly impressed, although not surprised, that Maine legislators have already signed on in large numbers. Maine has more signatories than any other state,” said Cornell du Houx. “Sens. Snowe and Collins can be comfortable knowing that the people of Maine will stand solidly behind them if they vote in favor of this common sense legislation.”

The letter calls on the foresight and innovative spirit of America’s top policymakers, reading: “The United States has never backed down from a challenge on this scale, and we urge you to again place our country at the forefront of innovation and prosperity. We, the undersigned state legislators, call on you to enact comprehensive clean energy jobs and climate legislation that relies on continued close collaboration between state and federal governments. We pledge our support in pursuit of a more prosperous, more secure, and more energy independent America.”

“This legislation is vital for both our economic and national security. We send over $1 billion a day in oil costs to foreign states that do not have our interests in mind,” said Cornell du Houx. “This is hard-earned American money that should be invested in our own communities.”

Cornell du Houx also announced a legislative resolution is being drafted in the state Legislature. The resolution calls on the full Legislature to support federal clean energy jobs legislation in order to bring new jobs to Maine, and make the United States a more competitive clean energy economy.

A Great Gift for Someone Special -- Thank a Teacher!

2009-12-23T11:57:00.000-08:00

As a teacher for over 20 years, probably the best gift I could receive from anyone is a "thank you" like the message below I received the other day from a former student.

When I taught her, she was an inner-city, teenage single parent. Today, she is a Brown graduate pursuing a Masters Degree at the same university.

It is students like her who occasionally look me up, and let me know what they're up to, that makes my last two decades of work so satisfying. Here is what she wrote:

=====

Hi Seth, I know this is random but I was thinking about people who helped to motivate me and were positive influences in my life and I thought of Seth Berry. I was wondering if you had taught a summer at Brown's summer High School back in 1991? I still have the materials from my experience in my Literature of Hope summer course, and it still feels like just yesterday.

At the time I was a single teenage parent and returned to high school briefly hoping to graduate and pursue my dream of going to Brown University. Unfortunately my life became very difficult and I dropped out and recieved my GED, but went back to Brown to work at the Vdub and Ratty cafeterias, where my brother also worked and my father was a janitor for many years.

I fell in and out of formal education for many years but always remembered my summer at Brown and the encouraging words I had received from my summer teacher. More than 15 years later, now a single mother of four I finished my associates degree from the Community College of RI and found out about the Resumed Undergrad Program at Brown. I wrote my admissions application about the first time I thought about attending Brown during my summer experience in my Literature of Hope course.

Four years ago I was accepted into Brown and my dream from many years ago had finally come true, and you had come immediately to mind. I had searched your name several years ago in the Brown database but was not successful. Now that I am working on my Master's at Brown in Urban Education Policy, you had come to mind again and I wanted to thank you for my experience that summer and making it seem possible for a first generation college student, single mother, and high school dropout, has the ability to make it to an Ivy league institution.

I believe every personal contact one makes has a profound influence on one's life, and I wanted you to know that you have had an impact and played a major role in the continuence and successful completion of my undergrad education at Brown, and now while working on my Master's degree. I still wonder what my summer instructor is doing and where he is now. Hopefully this is the same"Seth Berry" (at the time longer hair, sandals, etc.)? If not, know there is someone with your name and went to Brown (huge coincidence :) ), that had a positive impact on one's future educational goals. This e-mail is very impromptu so I apologize for informal writing but I just needed to let you know the significant role you had played in my life almost 20 years ago and still today.

========

Like this young woman, most teachers overcome significant challenges in their profession. Studies show that but for air traffic controllers, teachers make more decisions per hour than any other profession. They are paid less than their equally educated counterparts in other professions, tend far more often to be female (particularly in the all-important early grades), and generally work as many hours outside the classroom as they do in it. What makes all this worthwhile is not the pay, but knowing we shape young lives.

While it doesn't diminish the gift my former student gave me, I suspect her earliest teachers -- her parent or parents, other early caregivers, her early elementary school teachers -- were those who truly gave her the capacity to learn and to overcome the odds as she did.

Today, the odds are similarly stacked against the 1 in 5 Maine children who live in poverty. And before they are in school, many will be irreversibly and expensively lacking in what it takes to overcome those odds.

