AUGUSTA, Maine — The Maine House on Thursday overwhelmingly rejected a bill that sought to exempt any “working papers” created by the governor or his inner staff from Maine’s Freedom of Access Act.
The 47-98 vote to reject LD 1805 was a bit of a surprise because the bill was approved last month by a majority of the Judiciary Committee. The bill now goes to the Senate.
LD 1805 was drafted by the governor’s office in response to a flood of broad FOAA requests last year but also in part to afford the governor the same exemption lawmakers enjoy.
Under Maine statute, official records of the Legislature itself are subject to the Freedom of Access Act. However, all legislative papers and reports, working papers, drafts, internal memoranda and similar works in progress are not public until signed and publicly distributed in accordance with rules of the Legislature.
LD 1805 would have applied that similar statute to the governor’s working papers, which include reports, drafts, internal memoranda and similar material that is used to draft legislation.
The bill was debated at length on the House floor on Thursday and received support and opposition from both Republicans and Democrats.
Rep. Joan Nass, R-Acton, said the bill seemed like a reasonable exemption. Rep. Charlie Priest, D-Brunswick, the lone Democrat on the Judiciary Committee who supported the bill, said it’s no different than the exemption currently enjoyed by members of the Legislature.
Priest addressed concerns that the bill was written too broadly and pointed to an amendment that would have allowed the exemption to expire automatically at the end of 2013.
“Then, we’ll have plenty of time to look at it,” he said.
Others were strongly opposed.
Rep. Lance Harvell, R-Farmington, called it “A bill only Richard Nixon would allow and I urge you to vote ‘No.’”
Rep. Maeghan Maloney, D-Augusta, said she doesn’t know why Gov. LePage needs an exemption when no other governor has asked for it. She also disagreed with Priest that LD 1805 gives the governor the same exemption lawmakers have.
“It’s not the same. We don’t have the power of the chief executive or the staff,” she said.
Adrienne Bennett, spokeswoman for the governor, said the bill was meant to challenge the legislative branch to live by the same rules as the executive branch.
“If we are a government committed to transparency it should be equal all the way around,” she said.
During a public hearing on the bill last month, LePage’s deputy counsel, Michael Cianchette, was the only person to speak in favor of it. He said the proposal is needed to ensure that decisions can be weighed and considered candidly before they are made public.
Without that exemption, Cianchette said, the governor and his staff likely would stop creating records for fear that they might be made public. Under the bill, the working papers would not be made public until the governor chose to distribute them or until the adjournment of the legislative session for which the proposed legislation, reports and papers were prepared.
Many, however, criticized the bill for fear that it would allow the governor’s office to operate in secret.
The bill was amended in committee to restrict the exemption only to the governor and his staff. Before, the language was vague and could have been interpreted to include cabinet members. The amendment also added the “sunset” provision.
But it wasn’t enough to earn passage by the House.
Several lawmakers said privately that LePage had been working hard over the last few days to personally ask Republican House members to vote for the bill.
Bennett said Friday that the governor told her he did not lobby any lawmakers individually on LD 1805.
Shenna Bellows, director of the American Civil Liberties Union of Maine, was instrumental in whipping up votes against the bill.
“Transparency is fundamental to a healthy democracy,” she said. “This bill would have created a significant exemption in Maine’s freedom-of-access laws and shielded the governor’s office from appropriate scrutiny.”
Follow BDN reporter Eric Russell on Twitter @BDNPolitics.
Nice try Paul. That damned transparency thing is going to force you to play by the rules in place.
Spoiled little brat LePage will surely be yelping and crying over this one. Who’s YOUR Granddaddy now Wha… Wha… Paulie!
Too bad we have a legislative house that can’t think beyond its nose. Finally someone had the guts to expose it for what it is: opaque. Not just a nice try, Paul; congratulations on your success. Your success will pay off even more when the legislature’s hand is forced to abide by the same rules.
The legislature has public hearings on all of their bills.
What are you talking about?
Bills are final documents presented for a hearing. Those final documents don’t fall out of the sky complete for presentation. They are written and re-written just like the governor’s paper’s. Those initial documents or drafts are not subject to public view in the legislature. Why not when drafts are in the executive branch?
Your silly diversion is does not cover up the fact LePage is wounded politically and already a lame duck.
The creep can’t even get his own party to vote for his version of “transparent” State Government.
Keep dreaming, you and your buddies.
