The First Pick For Governor

Forecaster columnist Edgar Allen Beem has been a lightning rod for love/hate letters over past statements. Just look at the recent letters to the Forecaster concerning Beem: "Beem needs a time-out", "Beem's 'satire' hits the mark", and "Beem has it all wrong". Beem's most recent column is sure to make 16 people very unhappy and one left smiling.

Beem has made his early picks for Governor. Les Otten and Rosa Scarcelli are Beem's picks for top contenders (you'll have to wait until the end for Beem's final pick). What? No Libby Mitchell or Steve Rowe? No Matt Jacobson, Peter Mills, or Bruce Poliquin? No Lynne Williams? How did Beem arrive at Otten vs. Scarcelli?

Right out of the gate Beem cuts all the independents, "the field doesn't have a Jim Longley or an Angus King in it this time", and the Greens. These candidates, says Beem, will loose out in the money race once the campaigns heat up. Donna Dion, Dawn Hill, Matt Jacobson, and Bruce Poliquin also get lumped into this group. Jacobson did well during the first fundraising period. To say Poliquin did well is an understatement, even with his personal contribution. The assessment of candidates based on money alone leaves out so many other factors, new media and the candidate's message to name two. I wouldn't count Jacobson or Poliquin out yet by any means.

So, by Beem's calculations we are down to Mills and Otten for Republicans and Mitchell, Rowe, and Scarcelli for Democrats. Mills gets cut for being too liberal. "but because I, a card-carrying liberal Democrat, might vote for him, his own reactionary party won't. Mills would stand a better chance running as an independent." As I've said here, Mills certainly has an opportunity to spin his recent votes and focus on his overall record to court Moderate Republicans and independents, who make up more of the Maine GOP than Beem seems to think.

Rowe has no steam left, according to Beem, two Dems left. Due to recent dissatisfaction with Augusta, Beem discounts Mitchell's closeness to recent events. Even though they are out of Beem's running, by this logic former Attorney General Rowe and Senator Mills would be out as well.

Now we are down to the final two, Otten and Scarcelli. Otten, Beem says, is old news. He has name recognition, but nothing else according to Beem. Scarecelli is by contrast a fresh outsider. Beem cites her business experience as a plus and likens her to a "female Obama". "'Rosa for Maine' has a winning ring to it", says Beam. I guess [insert candidate name] for governor/Maine just doesn't work for anyone else.

If Mr. Beem's prediction comes true and we do see Otten v. Scarcelli I will personally post an article stating he was right. The only part of Beem's assessment that has a chance of coming to fruition is that an outsider could win the Blaine House. Then again, someone told me recently, once you are involved in politics you are a politician.

Anyone agree or disagree with Mr. Beem assessment of the campaign?

Moved

I have moved over to Wordpress. Update your links and visit The Maine View here: http://themaineview.wordpress.com

Whole Foods and Health care

I have tried to avoid the health care debate up to this point. Neither side of the argument has really captured me yet. Large areas of our health care system are despicable. The massive turnout at last week's fee clinic in Los Angeles indicate something is rotten in Denmark. Clearly, the problem is too large to ignore any longer. We shouldn't rush out any bill just to say that we have something. That could hurt more than it could help. How we will pay for this plan and how much families will actually save are my main concerns, not "death panels" or big brother telling me what doctor I have to choose. That is not to say I'm against market-based solutions, I'm just not ruling out any proposal, government intervention or no, that solves our problems appropriately. No, I'm content to listen to other people's opinions at this point.

John Mackey, CEO of Whole Foods, wrote an editorial in the Wall Street Journal last week expressing his thoughts on health care reform. In short, Mackey does not agree with President Obama's health care plan. Mackey clearly articulates his arguments against Obamacare, citing funding problems, possible health care rationing, and finding the root cause of America's health problems as problems the Presidential health plan does not address. Something we haven't heard a lot of above the shouting, Mackey provides his alternative health care reform. All in all, the article was inoffensive, especially compared to some other comments floating around, and had a few sound options. At the very least it has furthered the debate on health care. Not everyone agrees however.

The CEO's market-based health care plan has caused some outrage among Whole Foods shoppers. Some shoppers are so upset over Mackey's editorial they have said they would boycott his stores. ABC news picked up the story this past Friday.

from ABC News:

"I'm boycotting [Whole Foods] because all Americans need health care," said Lent, 33, who used to visit his local Whole Foods "several times a week."