One of my favorite jobs right now is serving as a member of the Maine Children's Growth Council, as well as the midcoast area's Success by Six Advisory Council. In this role I am privileged to work with providers, business leaders, academics and others determined to help move Maine forward in its early childhood investments. Children from prenatal to age five, far more than the 9-18 year olds I have taught, are Maine's greatest opportunity for long-term economic growth. Their future success is the greatest gift we could give -- both to ourselves and to the next generation.

This is not feel-good econometrics. Neurologists now tell us that the brain's capacities to learn, love, and overcome adversity are 85% established by age 3. Nobel Laureate James Heckman has shown that within two decades, each dollar spent on proven early childhood strategies avoids sixteen or seventeen dollars spent later on for special education, remediation, mental health, crime prevention, and lost productivity. Students like my own formerly teenage single mother, now a Brown graduate student in education herself, are the proof in the Christmas pudding.

While you're doing those holiday cards, write a quick note of thanks to a long-ago teacher of yours. It may be the best gift you give this holiday season!

All the best in 2010,

Seth

2009-11-16T11:08:00.001-08:00

Parks, Historic Sites See Attendance Increase To Date

2009-11-15T08:41:00.000-08:00

Great news from the Maine Department of Conservation! What can Maine do to continue this trend?

Best regards,

Seth

AUGUSTA, Maine – Maine residents and visitors took to Maine’s state parks and historic sites with a passion this past season, according to year-to-date figures released by the Maine Bureau of Parks and Lands (BPL).

Sixty days of rain this summer failed to dampen enthusiasm for day use and overnight camping at the state’s 47 parks and historic sites. Attendance to date has increased by an unexpected 6.7 percent over last year’s attendance figures.

Day-use at the state parks and historic sites has increased by a significant 7.4 percent, or 138,745 more visitors, through October over last year. Despite the bad weather, overnight camping stays at the 12 state parks that have campgrounds to date have increased by 1 percent, or about 2,000 more visits, over last year’s figures.

“This is excellent news; it confirms our belief that people love our state parks and historic sites and are returning again and again to their own special places,” said Commissioner Patrick K. McGowan of the Maine Department of Conservation, which oversees the BPL. “Such visits enhance personal enjoyment and well-being, create wonderful family memories and support our tourist and retail economy.”

“We are really happy with the way Mainers and our visitors continue to use our state parks and historic sites, especially when the weather is good!” Will Harris, Maine Bureau of Parks and Lands director, said. “We hope that they continue to make this a life-long habit of coming to our parks and enjoying them.”

Final year-end figures for camping, day-use and combined use will be available in January.

BPL counts show that through October, there were 2,022,070 visits to the Maine state parks and historic sites, making it the second highest attendance in the last five years. The year 2007 had the highest attendance so far in this century, with a year-end total of 2.3 million visits.

Camping figures this year show that some 221,536 overnights took place at the 12 state campgrounds, 1 percent more than last year’s to-date figure of 219,417.

The season started in April with very strong park attendance and high sales of park passes, but the subsequent rainy weather kept visitors away. Attendance through late July, August and into the fall months, however, picked up considerably when weather improved. In fact, all state park reservable campsites were completely filled for several weekends in row in August.

“People really came out at the end of the season, which shows there’s a strong desire to use our parks and historic sites,” Harris said.

The BPL director said he thought there were several reasons for the increased visits to the state parks and historic sites. He said many Maine residents are recognizing the value and importance of outdoor recreation through such initiatives as Gov. John E. Baldacci’s “Take It Outside.”

“People seem to be taking that to heart, and kids and parents are recreating outdoors, which is really what Maine is all about,” Harris said.

Visitors also seem to appreciate all the new facilities at the state parks, constructed with funding from the November 2007 bond referendum, which was overwhelmingly approved by voters. Six new playgrounds, new bathhouses, toilets, wheelchair-accessible camp sites and other facilities have been built with $7.5 million from the bond issue.

“We’ve heard anecdotally how much they are appreciated,” Harris said. “The new facilities have really helped to get people to the parks.”