Whether the legislative document has been “worked” up by either the Revisor of Statutes Office or, in the case of Appropriations, the Office of Fiscal Policy and Program Review, the end result of the “bill” (LD) is printed and published. The only real “work up” of a bill, is done in committee, which files are available at the end of the session. Both of these offices I mentioned are staffed by non partisan staff, these people are not hired by the legislature, they are hired by either the Revisor or the Director. Each committee is assigned a Legislative Analyst, who assists the committee’s with the legal language, and research. The LA’s office is part of the two office’s mentiioned above. There is nothing done on the sly Whawell, there’s no secret meetings, not all legislators are lawyers, it’s done to assure the bill is statutorily correct. Not once have I ever heard a proposal suggestion from a legislative analyst to a committee as a whole, or a member, many of these people are paralegals or have legal training, and know that it is not allowed.
Not all bills have fiscal impacts, these would not have to be run through the fiscal office. All budget bills are researched only by the fiscal office.
Bennett’s comment that the bill’s purpose was to “challenge the legislature to live by the same rules as the executive branch” is ludicrist and sophomoric. If this were the purpose, then the bill would have been directed at the legislature and it’s process; not granting the governor the same exception as the legislature.
What if a bill has parts in it written up by a special interest group? Or, what if a bill is termed a “bi-partisan” bill where in fact a dozen or so people from one party and only one from the opposing party are responsible for crafting it?
Special interest groups do not write any parts in any bills, they attempt to influence legislators and the executive to suggest their interest be addressed in the bill. They do NOT write anything, the actual writing of the bill is done in either the Revisor’s Office or the Fiscal Office , and if the bill has a fiscal impact whatsoever, then it is both offices that review and write the bill.
“Bi-partisan” is a political and editorial term. It’s simply meant that members of both parties have sponsors and co-sponsors signing on to introduce the bill, not necessarily voting on passage, which is where the bill meets it’s fate. If there is a bill that affects a certain region, you will often see both parties signing on due to political reasons. There are many reasons why members from both will sign on, this is one. If both party’s agree on a bill’s passage, then it’s called a bi-partisan vote, which simply means that they agreed. It’s certainly easy to understand how a person can co-sponsor a piece of legislation, vote against it all the way through, and it passes.
But yet go onto a campaign and claim that they co-sponsored the bill……it happens all the time.
Bennett must have gigantic acid reflux from having to come up with some of the idiocies that she spouts …
I stand and applaud the house members from both sides of the aisle who have now voted to force the governor to stick to one of his campaign promises, to have a more “transparent” government. Hoisted on his own petard. If it has worked for governor’s since 1820, why does this governor need something different? It only tells me he has much to hide. Now it won’t be so easy. Thanks again House.
It was still a very partisan roll call vote:
http://bit.ly/I0QLVi
Very true, BUT , how many of them are teapartiers? At least some have gotten a whiff of what may happen to them in Nov.My guy was a yes, no big surprise but I’m sure he won’t knock on my door this year for money and votes.
That’s the trouble with liberals. They spend their time worrying about what is going to happen to them in the next election cycle. Now we have a governor who dares stand behind his convictions to serve the people of Maine. Go LePage!
What about those in betweeners? They aren’t liberals or rightwingers! It’s fine to stand behind your convictions as long as they are realistic ones!
“It’s fine to stand behind your convictions as long as they are realistic ones.”
Hmm. Let me think about this one. A person has a conviction – that is, a firmly held belief or opinion according to my dictionary. Now, if this person has a firm belief then obviously this person believes it is based in reality. But now you seem to be telling me you would deny this person the right to take a stand if you disagree with him. I hope that’s not case. But do you know what? A lot of people with a liberal mindset do believe that anybody who disagree with them should not be allowed to exercise their right to take a stand.
Here’s a typical example: Democratic California Governor Jerry Brown signed a bill that requires California public schools to teach gay history. I thought history was an account of significant events, but now Governor Brown wants teachers to mention the sexual orientation of those mentioned in history as though sexual orientation made a difference. It’s obvious the governor has an agenda here. He wants to impose his own personal firmly held beliefs or doctrines about the suitability of homosexuality on young impressionable minds. Anyone or any parent who takes exception to his view will be shut off from the school curriculum.
I’m glad I don’t live in California. I cherish freedom too much for that. And if I were younger and raising a family I’d stay clear of that state or any state like it where political freedom is restricted.
What do you call an “betweener”? The state and the country have taken this country so far to the left with big intrusive government, uncontrolled social spending, and social engineering that we need leaders like LePage for an overdue course correction. Unless you have live long enough you might have a problem understanding the extent this country has moved over to the left.
Thanks for pointing that out. The liberals who like to change the subject while reversing the tables on their opponents have a lot of explaining to do. Luckily for them, the media can be counted on to protect them when they act silly, which is pretty much most of the time.
It’s funny to see House members accusing the governor of hiding out in the open while they themselves are in hiding behind closed doors protecting their working papers from public view. Why all the hiding? Are they afraid the voters and the governor will find something embarrassing?
