As your state legislature is now really getting into the thick of this session’s business, I wanted to provide a report on a few selected bills which represent some honestly divided opinions among legislators.
In each case, I’ve tried to fairly outline the arguments pro and con and then to report on my own vote and the bill status.
As always, I welcome your replies and comments. Please let me continue to hear your concerns.
Superintendent residency requirements
LD 6 An Act To Prohibit a Requirement That a Superintendent Reside in the School Administrative Unit seeks to allow local school boards to waive municipal requirements that school superintendents reside within a municipality.
- Proponents: As the hiring pool for new superintendents becomes increasingly competitive between districts, residency requirements where they remain are impediments to good candidates. Allowing locally elected school boards to waive this requirement and hire who they deem best represents reasonable compromise reflecting current need.
- Opponents: Municipal charters represent home rule. State shouldn’t be creating ways to circumvent charters.
I voted in favor of this bill. It passed both legislative bodies but the Governor vetoed. Override votes have not yet been taken in either body.
Making good on the state’s obligation to mental health care.>/b>
LD 87: An Act To Improve Community Mental Health Treatment requires the state to provide rehabilitation services and interim housing for individuals with chronic mental illness.
- Proponents: This is legally required of the state by consent decree. Even if not required, lack of treatment will incur greater state expense in the future. Morally, it’s the right thing to do.
- Opponents: State cannot afford $5.6 million expense.
I voted in favor of this bill. The bill is pending enactment in the Senate.
LD 105: An Act To Allow Motor Fuel Containing Five Percent Ethanol To Be Sold in the State
allows selling gasoline containing only 5% ethanol
- Proponents: Provides and option which would be helpful for those with small engines who have had trouble with high ethanol gas, could increase mileage
- Opponents: Ethanol is only viable option to meet federal requirements for renewable fuel. Nothing in state law prohibits the sale of 5% ethanol. Law is unnecessary.
I voted in opposition to this bill. But a majority in the House voted in favor. The bill is currently in non-concurrence between House and Senate.
LD 115: An Act To Join in a Prohibition on Motor Fuel Containing Corn-based Ethanol prohibits the sale of ethanol.
- Proponents: Ethanol is bad for small engines. Ethanol is not a good source of renewable energy. Ethanol results in lower gas mileage.
- Opponents: Ethanol remains only viable renewable fuel. Current federal requirements can’t be met in Maine without ethanol. No cost-effective biofuel alternatives exist yet.
I voted in opposition to this bill but the bill received a majority of support in the House. It is currently pending in the Senate.
Reducing size of state legislature:
LD 134: RESOLUTION, Proposing an Amendment to the Constitution of Maine To Reduce the Size of the Legislature seeks to reduce the number of legislators in the House from 151 to 101 and in the Senate from 35 to 25.
- Proponents: New technology could make governmental representation more efficient. Would save money. Many states with similar populations have smaller legislatures.
- Opponents: Close representation and personal access to government is distinctive to Maine. Present number of legislators allows efficient division of effort and thoughtful in-depth committee work. Cost of legislature is less than 1% of state budget.
I voted in opposition to this resolution. The bill died between the House and Senate.
LD 209: An Act To Strengthen the Rights of Grandparents under the Grandparents Visitation Act seeks to extend Grandparents’ rights to see their grandchildren over parental objection to grandparents who qualify under an expanded definition of “sufficient existing relationship.”
- Proponents: “Sufficient existing relationship” is inadequately defined in statute. Modern families are complex with grandparents filling in more as surrogate parents in cases such as parental incarceration, disability, and illness.
- Opponents: Expanded definition of sufficient existing relationship likely to infringe on constitutional case law. Grandparents who have de facto parental relationship already currently allowed to intervene. This would tread on parents’ rights to protect against manipulative or abusive relationships.
I voted in opposition to the bill. The bill died in both the House and Senate.
LD 272: An Act To Reduce Youth Cancer Risk prohibits tanning business to sell their services to those under 18.
- Proponents: New medical evidence clearly shows that artificial tanning greatly increases the incidence of melanoma in teens.
- Opponents: Bill oversteps state authority over individuals and families.
I voted in favor of this bill. The bill was enacted in both bodies but vetoed by the Governor. Neither body overrode the veto.
Growing food in the Capitol Park
LD 474: An Act to Require Edible Landscaping in a Portion of Capitol Park directs the Park Commission, subject to adequate funding, to arrange for and implement a plan to incorporate food-producing landscaping into a portion of Capitol Park as consistent with the Olmstead plan in 1920.