The U.S. economy and the “stay-cation” concept also have played a part in attendance figures, the director said. People realize that state parks “still are a great value for Mainers for their recreation dollars,” Harris said. He noted that many people are using season passes, which offer season visits at reduced prices.

The BPL director pointed out that Maine’s state parks and historic sites also offer clean and safe facilities. “Even with a Spartan budget, our staff has maintained our parks in extraordinary order, which adds to their attractiveness,” he said.

The Maine state parks and historic sites offer a large variety of activities, from ocean-beach swimming to mountain biking to ATV-ing, as well as living history events and special performances. Ten of the parks are staffed year-round, and several of them will be offering family activities this winter. Visitors also have access to the parks, such as Range Pond and Wolfe’s Neck, during the off-season for walk-in use, Harris said.

“What we’re offering is something people seem to look for and what they want,” the BPL director said, “And we’ll continue to give them that in the upcoming season.”

For more information, go to: http://www.parksandlands.com

Democratic leadership disappointed by tax reform petition passage

2009-11-10T14:54:00.000-08:00

Referendum seeks to delay tax cuts for Maine people

AUGUSTA – In response to today’s announcement by the Office of the Secretary of State validating the petition signatures for a People’s Veto to the tax reform law, joint Senate and House majority leadership released the following statement:

“We are disappointed that the petition gathering effort to repeal a historic tax cut has succeeded. This comes at a cost to businesses and taxpayers, who stood to benefit from the substantial income tax relief they would have received starting in January.

According to Maine Revenue Service, the law lowers income taxes for 95 percent of Maine tax payers, while sending a powerful message to global investors about the friendly economic landscape in our state. It moves Maine from the 7th highest income tax rate in the country to the middle of the pack and modestly expands the sales tax to certain discretionary items and services. Further, the reform provides much needed stability to the state’s tax code.

We’re also disappointed that the Maine Republican Party would put such great effort into repealing a tax cut for Maine people at a time when so many are struggling to make ends meet. However, we are confident that Maine people will understand and value the benefits of this important law upon learning more about its details.”

Important Issues on November 3rd Ballot

2009-10-24T08:10:00.000-07:00

At town offices all next week, and at polling places on November 3rd, voters face seven important questions about Maine’s future. With no candidates for federal or statewide office on the ballot, voter turnout will be the determining factor, and results on these critical questions are unpredictable.

Among other issues, we will decide whether to approve marriage equality, whether to change the excise tax, and whether to approve the “Tabor II” anti-tax initiative.

As Majority Whip in the Maine Legislature, I helped to enact marriage equality. I also had the opportunity to enact Tabor II and excise tax referendums exactly as they will appear on the ballot. On these, I voted no. Both questions, enacted as written, would hurt Maine cities and towns and significantly delay our economic recovery. I will be voting no on Questions 1, 2, and 4, and I urge you to do so as well.

Below is a summary of referendum questions prepared by the Secretary of State’s office, with additional information from the House Majority Office. I hope this summary will help you to make your own informed decisions. For more on my own views, please contact me directly.

All the best,
Seth

P.S. – By voting early, you can make sure you are removed from the lists of advocates who will otherwise call to make sure you have voted. To vote early, visit your town office.

Question 1 - People’s Veto
An Act To End Discrimination in Civil Marriage and Affirm Religious Freedom
“Do you want to reject the new law that lets same-sex couples marry and allows individuals and religious groups to refuse to perform these marriages?”

Question 1 asks whether Maine voters want to reject amendments to the state’s marriage laws that were enacted in May 2009. The new law would allow same-sex couples to marry in Maine. It also would recognize such marriages lawfully performed in other states. It would continue to allow individuals who are authorized to perform marriages to refuse to perform a marriage for any couple for any reason. Finally, the law does not allow any court or governmental body to compel, prevent or interfere in any way with a religious institution’s doctrines, policies, teaching or practices regarding marriage.

A YES vote means you want to repeal the marriage equality law.
A NO vote means that you want to keep the law as passed by the Legislature earlier this year.

Question 2 - Citizen Initiative
An Act to Decrease the Automobile Excise Tax and Promote Energy
“Do you want to cut the rate of the municipal excise tax by an average of 55% on motor vehicles less than six years old and exempt hybrid and other alternative-energy and highly fuel-efficient motor vehicles from sales tax and three years of excise tax?”