"While Mackey is worried about health care and stimulus spending, he doesn't seem too worried about expensive wars and tax breaks for the wealthy and big businesses such as his own that contribute to the deficit," said Lent.

Can we guess the rest of Mackey's views simply because he hasn't written an article about them? Certainly not. Health care is the issue that is in the news now, this is what gets the most coverage. Simply because Mackey did not choose to express those now, does not mean he must believe what Mr. Lent suggests he does.

Another woman believed Mackey should only make his views public if Whole Foods shoppers agree with them.

from ABC News:

Christine Taylor, a 34-year-old New Jersey shopper, vowed never to step foot in another Whole Foods again.

"I will no longer be shopping at Whole Foods," Taylor told ABCNews.com. "I think a CEO should take care that if he speaks about politics, that his beliefs reflect at least the majority of his clients."

Are we back to here already? I thought we left all that rhetoric behind when Bush stepped out of the White House. Well the far-right does not have a copy-right on the with-us-or-against-us mentality. Yes, there are certain opinions people ought to keep to themselves in polite company, but there was nothing offensive about Mackey's argument. Maybe Ms. Taylor forgot, but as Reason pointed out, Mackey has supported the legalization of marijuana in the past. I wonder how that jives with the majority of his clients?

God forbid that someone try to advance debate on health care in this country. May this be a lesson to you Mr. CEO. Don't voice your opinion unless you poll everyone you serve to make sure they will agree with it.

Hey, I wonder if all these people boycotting realize they are using a market-based form of protest of a market-based opinion on health care? Drink up the sweet irony.

MEA results are in. So what do they say?

The results of the last MEA test have been posted. Depending on how you view the scores you get a different picture. There were increases in math and reading at almost every grade level, which is good. However, when you look closely the increases were not that impressive. The average reading scores of grades 4,5,7, and 8 increased by one point while grade 6 decreased by one point. Math scores increased at roughly the same level across the board.

Get down even closer and the results become a little more interesting. There were drops in students who partially met or did not meet standards at almost every grade level in both math and reading. Some drops were greater than others. When the three year data is examined a few grade levels simple did a yo-yo, gaining a point from 07 to 08 then dropping a point this year. We can't really call that a success in education.

Math scores do not show a promising improvement from last year. Grades 3-5 post an overall gain of only 2% who met standards, while grades 6-8 posted an overall loss of 1% who met standards. Maine students shined on the MEA exams when it came to reading. 11% more students of grades 3-5 met standards, with 12% gains in 6-8.

Back to the big picture. It's time for a downer. Only 68% of students 3-5 met or exceeded reading standards. 73% of students 6-8 did the same. In math 67% of 3-5 and 55% of 6-8. Almost half of middle school students cannot at least meet state standards. In no area do we even get three quarters of the students meeting standards, though 6-8 almost made it. Let's stop to consider what that means. The MEA is not asking that children be geniuses or qualify for every AP class in high school. These are pieces of knowledge that children should be learning at each grade at a minimum. I'm not going to debate issues with standards of testing methods here. We'll save that for another time. I will say that these figures are unacceptable. Even Commissioner of Education Sue Gendron stated there is more work to do saying, "The Department is keenly aware of, and wishes to recognize, the intensified efforts of teachers and administrators at the local level who are largely responsible for these gains. We also know that more work needs to be done to support those students who are not yet meeting standards."

With roughly $2 billion being spent on education anyone who puts a dollar into Maine's coffers should be paying attention. Kids or no, education is essential to the economic outlook of Maine. Educational excellence will attract business to Maine and create the workforce to take those new jobs, better jobs. We've talked about combating dropout rates and getting more kids to into college. Let's start looking at the percentage meeting standards. Everyone should know what these standards are. Everyone should start asking why 100% of our students aren't meeting them. This isn't an attack on teachers or Maine schools. Teachers are working hard even when there are many factors working against them. This is a call for people to be more involved. This is a call to look at why we aren't at 100% and how to get there. Get involved in education.

Lynne Williams on clean elections, tax reform, and Maine's Green Party

Recently the Maine Green Independent Party came out in opposition to House Speaker Hannah Pingree's bill that would add new requirements to receive Clean Election Fund money. Proponents of the bill have said it keeps the system from becoming a "system of losers" and that a candidate is not viable if they "can't raise $40,000". Statements from Anna Trevorroe and yourself have categorized the bill as unfair and paradoxical. Could you please address some of the comments made by the bill's supporters and those of the Green Party?

