Attn: Mainers! Question #1 Coming Up Soon
Here is a copy of an OpEd piece written by House Rep. Robert Foley in The Journal Tribune in regards to Question #1 coming up on the ballot November 3rd in Maine. It's basically about Maine's election laws and the funding thereof. Very informative. Thanks House Rep. Karen Gerrish for providing the link to the piece below!
"On Nov. 3, Maine voters, and taxpayers, will have several questions on the ballot that will affect how much more Maine’s taxpayers will have to shell out in the future. Two questions put forward by the Maine Legislature deal with bonding for specific projects, $85 million for transportation projects and $15 million for housing for low income seniors, totaling $100 million dollars. Question 1, put forward by a citizen’s petition, seeks to change Maine’s Election laws. While I am familiar with the bonding questions, I needed to study Question 1 more carefully and its impact on Maine taxpayers and our electoral process."
"Question 1 seeks to change Maine’s Election laws in three ways. First, it seeks to increase the amount “taxpayer-funded” candidates can receive from Maine’s taxpayers. Currently a “taxpayerfunded” candidate for the Maine House of Representatives receives approximately $5,000 while Senate candidates receive approximately $25,000, certainly enough to run a rigorous campaign here in Maine, as many of these candidates return unspent state dollars."
"Question 1 seeks to increase these amounts up to $17,500 for House and $65,000 for Senate candidates. This represents about a 300 percent increase. The proposal also raises the “taxpayer-funded” candidate for governor up to as much as $3 million dollars. When added up, this proposal could cost Maine taxpayers over $10 million of additional money per election cycle. In light of the tight budgets now facing the state, more taxpayer dollars for political candidates versus senior citizens and nursing homes doesn’t seem like a good choice to me."
"One of the stated goals of those supporting Question 1 is to get money out of politics. I don’t believe raising the amount of taxpayer contributions to candidates by 300 percent accomplishes that goal. If anything, there will be more flyers in your mailbox, more robo-calls to your home, more lawn signs along the roadway and more opportunity for misuse and abuse. Many of the reported penalties and fines issued by the Maine Ethics Commission in recent years have been for the mis-reporting and/or misuse of these taxpayer funds."
"The question also seeks to improve the disclosure of those who are paying for political ads, claiming that too much out-ofstate money is pouring into Maine elections. While this seems like a worthy goal, I started to research who was actually paying for the campaign in support of Question 1. While it wasn’t easy, I finally was able to find that the two major supporters, “Maine Citizens for Clean Elections BQC” and “Mainers for Accountable Elections,” are listed as the sponsors of their ads."
"Further research into their finances disclosed that they are financially supported by many out-of-state organizations and wealthy individuals like the George Soros Foundation from New York, the Proteus/Piper Fund from Amherst, Massachusetts, ($350,000), Sean Eldridge of Shokan, New York ($200,000), Every Voice from Washington, D.C. ($125,000), Common Cause, Washington, D.C. and the list goes on. Over $1.3 million has been raised so far with 80 percent from out-of-state groups in support of changing Maine’s Clean Election laws. The bill also calls for naming the top three donors contributing to a campaign but you won’t find any of these names on their ads. Who’s fooling who?"
"The third issue that this question attempts to address is an increase in penalties for those who violate Maine’s election laws. Again, while this seems noble enough, Maine’s Ethics Commission, which is statutorily in charge of Maine’s election procedures, has already proposed two of these changes to Maine’s election laws; the full disclosure of who is paying for political ads and an increase in the penalties against those who violate our laws. Two of the changes that Question 1’s 16-page statutory language provides are already being proposed by “our” Ethics Commission. Seems to me that Maine’s Ethics Commission is the organization who ought to be in charge of managing and changing our election laws, not these out-of-state groups whose interests in Maine election laws are unknown and undisclosed."
"I urge every Maine voter and taxpayer to study the questions on this November’s ballot carefully and make an informed decision. I am glad I took a harder look at Question 1 myself."