He was elected to a “public” position. He is suppose to be working for all of us, not just a select few. He already has his panties in a bunch over every democrat and probably independent, how can he be “fair”to all? Why is it when either party is elected, it’s one side or the other? Where is the happy medium?
This bill deserved to be voted down unanimously by all members of the house; but its still a victory for democratic sunshine.
It will be a victory for all when the legislature stops exempting (shielding) itself from the law the governor must abide by. Of course, for those who believe in double standards, the status quo suits them just fine.
The slight differene is that bills all have public hearings and are not shrouded in mystery. The Legislature is far more transparent than the executive branch. The Gov’s papers of how he comes up with his suggestions are not even remotely the same.
That said, I could care less if they are forced to show their working papers, whatever makes everyone happy.
No, there is essentially no difference between the working papers of the executive branch and those of the legislative branches. Besides, why does the public need to know what is in the working papers when the final product is what is important. What you are advocating are double standards.
Actually, I am not advocating anything. But to say that there is no difference between the different branch’s of Government is a bit of a stretch. However, if a bill is put on the floor to have them release their working papers, I wouldn’t be against that at all. And seriously if you don’t know why we need to know “how we got here” in regards to who is actually pushing for the legislation, behind closed doors with the Gov, then I guess that is just a place were we will will have to agree to disagree.
My understanding is that current law provides the means for citizens like you and I to know what is going on in governor’s office. That same open access is not legally available in the legislature so that if you want to know, for instance, who is writing the law and for what reasons, you have no assurances this information will be made available.
whawell..the issue is what is included in the definition of “working papers”.it has a very specific and very narrow meaning and purpose..the govenor tried to shield basically all his documents from public access..
So more of what shields government business from the light of public scrutiny is good? Well! Whatever trips your quivering trigger finger, you can go boom, and call it progress; but real life doesn’t work that way..
Two sets of standards? I’ll bet you any money that will no longer be the case if and when the Democrats control the executive branch. But hey, it’s all about politics as usual with some folks.
You sound like some sort of tea bag, contrarian chicken little.
Contrarian chicken little? What the hell is that? Are those the politician who are scared to work on a level playing field, like those in the legislature who voted down the bill? Are they afraid the people they are supposed to represent will know what they are thinking. Typical liberal thinking, that is, standards are only for everyone else but them.
You are using your ‘common sense’ again, aren’t you whawell? That’s why you are unable to see that there is a huge difference between the governor’s papers and any given legislators papers. Try some uncommon sense, you’ll come off sounding smarter.
Strange that this is the ONLY governor that’s felt he’s entitled to this level of concealment.
Come on. “Double-standard” ? Really ?
Apparently your understanding of what is going on to whom is exactly backwards. The governor’s office does not enjoy the level of concealment the legislature enjoys. So why the double standard? I know, some posters told me the obvious: The legislature and the executive branches are different. So what! Aren’t people entitled to open government? Right now one part of the state government is open while the other part apparently is not. The bill to end this different type of treatment passed unanimously in the judiciary committee but failed to muster enough votes to pass in the house chamber.
This is an exemplary move by the legislature to reign in the Lapudge, and make him accountable for his action, in a transparent manner. And what difference should this make, after all, an honest politician has nothing to hide. Now, where are all the jobs that the great one promised to bring into the State o’ Maine.
Perhaps at the LaPaggie family reunion….
Classy classy guy, that Paul LePage. Just a class act in every way.
LOL
Paulie is having a tough week !
Proves that once again, if you try to hide from the people, the people WILL find you. Nice try, Guvna.
What exactly is the Governor doing that he wants to make sure no one knows about? Maybe he has a guilty conscience after all!
chopchopchop
That is it exactly.
I am thrilled that the house has rejected that with a clarity that the judicial committee certainly didn’t have.
But you are right..what was the Governor trying to do and what does that mean to us, to “we the people”?
The reference he made in the bill to “working papers” has a very long, very clear, very consistent and unambiguous judicial history under the Freedom Of Information Act ( public right to see public documents).
Its only purpose is to protect the “deliberative process”..all that input and all those ideas and letters and advice that go into the hopper before a decision is made.. It is very very narrow and is meant to allow that process to go on with no outside interference. The idea is that staffers and advisors need that privacy to thoroguhly explore a solution or a decision. As soon as the decision is made though all of that is no longer “working papers” and is available under FOIA.
What LePage sought here through his Deputy Counsel Michael Cianchette, was much much much broader. He was essentially saying everything he says and does about a bill is “working papers” until it is passed…that everything he does is “working papers” it was way out of bounds from the normal straight and narrow uniform clear long history determining what “working papers” means.