Anna’s and my comments speak for themselves. The paradox comes from the fact that the goal of passing Clean Elections was to open up the opportunity to run for office to a broader spectrum of candidates than just those who are either independently wealthy – we still get those, as you can see from the currently declared candidates – or connected to special interests and individuals with money – and we get those too. Yet Hannah Pingree herself admits that this “opening up” was not meant to include Greens and Independents when she “says the move was intended "to make the system more attractive for major-party candidates."” The facts stated by the reporter, following this comment, are indicative of the hypocrisy of the Maine Democratic party and their leadership – “of the six gubernatorial contenders who have used Clean Election funding since the system was set up, three have been Republicans; one was an independent and two were Greens. No Democrats have used the system to run for governor.” Furthermore, it is the height of hypocrisy for Pingree to be testifying in Congress in favor of “clean elections,” when her own party does not even participate in the system at the statewide level.

That said, however, the statute has been changed and I will raise the required $40,000 of in-state funds and utilize that to continue to create the top-notch grassroots operation that we are putting together.

If everyone is not required to run as a clean election candidate is the system fair to begin with? Would it level the playing field or make it more uneven to make Maine elections 100% clean funded?

I am intrigued by your question about making everyone run as a Clean Elections candidate although I have not researched if that would pass muster on constitutional grounds. Campaign limits have been upheld, as have spending limits for publicly funded candidates and bans on corporate contributions, but I do not know where the courts would come down on requiring all campaigns to be publicly funded, and whether that has been tried before.

The term "clean election" gives a negative connotation to private funding. Even in this age of transparency, where any citizen can view a candidates fundraising reports, do you believe private funding is prone to outside influencing?

The current transparency level does make traditional funding less of an influence factor. What concerns me, however, more than the possible influence that one contributor alone could curry from the relatively small private contributions that are allowed is the “bundling” that goes on, in which a connected individual can make his or her individual contribution as well as collecting contributions from employees at his or her business, who often feel pressured to give. Also of concern is the fact that any time spent raising money takes the candidates away from meeting the voters, which should be the main activity of the candidate.

This week the Green Party join with Maine's GOP in opposing the current tax reform plan, LD 1495. The MGIP has labeled the bill less progressive and likened it to a flat tax, launching a "No Flat Tax for ME" campaign. Maine Democrats responded to the Green Party's move by saying, "Beginning in 2006 when John Eder’s reelection campaign accepted the help of Republican leader Josh Tardy, the Greens in Portland have moved closer to the Republican Party." In the Portland Press Herald, House Majority Leader John Potti was quoted as saying, "The fact that we’re getting hit on both the right and the left confirms it’s good middle-of-the-road policy." What is your opinion of the current tax reform plan? What do you make of the Democrats anger at the Green Party's opposition? Is the Green Party cozying up the Maine GOP, moving further left, or do the Dems just not have the Green Party pegged?

With regard to the people’s veto campaign against the Tax Reform Bill, it is not surprising that my party supports the repeal. We support progressive taxation, and increasing the sales tax, particularly on activities that are neither discretionary nor mostly engaged in by out-of-staters, is not progressive. Likewise, the decrease in the highest marginal tax bracket does nothing to help those same folks who will be most hurt by the sales tax increase, since few of them are in the highest marginal tax bracket and many of them pay no state income taxes at all. This so-called “tax reform” is in actuality a tax increase for those who can least afford it.

There was one aspect of the original bill that I supported and that was the increase in the real estate transfer tax. Yet that tax increase, which was small and usually paid only a few times by any given individual, when they buy or sell real estate, was removed from the final bill. It was at that time that I personally decided that I could not support the bill.

John Piotti’s comment suggests that he does not know the nature of coalition-building. Coalitions are frequently temporary arrangements whereby various coalition members work together towards a common goal. The Maine Green Independent Party worked with the Maine Heritage Policy Center on the signature drive to repeal forced school consolidation. Now we find ourselves once again agreeing on our opposition to the so-called tax reform bill, although our reasoning may be different. Mr. Piotti’s statement says more about who the Maine Democratic Party considers to be its constituency and that is certainly not the working people of this state. If my party and the Maine Republican Party agree on this issue, great. There will be many things coming up that we will disagree on. There is a reason that the word “Independent” is included in our name.

My last comment segues into my next. The Green Party throughout the country, including our Maine Green Independent Party, operates according to our Ten Key Values – Social Justice, Ecological Wisdom, Non-violence, Decentralization, Community-based Economics, Feminism, Diversity, Responsibility, Future Focus. Those values guide our decisions about what issues to support, what to oppose, what to propose, and what candidates to support. Unlike the major parties in this country, we take no PAC money, so we are free of corporate pressure. Just a cursory reading of the struggles to pass health care reform on a national level shows that the impact of corporations, and corporate contributions, is tremendous and can stall any reform that suggests to these corporations that they will lose power and influence, along with profits.

