We’ve called on Maine’s elected leaders many times to work together and compromise. So we would like to point out recent examples of people respecting each other despite their different political views. Overcoming partisanship isn’t just a nicety; it can lead to specific plans for change.
Experiencing a recount after months of campaigning is certainly stressful, but last week Democrat Wayne Werts and Republican Bruce Bickford, both of Auburn, sat together and chatted while officials recounted ballots for nearly five hours.
The two men have known each other more than 20 years and will remain friends, they said, even though Werts beat incumbent Bickford by five votes for the seat to represent Lewiston and Auburn’s Maine House District 70.
“I plan to support him 100 percent,” Bickford said of Werts. During the recount, they joked about the closeness of the race and both emphasized their similarities and moderate viewpoints.
Werts said the closeness of the race only solidifies his moderate stance. “People are tired of the ledge sitting. They want something done, and that means crossing the aisle, that means compromise, that means negotiating and getting something done for the citizens of Maine,” he said.
Clearly the former fire chief’s actions will reveal the truth of his words, but we’re glad to see him starting off right and expressing openness to opposing viewpoints.
In a separate example, two former political rivals are working together to seek ways to reduce the deficit. Former Gov. John Baldacci, a Democrat, and former state Senate President Rick Bennett, a Republican, joined the Campaign to Fix the Debt. The group is working to find ways to address the country’s $16 trillion debt and prevent the “fiscal cliff” at the end of the year.
The campaign plans to host town hall meetings across Maine to raise awareness and listen to residents’ concerns about the national debt. Bennett, who unsuccessfully ran against Baldacci for Congress in 1994, stressed that the debt is a problem for elected officials of all parties.
“This is a national problem. It’s not a Republican problem, it’s not a Democratic problem. It’s been contributed to by everybody in office. It needs to be solved by everybody in office,” he said.
We stress the need for bipartisanship now, as a Republican-controlled U.S. House and Democratic-controlled U.S. Senate seek to avoid the man-made fiscal cliff at the end of the year, which is when temporary Bush-era tax cuts are scheduled to expire, and automatic spending cuts are set to take effect.
Werts and Bickford, and Bennett and Baldacci, are small but important examples that bipartisanship happens.
Since World War II, voters have elected a split government two-thirds of the time. For a variety of reasons, the political system on a macro level tends to continually balance itself. Disagreements are a healthy and necessary part of that balancing act. It’s the struggle against an opponent where moderation and consensus are achieved.
Respect sometimes, perhaps often, relies on precedents, history, established practices that have been tested and proven. The “respect” shown climate scientists and the work they have been engaged in for 40 – 50 years has been a hinderence to implementing sound policy around such common sense frugality as energy conservation, weatherization, investing in renewable alternative energy sources. Discussion has been deliberately short circuited by Multi-million dollar disinformation campaigns or by other prejudices. Another case in point might be Marco Rubio refusing to answer the question of how old the earth is. For the vast majority of college educated individuals and most school children that is not a controversial question. For a politician having to pander to religious prejudices, discussion becomes impossible if the basic facts of geology, biology, evolution, archeology are off the table. I can respect another’s religious beliefs, but not when they veer off into the unbelievable. That is no way to formulate public policy. Roe v Wade provides a good lesson in humility on a deeply controversial subject that involves science, religion, and morality. The majority justices concluded that it would be presumptuous of them to decide an issue that neither theologians, academics, medical practitioners, judges, scholars or philosophers have been unable to find consensus on.
Ah yes the global warming alarmists. Let me know when global warming becomes a serious enough issue that we need to develop the only currently available power source that is cheap, reliable, and robust enough to actually supply our energy needs…hydropower. Until then your blathering about climate change is nothing more than a cover for making power more expensive and depopulating Maine.
Guess you haven’t been paying close enough attention, old man. A buddy of mine put a wind turbine up in his backyard a couple of years ago. During Hurricane Sandy it generated in those couple of days 20% of his months electricity needs. The photovoltaics on the roof of the building we built to house his business has been producing, consistently, a similar offset. There will come a time when all of that energy will be absolutely free. And when the cost of the technology comes down, as it could sooner rather than later, the free energy comes quicker. Climate change aside, even you, fiscal conservative that you might be, might come to believe this sounds like a common sense way to use less oil and coal. Maybe. But with 97% of climate scientists in agreement CC is real, happening, and human caused, with the World Bank making dire predictions, with insurance companies and their actuarial tables taking the financial threat of extreme weather events seriously, with most other major advanced economies investing in alternative energy technologies… with a Luddite attitude of “who cares” here in the US we’ll miss being a leader in those markets, letting others dominate us. Germany and China already are way ahead. The US continues to navel gaze…
I can’t speak for what is happening in Germany… but China is not ahead. Much of what they produce for “green tech” is for export to western markets. Meanwhile they put up on average 2-3 electrical generating plants per week many, if not most, burn coal.