Question 2 is a citizen initiative that, if approved, would reduce the rate of the excise tax on motor vehicles less than 6 years old. This is the tax that owners of vehicles pay each year in order to register their vehicles. The excise tax is collected and retained by the city or town where the owner of the vehicle lives. The towns then use the money from the excise tax to build and maintain the local roads.

A YES vote means that you favor the proposal.
A NO vote means you want to leave the excise tax as it is currently.

Question 3 - Citizen Initiative
An Act to Repeal the School District Consolidation Laws
“Do you want to repeal the 2007 law on school district consolidation and restore the laws previously in effect?”

Question 3 is a citizen initiative that would repeal the school district consolidation law that was passed in June 2007, and subsequently amended in 2008 and 2009, and would re-enact the laws governing school administrative units in Maine that were in effect prior to June 2007.

A YES vote on this question means that you want to repeal the consolidation law.
A NO vote means you want to keep the school consolidation intact as passed by the Legislature in 2007.

Question 4 - Citizen Initiative
An Act to Provide Tax Relief
“Do you want to change the existing formulas that limit state and local government spending and require voter approval by referendum for spending over those limits and for increases in state taxes?”

Question 4 is initiated legislation that seeks to change existing law with regard to limits on spending by state, county and municipal governments, and state tax increases. The initiative repeals the existing caps on spending of state General Funds and replaces it with a new formula that limits growth in spending for all state funds to the percentage increase in the Consumer Price Index for the most recent calendar year plus the percentage increase in state population for the three most recent years. The initiated legislation also changes the existing spending limits for county and municipal governments to add that the growth in spending allowed cannot exceed the percentage change in personal income in Maine, averaged over the previous 10 years, plus the percentage change in the Consumer Price Index forecast for the next two calendar years.

A YES vote means that you want to adopt the new funding formula.
A NO vote means that you want to keep the existing caps on state and local spending.

Question 5 - Citizen Initiative
An Act to Establish the Maine Medical Marijuana Act
“Do you want to change the medical marijuana laws to allow treatment of more medical conditions and to create a regulated system of distribution?”

Question 5 repeals Maine’s existing statutes regarding the medical use of marijuana and replaces them with a new law, entitled the Maine Medical Marijuana Act. This initiated legislation expands the list of medical conditions for which marijuana may be prescribed.

A YES vote means you favor expanding the list of medical conditions that may be treated using marijuana.
A NO vote means you favor leaving the medical marijuana laws as they are currently.

Question 6 - Bond Issue
“Do you favor a $71,250,000 bond issue for improvements to highways and bridges, airports, public transit facilities, ferry and port facilities, including port and harbor structures, as well as funds for the LifeFlight Foundation that will make the State eligible for over $148,000,000 in federal and other matching funds?”

Question 6 would authorize the State to issue bonds in an amount not to exceed $71,250,000 to raise funds for a variety of projects, as described below. The bonds would run for a period not longer than 10 years from the date of issue. The Department of Transportation would expend $69,750,000 of the bond proceeds for the following types of projects:
• $55 million for highway and bridge improvement projects statewide;
• $ 5.75 million for improvements to the ports at Eastport and Searsport;
• $ 4 million for improvements to state-owned rail lines
• $ 2 million for improvements to publicly owned airports;
• $ 1 million for ferry facilities; and
• $ 1 million for the LifeFlight Foundation

A YES vote means that you want the state to borrow this money in order to invest in the projects listed.

A NO vote means you no do not want the state to borrow this money for the projects listed.

Question 7 - Constitutional Amendment
“Do you favor amending the Constitution of Maine to increase the amount of time that local officials have to certify the signatures on direct initiative petitions?”

The final item, Question 7 would authorize an amendment to the Constitution of Maine to change time frames in the direct initiative and people’s veto referendum process. The amendment would increase, from 5 days to 10 days, the time period for officials of towns to complete their review of petitions for a direct initiative in order to certify which signatures are those of registered voters within their towns.

A YES vote means you favor giving municipal officials adequate time to verify signatures.
A NO vote means you want to leave the time frames for verifying signatures as they are currently.