Coinciding with the Green Party's statement on tax reform, former gubernatorial candidate Pat LaMarche published an editorial in the Bangor Daily News asking people to reconsider voting Green. All of these recent maneuvers seem to be part of a concerted effort to bring the Green Party to the forefront of state politics. Third parties in general have struggled to provide a viable alternative and combat the "spoiler effect" many voters feel third parties create. Is the Maine Green Party a viable alternative to Maine's Democratic candidates? Can we say that the Green Party is trying to out-progressive the progressives?

We are fighting the power structure in this state. Democrats who consider themselves good liberal environmentalists are forcing huge industrial developments on rural Maine communities. The Democratic-controlled legislature recently tried to pass numerous bills that would have stripped local communities of their authority to even approve, much less site, such projects. The Democratic-controlled legislature passed forced school consolidation in the dark of night without any public hearings throughout the state, and our rural communities are suffering financially from this ill-advised legislation.

Our goal is to present the Maine Green Independent Party as a viable alternative to the major parties – we are not left or right, but out front. Some of our ideas may sit well with conservatives, and some will sit well with liberals. We are developing an extensive grassroots network throughout the state and my campaign is focusing heavily on the rural communities. I have been working with these communities to fight back the power establishment in this state, which is heavily tied into the Democratic party. Most importantly, my campaign and our party stand for a philosophy that believes that people are more important than profit. That is what will eventually bring us to the forefront.

Lynne Williams, a resident of Bar Harbor, is running for the Maine Green Independent Party's nomination for Governor. Williams is also an attorney and serves on the Bar Harbor planning board.

Anna Trevorrow Interview

Let's start off with a little background information. Could you give us a some history of your association with the Maine Green Independent Party?

I have been registered as a Green Independent for as long as I have been eligible to vote. However, it has only been within the last three years that I became active in party leadership and infrastructure. The party’s ten key values are what drew me into the party originally. I am the kind of person that views just about everything as political. At the same time, in our time and place - with heightening environmental concerns, tyrannical practices of war and occupation, poor economic practices, the unsustainable nature of capitalism - I felt a need to do something to become part of the solution to these problems. The Green Party was the movement that I latched onto to fulfill that need.

One thing about the Green Party: once you show some commitment and willingness to work, it is not long before you find yourself running for office or serving in a decision-making capacity. It is a hands-on approach to learning politics. So in the three short years that I’ve been involved, I have run for School Committee in Portland unsuccessfully (2008), run successfully for Portland Charter Commission (now serving, 2009), served as a state party Steering Committee member, and currently serve as Chair of the state Steering Committee.

Recently the Maine Green Independent Party came out in opposition to House Speaker Hannah Pingree's bill that would add new requirements to receive Clean Election Fund money. Proponents of the bill have said it keeps the system from becoming a "system of losers" and that a candidate is not viable if they "can't raise $40,000". Statements from Lynne Williams and yourself have categorized the bill as unfair and paradoxical. Could you please address some of the comments made by the bill's supporters and those of the Green Party?

The argument that clean election funds should be reserved for “viable” candidates only, suggests that “viability” is determined by the ability to raise large sums of money. The concept behind clean elections funding has always been that candidates ought to compete based on their policy ideas and the values they represent. The new changes undermine that fundamental concept by mandating a monetary threshold for competitors. The arguments in favor of the new changes make no apologies for the fact that clean election funds are now reserved for an elite group. It is not just a hurtle for Green Party candidates, but for any candidate who is not the most institutionalized.

This week the Green Party join with Maine's GOP in opposing the current tax reform plan, LD 1495. The MGIP has labeled the bill less progressive and likened it to a flat tax, launching a "No Flat Tax for ME" campaign. Maine Democrats responded to the Green Party's move by saying, "Beginning in 2006 when John Eder’s reelection campaign accepted the help of Republican leader Josh Tardy, the Greens in Portland have moved closer to the Republican Party." In the Portland Press Herald, House Majority Leader John Potti was quoted as saying, "The fact that we’re getting hit on both the right and the left confirms it’s good middle-of-the-road policy." What is your opinion of the current tax reform plan? What do you make of the Democrats anger at the Green Party's opposition? Is the Green Party cozying up the Maine GOP, moving further left, or do the Dems just not have the Green Party pegged?