I was talking about the export market. I was in China in 2001 on a river trip down the Yangtze, before it was flooded. LOTS of coal boats and coal along the river bank in towns. The air in Chongching, where we boarded the boat, was yellow with smog. Took several hours of travel downstream to get away from it, and then you’d come to some other town that burned a lot of coal.
One of the first things that needs to be done is offer protection to those politicians who were foolish enough to sign Grover Norquists pledge. Protection in the form of resistence to out of state money that seems to flow through Norquist. The same thing goes in the other direction. If there are extreme left wingers, a hand must be offered to bring them more toward the center where at least compromise can be negotiated.
Sorry, but there are some areas where I don’t want my legislator to compromise. Compromise gave us the Patriot act, NAFTA, The war in Iraq, and the escalation in Afghanistan.
Despite the contention that compromise is unattainable, the facts prove otherwise. The parties are perfectly able to compromise if it means war, pay-offs to their K Street buddies, or some scheme to screw the working man. I want my people in the Maine State House and in Congress to stand their ground on the principles on which they campaigned. Anything less is hypocracy.
Democracy gave us the Patriot Act, NAFTA, the war in Iraq, and the escalation in Afghanistan. Should we do away with that, too?
Disinformation and fearmongering gave us all of those things… And there was plenty of information available on all of this that was left “off the table.”
Some of that is fair. Afterall, they all had bipartisan support, and I don’t think many held their noses while doing it.
“Democracy” gave us none of the above. We are a represenative republic. In a true democract we would have had none of the issues I mentioned, as the majority at the tim,e was not supportive.
Oh…who knew. But given the effect commercial political advertising in current elections, I shudder to think what how it could affect a true democracy.
Direct, popular election of Senators and a number of other developments are allowing us to evolve from the original democratic republic.
With the worst divider in the history of Maine politics residing in the Blaine House, I wouldn’t hold my breath waiting for compromise.
He just may be the catalyst needed for both sides to work together for a compromise. After two years and very little to show for it, even people in his own party are jumping Gov. LePage’s ship. The people of Maine are saying they want reasonable debate and compromise from both sides of the aisle. It makes it a bit more comfortable for a Republican to “cross over” without appearing to have abandoned the GOP with those factors taken into consideration.
Wouldn’t that be the height of irony? lol. Everybody gets together and works out a solution while Poor Paul stomps his feet, holds his breath, and waits for orders from the Koch brothers.
That is exactly what I’m hoping to see! Of course, the Gov will let it be known that it was his idea the whole time :)
I wonder how many people know that the very first thing Scott Walker did when he took office as governor of Wisconsin was to hang up a sign that said Wisconsin was “Open For Business”? Now that is quite a coincidence. How could they have both come up with the same idea at the same exact time?
Well of course you know that was no coincidence at all. Neither is the lockstep in which several governors are marching when they openly deny they will set up insurance exchanges provided for in the ACA, letting the feds do it… I think they believe there is a principal involved.
Respect? Moderation? Compromise? Fairness?
Not as long as I’m breathing air.
Not quite sure what you’re trying to say here.
Here’s today’s article regarding what the Republican’s must do. They have no intention of allowing their membership to represent anyone other than the party.
“In my background as a senior officer on a ship, I recognize that there are times when you must question the orders being given by those above you, but during a battle or emergency it is not the time to do it. In such times, everyone must pull in the same direction, and to fail to do so betrays that one is more concerned with scoring political points than actually accomplishing real victories that will benefit all of America.”
Well, when a box of bs is all wrapped up in a fancy wrapper with a bow on top… sure, I’ll buy one… it’s still bs… But I take your point.
I hope you are not representing anyone. Try smelling the box first. As I understand our system that is the job for which lawmakers get paid… very well.
They are paid quite well do it that…but they are better paid by the people who want to put feces in boxes.
For sure…
Representing just myself. Poorly, often… I’ve appreciated some of your comments on this topic, btw.
Political “moderation” and bipartisanship are two different things.