To learn more about the seven referendum questions, you can visit the Maine Secretary of State’s Web site at: http://www.maine.gov/sos/cec/elec/2009/intent09.htm.

2009-10-10T13:56:00.000-07:00

Celebrate Bowdoinham, 2009 with Steve Rowe and local Democrats

Step Up for Kids, 2009

2009-10-09T08:39:00.001-07:00

Time for the facts, Piglet

2009-09-25T18:05:00.001-07:00

As President Franklin D. Roosevelt -- who oversaw the greatest economic recovery this country has ever seen -- once said: "a radical is someone who has both feet firmly planted -- in the air." TABOR II proponents, in launching their so-called "Piglet Book," clearly planted both feet firmly in economic midair at the State House yesterday.

Not unlike previous reports from the Maine Heritage Policy Center, the "Piglet Book" is misleading, contradictory, and outdated. Truth is, the Maine State Legislature was lauded nationally by conservatives for its fiscal responsibility in passing a balanced budget in economic crisis. In combination with careful spending, tax reform legislation passed this past session also reduced the income tax, putting more money in the pockets of Maine citizens.

Sadly, the report adds nothing to public understanding of the actual economic or budgetary issues facing Maine. Here are just a few of the key, fact-free claims of the Piglet Book, and a note of explanation with each.

1. They say state employees are “over employed and over compensated”. The truth is just the opposite. Since 2002 the state has reduced its payroll by almost 1,000 employees.

2. They call the Dirigo Health program a waste of taxpayer money. The truth is that Dirigo is not funded by tax dollars. It has been funded through a savings offset payment and will be funded in the future through a surcharge on insurance premiums.

3. They call Clean Elections “welfare” for politicians. The truth is that Maine people widely supported the system and it was in fact created by a citizen-initiated referendum. Today, it is viewed as a model for the nation.

4. They claim the new Maine Turnpike administrative building cost taxpayers $11,900,000. The truth is not a dime of state tax money was spent on the project. The building, which also houses a State Police Troop, is funded through toll dollars.

5. They cite as waste $45,000 to build a playground in Presque Isle. That’s just not true. The playground was proposed but was never funded. This goes to show how desperate the Maine Heritage Policy Center is to mislead the public.

7. They say the state spent $20,000 on the production of Learner and Lowe’s “My Fair Lady”. The truth is the production was funded through federal money.

8. They say the state threw out over seven million in tax payers dollars in 2008 on auto mileage reimbursements. The truth is that those employees who travel the most – such as transportation safety inspectors – were given state vehicles two years ago in order to save money while carrying out vital public services.

9. While the Piglet report calls for a reduction in state employees and compensation, it also calls on the state to hire more employees to prevent overtime expenditures; showing deep contradiction in their purported policy prescriptions.

More broadly, the Piglet Book is part of a national effort to "privatize" or "shrink government." These words sound good, but are in fact a method to turn our remaining public services -- schools, roads, public safety, etc. -- over to for-profit businesses. In the world today, probably the best working model of such a radical "free market" is Somalia.

Americans -- and especially Mainers -- can be fooled at times, but never twice. Civil, intellectually honest, facts-based speech -- from all perspectives -- is what Maine and America want today more than ever. I am hopeful that we will soon see more of it.

Berry and other Mainers Call for Climate Action - NRCM Insider

2009-09-11T09:10:00.001-07:00

Mainers Call for Climate Action - NRCM Insider

Shared via AddThis

Letter from a constituent: Health Insurance Reform Needed Now

2009-09-09T06:52:00.000-07:00

From time to time, I hope to use this space to share some of the letters from constituents regarding various issues. Here is one I received yesterday:

Dear Rep. Berry,

Here's my health care stories - one's about me, the other is about my dad:

In order to get treatment I have to go to my General Practitioner, get a referral from his "Referral Specialist," who usually argues with me about why I need this. She then sends the request to the "Insurance Company Referral Specialist," who also argues and looks for ways to get out of paying. We pay premiums, then co-pays, then get a bill for what the insurance company decides not to pay. If you have had any health issues this probably sounds familiar. And we have really good health insurance.