The Dems had to dig deep to find this skewed accusation, and even at that, came up false. Eder never “accepted” Republican help. In 2006 a PAC headed by Josh Tardy made independent expenditures that went to a mailing promoting John Eder’s reelection because they saw his as a swing-vote seat and would rather it go to a Green Independent than have to face a Democratic majority in the House. The PAC crafted the mailer by itself, without Eder’s knowledge.

I think the Dems do not have the Green Party pegged. We happen to be on the same side of this issue as the Republicans but for entirely different reasons. Understanding that it takes a long time for tax reform to pass, we believe that instituting a flat tax on income would be a dangerous move for Maine at this time. Flat taxes are by nature inequitable, and the Green Party believes that those most capable of paying back into the system ought to compensate to some degree for those less able. I think the Dems would likely agree with us that this bill is not perfect, but they would side with argument of implementing it now and fixing it later, while Greens would be hesitant to implement it not knowing when and in what ways it would be changed later.

Coinciding with the Green Party's statement on tax reform, former gubernatorial candidate Pat LaMarche published an editorial in the Bangor Daily News asking people to reconsider voting Green. All of these recent maneuvers seem to be part of a concerted effort to bring the Green Party to the forefront of state politics. Third parties in general have struggled to provide a viable alternative and combat the "spoiler effect" many voters feel third parties create. Is the Maine Green Party a viable alternative to Maine's Democratic candidates? Can we say that the Green Party is trying to out-progressive the progressives?

The stronghold of the Democratic Party in the state of Maine allows the Dems to safely move to the center when it comes to policy implementation. They are shrouded in the rhetoric of “progressive,” but the Green Party challenges them to walk the walk, so to speak. In the meantime, in the 25 years that the Green Party in Maine has operated as a political movement, despite many challenges, we have only grown in number. Our growing membership (now up to approx. 32,000) indicates that every year more and more voters become dissatisfied with the status quo, and become empowered to support the truly progressive Green candidates.

Anna Trevorrow is the chairman of the Maine Green Independent Party and member of Portland Charter Commission.

Maine Greens Ready to Rumble

(Cross-posted @Augusta Insider)

Over the past few months the Maine Green Independent Party has locked horns with the Democrats on many issues. The Maine Greens have opposed recent changes to the Maine Clean Election Fund requirements and joined with the Maine GOP in speaking out against the recent tax reforms. Though the Greens have been active in Maine for some time they haven't had anyone in Augusta since John Eder left in 2006. The Greens are working hard to prove they are a viable alternative to Maine's Democrats.

The Maine Clean Election Fund changes, sponsored by House Speaker Hannah Pingree, were altered to "to make the system more attractive for major-party candidates" according to Pingree. The changes, categorized as hard but fair by supporters, raised $5 contribution requirements from $2,500 to $3,250 and added a requirement of $40,000 in $100 donations. Proponents of the bill have said that the $40,000 requirement keeps significant taxpayer money only going to viable candidates.

"The argument that clean election funds should be reserved for “viable” candidates only, suggests that “viability” is determined by the ability to raise large sums of money," said Green Party Chair Anna Trevorrow. "The concept behind clean elections funding has always been that candidates ought to compete based on their policy ideas and the values they represent. The new changes undermine that fundamental concept by mandating a monetary threshold for competitors." Trevorrow went on to say that this is not just about the Green Party, but that the changes keep clean election funds from any candidate who is not most institutionalized.

In the Portland Phoenix, gubernatorial candidate Lynne Williams labeled the Clean Election Fund changes a "paradox, in that the Clean Election system exists to take money out of politics, but now requires fundraising." Williams went on to say that "The paradox comes from the fact that the goal of passing Clean Elections was to open up the opportunity to run for office to a broader spectrum of candidates than just those who are either independently wealthy – we still get those, as you can see from the currently declared candidates – or connected to special interests and individuals with money – and we get those too." There were also strong words from Lynne Williams for the bill's sponsor, Hannah Pingree.

Hannah Pingree herself admits that this “opening up” was not meant to include Greens and Independents when she “says the move was intended "to make the system more attractive for major-party candidates." ” The facts stated by the [Portland Phoenix] reporter, following this comment, are indicative of the hypocrisy of the Maine Democratic Party and their leadership – of the six gubernatorial contenders who have used Clean Election funding since the system was set up, three have been Republicans, one was an independent and two were Greens. No Democrats have used the system to run for governor.” Furthermore, it is the height of hypocrisy for Pingree to be testifying in Congress in favor of “clean elections,” when her own party does not even participate in the system at the statewide level.

