OBSERVATIONS FROM AUGUSTA

Legislative Blog # 1

I moved to Augusta for this Maine legislative session to pay more attention to issues I care about, to be close enough to testify frequently, and blog about my observations at least once a week. Full disclosure: I am a registered Democrat, a fiscal conservative, a liberal for social justice, a capitalist on micro-economics, and a socialist on macro-economics. I am sure I hold various other values I can’t think of at the moment that might mean I ought to register as a political independent. But “habit is habit and not to be thrown out the window but coaxed down the stairs one step at a time” (Mark Twain, I think). Besides, this life is so full of complications and challenges that I must fly by the seat of my pants with all my ideals. Hopefully, you will discover along with me and along the way what I mean by this introduction to my current project(s).

I moved in here Monday, New Year’s Day 2018, an appropriate day to begin one more time to change my life. At least for the next several months. Here is a room in a house with 5 other tenants and common kitchen, dining room, and living room with a TV which I vowed not to watch while here, and already failed at that by watching PBS News Hour every night. So preoccupied since Monday with setting up computer equipment and settling in (which involved way too many hours of finding my way and shopping for things I forgot or that don’t work, like my GPS car charger)  I missed an important public hearing yesterday on a bill attempting to prevent the gathering of petition signatures  at the polls. 

So now, to the meat of observed political matters for this week: 2 issues related to the influence of money in politics.

On Wednesday, January 3^rd a public hearing was held on the effort to restrict the right of voters to petition the government. I did not hear about this hearing until after 1:00 PM, the time it was supposed to start. It seems many if not most of our state legislators, both Democrats and Republicans as well as our Secretary of State are bothered and frustrated by the referendum process that includes the gathering of signatures at the polls to get a referendum on the ballot. SOS Matt Dunlap has proposed a bill LD 1726  that includes a provision to ban signature gathering at the polls. He says the ban is not intended to restrict voter rights, but, he says “Sometimes signature gatherers are very, very aggressive [. . .] They take things right to the very edge and it causes issues [. . . .] this is a response to complaints we get from townclerks and voters themselves who complain to the heavens.” 

Anna Kelly from the League of Women Voters of Maine says eliminating the ability to gather signatures at the polls would “give an advantage to groups that have a lot of money [ . . . ] funded usually from big donors out of state,” 

A brief anecdote to further illustrate how this issue relates to money in politics: I have gathered signatures for referendum petitions at the polls, most recently for Ranked Choice Voting in the November election. I sat beside one other signature gatherer for a different cause who was being paid $180 for the day to gather 300 signatures. In a 12-hour day, he gathered something over 250 signatures by the time I left. I do not know what was to happen if he didn’t complete his goal. Perhaps he would have to gather the remaining signatures elsewhere to get paid. I hear about some gatherers being paid as much as $25.00 per signature for a well-financed campaign. At 300 signatures that gatherer would earn $750. In contrast, the gatherer paid $180 per day would have only earned a bit less than $1.66 per signature for the same number of signatures. At the polls both gatherers would have equal access to voters. Being denied that access, which gatherer do you think will have the best success in gathering signatures?

I do not and will not get paid for gathering signatures. I oppose getting paid for gathering signatures, for causes I support as well as for those I oppose. I do not fault paid signature gatherers. Knowing how onerous the job is, I believe it to be worth $25 per signature, but I do fault the gross wage inequality. I do fault the  elected officials who pay attention to donors more than voters when they legislate. I do fault the power of money.

I might have more sympathy with the complainers at the polls and with Dunlap’s bill if it were not for the consequences of allowing the power of money to control our Democracy. Restricting the will of the voters may not be intended, but restriction will be the conseqence. The increasing influence of money in politics is a major cause of the increasing disconnect between elected officials and the voters they represent.

Instead of restricting voters’ access to each other and to their government, we should look harder for a solution that eliminates the power of money in politics, the root cause of so many of our problems.

Next week, I hope to have more news of a proposal to give another multi-million dollar corporate subsidy to General Dynamics (owner of Bath Iron Works). According to Bruce Gagnon from Global Network, the bill sponsored by Rep. Jennifer DeChant (Dem-Bath) and Sen. Eloise Vitelli (Dem-Arrowsic) “to give GD $60 million over the next 20 years is still not written.  It appears DeChant continues to work with GD’s lawyers and lobbyists to complete the bill for Taxation Committee hearings that would be on January 22.”   

To be continued.