My dad, sadly, has a terminal condition that he has been enduring for over a year now. We are only days or at best a few weeks from the end. Dad has Medicare. There's no GP, RS, ISRS - he just self refers directly to the specialist. It has been a real blessing not having to deal with all the hoops I have to go through personally during this difficult time. No one's talking about pulling the plug on him - he is getting the best care possible. We are able to approach the situation and treat him like he will make a full recovery even though it's 99% certain he will not.

I have to ask what value do the insurance companies provide? I have to navigate three levels of bureaucracy - for what? It just adds more cost.
Insurance companies make billions in net profits, pay multi million dollar salaries to their executives and all they do is handle the money. This is not like car insurance where you can switch to Geico - you get what you get and have little choice. Given that I have little choice any way, AND, I have all these hoops to go through to get to the care I need, I am a little envious of those with medicare. Yes we will have to pay for it but believe me, we are paying for what we have now. Small businesses usually have high premiums, must hit their employees with a portion of those - and then the employees pay and pay again if they need care.

It really pisses me off to hear all this crap about "pulling the plug on Grandma" and "the government will get between you and your doctor." It's coming straight from the people who are making billions on the present system and it's all lies based on a particle of truth. My experience is exactly the opposite.

In my opinion we should all be demanding medicare for every American. We will have to pay for it but we will no longer have to pay for three levels of bureaucracy that only adds to the cost - and the frustration of getting sick.

I feel like anytime there's a real issue that needs to be solved, there is a legion of pundits, experts and politicians ready to divert our attention, dissemble the truth and distract us from what's really important. This is what passes for politics in our great country. Problem is, most politicians have forgotten there's a difference between politics and governance. They always choose winning politics over good governance because gaining or retaining power seems to be more important than serving the people.

I was driving in to work a couple of days ago and got stuck, with a lot of other drivers, in a construction zone bottle-neck. This caused a significant backup which was made worse by some drivers trying to force all the cars into one lane a mile prior to the narrowing point. They weaved back and forth across two lanes and waved fists at those who slipped by. I suppose we could all have made a single line stretching back for several miles, but once the traffic slowed to a crawl it made more sense to me to fill two lanes all the way to the bottle-neck and then take turns entering the single lane.

Did it matter who was right? That misses the point - we were all in that situation together.

We are in a situation now with health care and health insurance that everyone pretty much agrees needs to be fixed. And, we are all in it together. Problem is, there is a legislative bottle neck. And that constriction is the direct result of our leaders from both parties engaging in politics when they should be governing.

Republicans see this as a path back to power and will play politics to the hilt. Democrats are too afraid of losing power and are succumbing to the fear tactics put out there by the opposition. Neither is focusing on governing wisely. All the special interest money makes the situation even more difficult.

Somebody has to step up and say "I don't care about getting re-elected, I want to do what's best for America."

A good sports analogy describes a team that has taken the lead and starts playing scared, playing not to lose - which almost guarantees failure.

Please continue to focus on governing and let those who would continue to play politics be exposed for who they are. You can't solve health care by playing politics: If you can't beat 'em, you are playing the wrong game. Bring the game to your 'house' and play a game you can't lose.

The Right to Lend Our Name; the Right to Take It Away: Protecting Ballot Integrity by Allowing Signature Retraction

2009-08-30T08:26:00.000-07:00

In less than two weeks, Mainers will learn whether a new, $57 million tax reduction will go into effect, or be delayed and even jeopardized. The effort to veto this reduction has become just the latest example of the need for retraction rights. If tax reduction opponents obtain the signatures of just one in twenty Mainers, the $57 million tax reduction will be delayed until at least June of 2010. Yet even if misled -- even if lied to -- those who sign cannot retract their signature.

We Mainers tend to trust each other. In some states dishonest signature-gathering methods have become commonplace, but fortunately, fraud and ballot abuse still surprise us here in Maine. Trust is the way life should be. Yet increasingly, the tactics of hired, out-of-state petition circulators undermine the spirit of Maine’s citizen referendum and initiative process. National groups such as the Ballot Initiative Strategy Center have documented abuses such as offering free food outside homeless shelters in exchange for signatures, or holding "fraud parties" where signatures are forged from the phonebook onto signature petitions. Signature gatherers both in Maine and elsewhere are routinely paid per signature collected, and a number have been charged with fraud and forgery. To protect the integrity of our ballot, I have proposed a bill to let people retract their signature if misled at the time they first signed a referendum or initiative.