Since Williams made her statement, Democrats Donna Dion and Libby Mitchell have both chosen to run as Clean Election candidates.

Representative Dianne Russel, who serves on both the Legal and Veteran's Affairs committees that helped create the Clean Election bill, stated the changes will actually strengthen third parties in Maine.

It is important to understand that we chose to change the ballot access requirements for the parties to ensure third (and someday maybe fourth) parties were still able to play a vital role in our democracy. I want to see them build the momentum they need to have an increasingly profound impact on our marketplace of ideas.

Representative Russel also sympathizes with those frustrated over the new requirements. " To be clear," said Russel, "I didn't want to change the system, but we were faced with legitimate budget concerns. If we did not make reasonable, fair changes to this system, the gubernatorial public financing system itself could have ended up in jeopardy."

Representative Russel believes that the changes to the system will make it more attractive to viable candidates, thereby helping to "[remove] money and its influence from politics and governing." Representative Russel also said a candidate's financing choices will "play an important role in who I do or do not endorse in the primary race."

Late last month the Greens joined the Republicans in opposing LD 1495, the tax reform bill. The Maine Greens argued that the bill was in fact less progressive than the current tax structure, hitting low-income Mainers in their already thin wallets. The Maine Greens have launched a campaign against the tax reform bill called "No Flat Tax for ME." Maine Democrats responded to the Green Party's move by saying, "Beginning in 2006 when John Eder’s reelection campaign accepted the help of Republican leader Josh Tardy, the Greens in Portland have moved closer to the Republican Party." In the Portland Press Herald, House Majority Leader John Piotti was quoted as saying, "The fact that we’re getting hit on both the right and the left confirms it’s good middle-of-the-road policy."

Anna Trevorrow said the Green Party opposes the tax reform because "flat taxes are by nature inequitable, and the Green Party believes that those most capable of paying back into the system ought to compensate to some degree for those less able." Lynne Williams felt the removal of an increase to the real estate transfer tax left her no choice but to oppose the tax reform bill. Trevorrow and Williams both disagree with comments made by Democrats after the Greens came out in opposition to the tax reform. "The Dems had to dig deep to find this skewed accusation, and even at that, came up false." said Trevorrow in reference to comments in a Maine Democrat press release. Trevorrow went on to say,

Eder never “accepted” Republican help. In 2006 a PAC headed by Josh Tardy made independent expenditures that went to a mailing promoting John Eder’s reelection because they saw his as a swing-vote seat and would rather it go to a Green Independent than have to face a Democratic majority in the House. The PAC crafted the mailer by itself, without Eder’s knowledge.

Forming a partnership toward a common goal is nothing new for the Green Party. The Maine Green Independent Party has worked with the Maine Heritage Policy Center to repeal school consolidation. "If my party and the Maine Republican Party agree on this issue, great," said Lynne Williams. "There will be many things coming up that we will disagree on. There is a reason that the word “Independent” is included in our name."

All of these high profile stances have pushed the Maine Greens to the front of political news. That's just what they want. Maine Greens are seeking to prove they are a viable alternative for voters. "We are not left or right, but out front," said Williams. They are reaching out through the grassroots to challenge the Democrats for their piece of the political pie. "I have been working with these communities to fight back the power establishment in this state, which is heavily tied into the Democratic party. Most importantly, my campaign and our party stand for a philosophy that believes that people are more important than profit. That is what will eventually bring us to the forefront." While the Democrats profess to be progressive, the Greens say they will be their conscience, challenging them to walk the walk or lose the votes.

Mills' campaign on social networking(UPDATE)

Young politicos tout the influence of new media in elections and politics in general. From the Augusta Insider's Gubernatorial Twitter Primary to Pine Tree Politics' piece on the "new media war" to my own critiques of candidates' websites, those of us in the net generation are excited to see how all these new tools will impact the game. The 2010 gubernatorial elections will be the first to feature YouTube, Facebook, and Twitter prominently. While many of us hope to see some bold things from politicians on social networking, it remains to be seen if they can truly win an election.

In a recent piece on Senator Mills' entrance into the gubernatorial field, I questioned the campaign's lack of social media presence. I stated that a candidate who missed out on a social networking experience could be making a serious misstep.