— State Rep. Robert “Bob” Foley, R-Wells, represents House District 7, which includes part of Wells.
"On Nov. 3, Maine voters, and taxpayers, will have several questions on the ballot that will affect how much more Maine’s taxpayers will have to shell out in the future. Two questions put forward by the Maine Legislature deal with bonding for specific projects, $85 million for transportation projects and $15 million for housing for low income seniors, totaling $100 million dollars. Question 1, put forward by a citizen’s petition, seeks to change Maine’s Election laws. While I am familiar with the bonding questions, I needed to study Question 1 more carefully and its impact on Maine taxpayers and our electoral process."
"Question 1 seeks to change Maine’s Election laws in three ways. First, it seeks to increase the amount “taxpayer-funded” candidates can receive from Maine’s taxpayers. Currently a “taxpayerfunded” candidate for the Maine House of Representatives receives approximately $5,000 while Senate candidates receive approximately $25,000, certainly enough to run a rigorous campaign here in Maine, as many of these candidates return unspent state dollars."
"Question 1 seeks to increase these amounts up to $17,500 for House and $65,000 for Senate candidates. This represents about a 300 percent increase. The proposal also raises the “taxpayer-funded” candidate for governor up to as much as $3 million dollars. When added up, this proposal could cost Maine taxpayers over $10 million of additional money per election cycle. In light of the tight budgets now facing the state, more taxpayer dollars for political candidates versus senior citizens and nursing homes doesn’t seem like a good choice to me."
"One of the stated goals of those supporting Question 1 is to get money out of politics. I don’t believe raising the amount of taxpayer contributions to candidates by 300 percent accomplishes that goal. If anything, there will be more flyers in your mailbox, more robo-calls to your home, more lawn signs along the roadway and more opportunity for misuse and abuse. Many of the reported penalties and fines issued by the Maine Ethics Commission in recent years have been for the mis-reporting and/or misuse of these taxpayer funds."
"The question also seeks to improve the disclosure of those who are paying for political ads, claiming that too much out-ofstate money is pouring into Maine elections. While this seems like a worthy goal, I started to research who was actually paying for the campaign in support of Question 1. While it wasn’t easy, I finally was able to find that the two major supporters, “Maine Citizens for Clean Elections BQC” and “Mainers for Accountable Elections,” are listed as the sponsors of their ads."
"Further research into their finances disclosed that they are financially supported by many out-of-state organizations and wealthy individuals like the George Soros Foundation from New York, the Proteus/Piper Fund from Amherst, Massachusetts, ($350,000), Sean Eldridge of Shokan, New York ($200,000), Every Voice from Washington, D.C. ($125,000), Common Cause, Washington, D.C. and the list goes on. Over $1.3 million has been raised so far with 80 percent from out-of-state groups in support of changing Maine’s Clean Election laws. The bill also calls for naming the top three donors contributing to a campaign but you won’t find any of these names on their ads. Who’s fooling who?"
"The third issue that this question attempts to address is an increase in penalties for those who violate Maine’s election laws. Again, while this seems noble enough, Maine’s Ethics Commission, which is statutorily in charge of Maine’s election procedures, has already proposed two of these changes to Maine’s election laws; the full disclosure of who is paying for political ads and an increase in the penalties against those who violate our laws. Two of the changes that Question 1’s 16-page statutory language provides are already being proposed by “our” Ethics Commission. Seems to me that Maine’s Ethics Commission is the organization who ought to be in charge of managing and changing our election laws, not these out-of-state groups whose interests in Maine election laws are unknown and undisclosed."
"I urge every Maine voter and taxpayer to study the questions on this November’s ballot carefully and make an informed decision. I am glad I took a harder look at Question 1 myself."
— State Rep. Robert “Bob” Foley, R-Wells, represents House District 7, which includes part of Wells.
posted by Candle in the Wind at
4:27 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home