As the current veto effort’s deadline looms, and with failure a real possibility, false claims are now mushrooming up as if fed by this summer’s record rainfall. We have heard multiple reports and have seen many forwarded emails making such claims. We have heard that the new tax reduction law taxes haircuts, lawyer’s fees, and social security benefits, and that it reduces funding for tree growth or the homestead exemption. It does none of these. We have heard it hurts the the poor or elderly. It does not. In fact, tax credits are fully refundable in the lower brackets. We heard from one circulator, who claimed to have been hired by the Maine Republican Party, that taxes on the lowest income bracket were increasing from 2 ½ to 6 ½ percent. In fact, most lower-income Mainers will come out ahead. From Maine House Minority Leader John Tardy, whose error I am sure was unintentional, we have heard that a family of four making $100,000 and with $25,000 in deductions would suffer a net loss. According to Maine Revenue Services, the opposite is true. Most frequently and most amazing to me, we have heard tax reform will have a net cost to most Mainers. Such blatant falsehoods were unimaginable a few years ago in Maine politics. Clearly, our culture of integrity and trust is at risk.

By broadening the base of the sales tax and lowering income taxes on all Mainers progressively, the reform package will in fact benefit over 87% of all Mainers. This is why every major newspaper in Maine has supported the reform, along with both conservative and liberal groups such as the national Tax Foundation, the Wall St. Journal, and the Maine Center for Economic Policy. Yet so long as distortions are rewarded and duped citizens left powerless, it is clear that the truth -- and equally important, the old Maine spirit of bipartisan cooperation towards shared prosperity -- will suffer.

To their credit, some tax reduction opponents -- including both a former Republican State Senator and the current Chair of the Maine Republican Party – have in fact admitted responsibility for a number of astounding inaccuracies. Another Senator, who is organizing the petition drive, has agreed that Maine Revenue Services figures cited here are accurate. So far, organizers have not given up signatures collected under false pretenses, or contacted those who signed to see if they were misled. We do still hope they will do so, and encourage those who may have been misled to contact the petition organizers, and CC the Secretary of State, to request a voluntary retraction.

My bill would not make it overly easy to retract your signature. First, you would need to notify both the petition circulators and the Secretary of State in writing -- not by email or telephone. Second, you would need to indicate how you were misled at the time of signing. Third, your retractions would need to be signed and in writing, both to discourage frivolous changes of mind, and to let circulators and the Secretary of State verify your identify and intent. Fourth, once retracted, your support for a petition could not be reinstated. Fifth and last, your retraction would be allowed only within a specified timeframe – no later than a week before the signatures must be turned in, and possibly earlier. The goal is not to prevent those who are collecting signatures from succeeding, but simply to help protect old-fashioned Maine honesty.

In a democracy, we have the right to learn more and to change our minds. Letting us do so will not stop fraudulent signature-gathering, but will discourage it. Above all, it will help to keep Maine’s future in the hands of Maine’s citizens.

Frequently Asked Questions about the Right of Retraction:

Why else should people be able to retract their names from petitions? Are there other examples of problems that have occurred?

In Maine, the rights of citizen’s initiative and people’s veto are stronger than in most other states. Recently, special interest groups have begun to target states like Maine, often spending millions of dollars to initiate or veto legislation that affects their special interest group.

In 2008, for example, special interests spent over $3.9 million to overturn legislation that would have helped extend health insurance to thousands of Mainers. Most of this money came from out-of-state beverage corporations interested in protecting their bottom line, even as the rest of us must pay in our insurance rates for the obesity, heart disease, and cancer caused by their products. During April and May, the campaign paid over $2,000 per day to an out-of-state petition gatherering firm.

Petition circulators are typically paid according to the number of signatures they collect. This provides an incentive for fraud. At present, several states have banned payment-per-signature. Their ability to do so has been challenged in court. In Maine’s case, a U.S. District Court in 1999 found that there was insufficient data at that time to show that payment-per-signature encouraged fraud. Other states have also required disclosure by circulators who are paid in this fashion.