Senator Mills' campaign has responded with their views on social networking, how they are using it, and hints at things to come.

from Team Mills:

Many companies and candidates use the shotgun approach to internet marketing. Shoot everywhere and hopefully you'll hit something. Team Mills is aiming for a more targeted approach. Different community sites have different uses and different levels of effectiveness. As an example Peter has been on Myspace for years. He's made 117 connections there. It's not worth putting more time and effort into Myspace. Contrast that to Facebook where in a few weeks he's made over 1,300 connections, where one link on public pensions sparked interesting discussion, where we can see how his friends identify themselves politically, religiously and what they do for work. We have plans for tube sites, photo communities and other networks that I'm not going to divulge at this point in the race. We all know that the internet is very useful for organizing volunteers and raising money, especially on a national, even international level. The question is how to use the internet for a Republican primary in Maine, while also casting a wider net for the general election.

UPDATE: The Mills' campaign has also released a statement today concerning their website. Check out an excerpt below and the whole statement here.

"I have always believed campaigns should be about talking directly with voters. While I will continue to go door-to-door to meet with the people of Maine, I'm very excited about the possibilities of connecting with greater numbers of Mainers online."

The website includes a custom designed online donation system, the first in Maine to meet the Clean Elections guidelines. The Ethics Commission says Mills is way ahead of the curve. Currently, Mills is the only candidate not to outsource his online donations.

Instead Mills chose to support a Maine company, the Portland-based payment processor PowerPay. Mills first learned of PowerPay during a Tech Maine networking event where he gave a speech entitled "Technology is our Future." PowerPay recently purchased the old Portland Public Market where they intend to move their growing company - a perfect example of Maine's potential in the technology sector.

Libby Mitchell will challenge other Dems for Blaine House

Senate President Libby Mitchell filed yesterday to run for Governor. The South Carolina born, Vassalboro senator will join 5 other Democrats and 15 contenders overall. Senator Mitchell has released a statement on her run, which has been provided in full below.

Elizabeth (Libby) Mitchell, Maine Senate President, filed her declaration of intent today to run as a Maine Clean Elections candidate for Governor. Mitchell, the only woman in the country to have served as both Speaker of the House and President of the Senate, is an attorney and former teacher. She is a former Director of Maine State Housing Authority, a multi-million dollar agency providing loans to first time home buyers. She has served for many years on the board of Maine General Health Association. Mitchell has just completed nine years of service as a Vassalboro selectwoman.

Mitchell announced her decision after talking with voters around the state about their vision for the next Governor. While California and other states imploded in this national recession, Maine laid foundations for future prosperity. Maine lowered income tax rates. Maine invested in wind energy and biomedical research. Maine did this with bipartisan civility. The Wall Street Journal called this “The Maine Miracle.”

“I am proud of my leadership in these achievements. But we are not out of the woods yet. There are lots of tough choices ahead and I’ve shown that I am not afraid to make them as Senate President.

My first priority as Governor will be to create good jobs by building upon the strengths of our great schools, solid work ethic, abundant natural resources, and wonderful quality of life.”

“If I have the privilege of serving as Governor, Maine will lead in renewable energy production – both earning money by selling energy produced in Maine to other states, and saving money by reducing our dependence oil imports. Maine will lead in educating our workforce – helping our students get the skills they need at a price they can afford. Maine will lead in getting health costs under control, while providing access for all. Maine will lead in reinventing its farming and fishing and wood products industries to compete in the world economy. Maine will lead in creating high-quality tourism experiences.”

“This year I helped Maine gain a step on other states. We are better prepared than most to emerge from the recession quickly. Now I want to lead Maine’s economy in the recovery. My entire career has prepared me for the challenge.”

Mitchell is choosing to run as a Clean Elections candidate because she believes it is more important for her to spend time talking to Maine voters, rather than spending time in a back office dialing wealthy strangers and friends. “I’ll talk to the people. I’ll hear from the people. That’s how we’ll build a consensus on how to deal with the tough choices ahead.”

Mitchell is married to Jim Mitchell and they are the parents of four adult children, all living and working in Maine. They also have 6 grandchildren.

A little island causes a big stir

A new development project is coming to Sears Island. The little island off Searsport in Waldo County could be home to three hundred acres of industrial development if plans go through, with six hundred under protection. Governors have pushed for Sears Island, the largest undeveloped, uninhabited, causeway accessible island on the east coast, to be the home of many developments. Joseph Brennan and John McKernan advocated Sears Island be used as a general port. Angus King promoted its use as a wood chip port, while Governor Baldacci pushed for an LNG terminal and an intermodal freight transport hub on the island.