- Proponents: raises awareness of local food and inspires public to plant own gardens, reduces park maintenance, conforms to original park design.
- Opponents: even nominal expenditure of public funds is inappropriate.
I voted in favor of the bill. The bill passed both bodies and awaits the Governor’s signature.
Expanding placement of commercial signs
LD 483: An Act To Promote Small Businesses by Enhancing the Use of On-premises Signs increases the height and distance that commercial signs can be from businesses and allows them closer to public ways. Allows more signs for each business and eliminates some restrictions on changeable lighted displays.
- Proponents: More signs are good for business. Current restrictions are inappropriate.
- Opponents: Maine’s long-standing sign law is appropriate and protects Maine’s brand. More signs could be distracting.
I voted in opposition to this bill. The bill died in both bodies.
Health care for young adults leaving foster care
LD 487: Resolve, To Establish MaineCare Eligibility for Young Adults Who Were Formerly in Foster Care directs the state to identify and reach out to enroll eligible 19- to 25-year-olds formerly in foster care into the MaineCare program.
- Proponents: this allows health care coverage to young adults who otherwise lack means for coverage under the extended family plan provisions of the Affordable Care Act.
- Opponents: State can not afford any expansion of MaineCare to a population that should be generally healthy.
I voted in favor of this bill. The bill is pending enactment in both bodies.
LD 611: An Act To Adjust Maine’s Minimum Wage Annually Based on Cost-of-living Changes
seeks incrementally to increase Maine’s minimum wage to $9.00 and indexes it after that to the chained cost of living.
- Proponents hold that putting more money in the pockets of the working poor benefits local business.
- Opponents argue that raising the minimum wage will hamper the number of entry level opportunities that businesses can offer.
I voted in favor of the minimum wage increase. It passed the House and is pending in the Senate on the Appropriations table.
Drugs for the elderly
LD 629: An Act To Restore Eligibility and Funding for Drug Programs for the Elderly and Disabled seeks to restore the recently reduced eligibility to the Medicare savings program for the elderly.
- Proponents: This is a vital program that helps seniors afford the cost of medicines without which they would be far sicker and dependent upon more expensive state nursing care.
- Opponents: State can’t afford to restore this benefit of nearly $3 million.
I voted in support of this bill. The bill is still pending enactment in the Senate.
Minimum obligation for local funding of schools
LD 667: An Act To Increase Funding to Schools seeks to phase out the proportional share reduction granted to school districts and their local taxpayers to meet the full funding of their schools when the state is unable fully to fund its share.
- Proponents: Current law exacerbates chronic structural underfunding of public education, unfairly allows some districts to maintain lower levels of school support than others.
- Opponents: hypocritical for state to mandate minimum local share when unable to meet own obligation. Tax base is tapped out.
I voted in favor of the phase-out of this reduction. The bill is currently in the Senate.
Right to work (for less)
LD 786: An Act To Ensure the Voluntary Membership of Public Employees in Unions and LD 831 An Act To Prohibit Mandatory Membership in a Union or Payment of Agency Fees as a Condition of Employment sought to eliminate the requirement that workers paid under collectively bargained agreements support the costs of collective bargaining.
- Proponents: Requirement coerces support of union operations. Inappropriate for state to serve a collection agent for these costs. Bargained contracts put businesses at competitive disadvantage.
- Opponents: federal law requires unions to represent all workers governed by collectively-bargained agreements, only fair that all who benefit should share in costs of representation. Other union expenses are wholly voluntary. Bargaining is engaged by mutual agreement of workers and businesses.
I voted in opposition to LD 786 and to LD 831. The bills both died in both bodies.
LD 835: An Act to Improve Organ Donation Awareness: requires a $2 donation checkoff on drivers’ license applications to fund the Maine organ donation fund.
- Proponents: 117,000 individuals are on organ transplant waiting lists, 18 people on this list die each day for lack of a transplant. Check-off is voluntary.
- Opponents: Oppose state administration and spending. philosophically opposed to transplants.
I voted in favor of this bill. The bill is pending further action in both bodies.
Holiday retail sales
LD 1197: An Act to Allow Stores under 10,000 Square Feet To Be Open On Certain Holidays
…allows stores having under 10,000 square feet of interior customer selling space to be open on Easter, Thanksgiving, and Christmas
- Proponents: oppose any commercial restriction.
- Opponents: retailers split on bill, 85% do not want to open on Christmas but would feel pressured if allowed. No evidence that opening holidays increases overall sales volumes, just spreads same volume over more days. Holidays should be family time for workers.
I voted to accept the Committee’s Ought Not To Pass report. The bill did not pass in either the House or Senate.