What’s the harm in putting things out for a popular vote?

Representative democracy means that we elect people to make decisions for us. If we dislike their decisions, Maine and 23 other states do allow us to overturn them at the ballot box. In all states, we can also vote those who supported a bad bill out of office.

For its first 90 years, Maine had no referendum process. From 1910 through 1992, Maine averaged one initiative or referendum question every two years. Lately, these numbers have spiked dramatically. This fall alone, there will be five referendum questions on the ballot. Most recent petitions have been supported to a large extent by out-of-state dollars.

There is also the matter of cost. If Mainers chose to revisit each of the more than 2,000 bills considered by each Legislature, I put the very rough annual cost somewhere between $1 and $3 billion. This is many times more than what it costs to have a Legislature.

Isn’t the Legislature prohibited from making laws regarding the people’s veto or citizen’s initiative?

The Constitution empowers the Legislature to enact further laws related to the people’s veto and direct initiative. McGee vs. Secretary of State (2006) errs on the side of petitioners, negating a paragraph of law that a majority found slightly to abridge the Constitutional right of petition. Both the Constitution and case law are silent on the question of the right to retract one’s own signature – a power that should simply be viewed as an extension of the right to sign.

Will the right of retraction place a new burden on the Secretary of State?

If this bill made it easy for people to change their minds, or were likely to result in tens of thousands of signature revocations, yes. This is why I propose that revocation be submitted in writing (not by email, internet or over the phone), and before a date certain. In addition, the effective date of the bill may be delayed to provide time for a new computer system to facilitate implementation. According to my preliminary conversations with the Secretary of State and his staff, these provisions should ensure that revocations are manageable and can be handled at no additional cost.

If anything, it is the number of ballot questions in recent years which add significant new costs and administrative burden. Statewide ballots must be printed, and tens of thousands of signatures counted and verified. By discouraging special interests from trying to mislead working Mainers with yet another self-serving ballot question, the right of revocation will reduce overall costs to the Secretary of State. More importantly, it will help to keep Maine’s future in the hands of Maine’s citizens.

Shouldn’t people just be more careful what they sign?

Yes! Before we sign on as supporters, we need to study the issue. Once we have signed, our name is publicly available and associated with the cause. It is accessible to the media, to future employers, to political parties. We also increase costs to taxpayers.

The problem is, we Mainers tend to trust one another. By and large this is a good thing. Our crime rate is consistently one of the lowest. Imported con artists, paid to swindle us for our signatures, are not something we’re used to. This is why we need a basic level of protection against fraud, and the right to retract our signatures if misled.

The referendum process is not a contract, but rather an exercise of our most basic democratic rights. As such, it should express our will accurately. On hearing of my bill, the director of a major civil liberties organization here in Maine said this: “It makes sense. If we support freedom of association, we also have to support freedom of disassociation.”

2009-08-20T08:16:00.000-07:00

How Health Care Reform Really Looks

Below is a good, simplified overview of what is actually being discussed in Washington D.C. (click on image to see in full). The suggested reforms are incremental, and very different from what some "protestors" seem to imagine, but would help set us on the road to cutting costs while improving quality.

Considering that medical expenses are the leading cause of personal bankrupcy in the U.S., and that we have one of the most expensive and lowest-performing systems, it seems worth considering these basic steps towards reform.

Clearly, what we have now is not working.

2009-08-10T08:55:00.000-07:00

At the Sea Dogs with Steve Rowe, Anne Haskell and Mark Bryant. Great team, great company!

2009-06-23T19:06:00.000-07:00

Governor signs historic energy bill

NRCM Insider

2009-06-23T14:27:00.001-07:00

NRCM Insider video of toxics bill signings with Seth's son and Matt Prindiville's kids as well. Note Lisandro Berry-Gaviria leaning over the Governor to make sure he signs in the right place...

Shared via AddThis

Maine Governor Baldacci Ceremonially Signs Environmental Legislation | All American Patriots: US politics, domestic and world news, science, environment, energy and technology

2009-06-23T09:19:00.001-07:00

Maine Governor Baldacci Ceremonially Signs Environmental Legislation | All American Patriots: US politics, domestic and world news, science, environment, energy and technology

Shared via AddThis