Seasport Town Manager James Gillway says that allowing industry to move into part of Sears Island would boost the economy. "Right now with the economic times as they are, it's very important that we find anything that will help the town to succeed," Gillway said in a WCSH 6 interview. The Penobscot Bay Watch disagrees. The Penobscot Bay Watch has begun fundraising to help those who have filed lawsuits against the development plans. PBW Executive Director Ron Huber said recently, "We don't believe you can have an island of this size half industrialized and half natural and somehow be able to pretend that you haven't harmed the nature of the whole island."

The Maine Independent Green Party has also stepped up to oppose the Sears Island Plan. “We had doubts about the ecological foundation of the process of mitigation banking. Now that the EPA has urged rejection of the plan, we are convinced that those doubts were correct. We are therefore urging the Army Corps of Engineers to reject the plan,” stated Anna Trevorrow, State Chair of the Maine Green Independent Party. Green gubernatorial candidate Lynne Williams also commented on Sears Island saying, “While mitigation banking may result in restored wetlands somewhere else in the state, it still results in the destruction, and eventual loss, of habitats in the development area. One cannot just move marine wildlife to another location, and they will therefore be scattered and eventually die off."

According to Trevorrow, the Green Party's opposition to the Sears Island Plan should not come as a surprise to anyone. "Given that one of the Party’s Ten Key Values is “Ecological Wisdom” it is our responsibility to work to defeat this plan," stated Treverrow.

Is economic growth in Maine a catch-22?

You don't have to look hard to find indicators Maine's economy isn't the best. The economy is not likely to improve before our next governor takes office either. Jobs, jobs, jobs is bound to the mantra for many candidates. Pine Tree Politics has examined Maine's current economy. Comparing Maine to Virginia, PTP talks about how Maine's next governor can make the state more business friendly.

from Pine Tree Politics:

Yes, Maine is not and never will be (nor should it) Virginia - you won’t find subways or built up metropolitan areas in Maine, and that is actually a good thing. But most of what states are ranked on happens to be fair to compare across boundaries - things like taxes, education of the workforce, economic health, technological penetration, regulation, venture capital, etc. In these areas, places like Virginia beat the pants off places like Maine, and as a resident I can see why, and how.

I do not envy whoever occupies the Blaine House next. They have a mountain to conquer when it comes to Maine's economy. Here's my view of Maine's economy. Someone gives you box of parts and says, “Well there’s parts to a couple B-17s, a Cessna, and I think there’s an old DC-10 in there too. Now make me a BMW...And you can’t look at any pictures or diagrams…And you can only use this Philips-head screwdriver.” My assessment is probably too harsh. I’m no economist, but as a layperson that's how creating economic growth in Maine looks. It isn't impossible, but damn, it isn't easy.

Maine’s economy still functions, for the most part, on a dwindling manufacturing and farming basis, with a healthy chunk fed by tourism as well. Tourism is a fickle industry. Bad weather, the economic conditions of other areas, and other factors make tourism an unreliable economic sector. Yes, Maine is a great tourist destination and tourism is an integral piece to the economy, I wont deny that. But it wont keep Maine’s college grads in-state or get those from other states to move in.

Manufacturing has been fading in this nation for a long time now. Many northern states, including northern New Hampshire, Northern Vermont, Upstate New York, and the Midwest car country, have felt the sting of cheap labor and production costs overseas. Why pay an American work $40,000 a year, plus benefits, pensions, etc. when a Chinese or Mexican laborer will work for next to nothing without extras. Not to mention the Chinese will clear cut just about any wood, making their wood products far cheaper than what we produce here in Maine. Yet Maine is still stuck on a manufacturing economy and our workforce largely reflects that.

Now, lowering the tax burden are reworking regulations key to attracting more businesses and diversifying the economy. With many other states already doing this, it is essential that Maine follow suit(guess we forgot about “DIRIGO” on that front). Personally, the method you mentioned that I find most important is education. An investment in education provide two economic benefits. First, it shows business that a state is willing and able to train a quality workforce with diverse skills and equips Maine students to fill those jobs, helping to prevent more devastating brain drain. Second, how a state invests in education, ie. charter schools or creative use of technology, entice the 21st century businesses that Maine so desperately needs. It is not enough to just throw more money into education, businesses want to see efficient spending, and so should Mainers.

Not to mention improving connections between K-12 and our community college and university systems. The seeds of Maine’s economic improvement can be sown with an innovative, progressive(by which I don’t leftist), and 21st century education. Just my two cents. Did I mention I'm no economist?