Impossible to think that a Governor,worse, his deputy general counsel and other advisors around him wouldn’t know that..would try this.
Which brings us back to your very much on point question.
man learn to spell
Spellcheck and a HS education can do wonders.
How do you do spell check at a blog? I obviously haven’t figured that out. When I write in “word” and paste in..it doesn’t format. I will work on it. I agree it is a detraction.
You can google me if you have any concerns about my educational level or background.
apologies..many many typos..I do try to go back and edit..will try harder!!!
His “reason” is that he wants people to be able to speak to him “freely” ie tell him what they really want, but not be tied to that conviction. If “you”, as a business person, wants some new law, and you don’t want to let the public know it is something you are pushing for, and why; I am sorry, I have no sympathy for you. If LePage can’t find anyone to talk “on the record” then maybe there isn’t exactly a noble reason behind it.
Then don’t write down what people to you “freely”.
It has worked since 1820 in Maine.
Exactly. Or I have an even better idea, if you don’t want people to know what laws you are pushing in private that you desparately want on the books, then don’t ask for the laws. DiMillo’s wanted some of the changes to work hours and training pay for minors, but while I am and was totally against that, I had to respect them for being up front and public about it. I mean, I will vote with my wallet on that, but I still respect that they wanted the law change and they weren’t shy about it.
Like the anonymous fax that caused the mural mess?We need more accountability.
Is there a date for the hanging or are we just tightening the noose at this time?
I was going to joke about him hanging on the second Tues. in November of 2014
but I have to wonder if he could even get the GOP nod to run again.
They are no longer treating him as their leader in Augusta, anymore, are they ?
There are a lot of moving parts in state politics right now.The fact that ME is both a cheap media buy and has few media markets means we will drown in ads between now and Nov.
That is something I can agree with. By the time the elections actually get here, I’m sick of everyone on both sides of the political spectrum. I was thinking in the next round of campaign reform, we should limit the candidates to “X” number of print ads, and “Y” amount of radio and tv ad time.
Great idea-but it will nevr happen.After CU destroyed America with the bogus misuse of the free speech argument,we have no chance.
With you on this one, Dane! We need to adopt the British system — declare an election three months in advance, people have three months to “run”, election is held — it’s over! The obscenity of the time we have to be bombarded with multi-gazillion dollar television advertising is appalling. By the time we go to the polls, I don’t want any of them — or their media spinners!
Shouldn’t you have just said ”
Maybe he has a conscience after all! ”
Why be redundant ?
; )
Capt. Kirk : Scottie, what’s the status ?
Scottie : Aye Captain, I think he’s gonna blow his top !!
Spock: Illogical Mr. Scott, the legislature has just told him to blow it out his @ss, the logical course of action would be to do as ordered.
Huh. Second time this week that the Republican-led legislature slaps down a Lepage initiative. Seems that someone has lost the law makers he thought he had in his pocket! Perhaps the playground bully has lost his sheen.
I think that in the first year of the Repub. takeover, the Right was feeling like they had the world on a plate. Now that the November elections are looming, they realize that they had a party that wrecked the house, and mom and dad are coming home soon.
I’m thinking the loss of support on this bill can be directly correlated with the daily loss of trust that Mr. LePage has lost over this past year within the minds of all Mainers who choose to use theirs. We wouldn’t trust this guy any further than we could throw him. Another bonus, now we’ll be able to see if the leader of this State can spell any better than he speaks. I’m not holding my breath on that one!
wow serious spellers here..got to get with the program
Finally they’re standing up to him. Maybe they’ve realized he has no power, unless they give it to him. Why the need for secrecy to begin with? It certainly isn’t in the best interest of the people to have our governor working on “secret” projects.
Nor should it be the way with the Legislature.
“It certainly isn’t in the best interest of the people to have our governor working on “secret” projects.” You mean “secret projects” like Baldacci’s Katahdin Lake deal? Those kind of projects?
I recall reading about it in the paper before the sale, so it wasn’t really a secret.
He is such a bad Governor that being able to say they voted against him is the only way that even Republicans in Arookstic County will get re-elected this November.
It’s “Aroostook”.
You’re correct on the spelling.Just one of those “other maine” guys.
Lol yea but even when you spell it right spell check says its wrong. Spell check must have been written by an “other Mainer”
Lost again, the little brat lepage is crying again.
could this be the first glimmer of the republican house members trying to distance themselves from the LePage debacle…
this is good, but….they got a long way to go before avoiding a complete bloodbath in November……Pauly Boy is a walking train wreck…..and by November some of the fallout damage of his disastrous administration will be appearing all over the place.
No i bet they are up for relection
Sounds like his legislative shills are starting to worry about November. Well, keep worrying guys and gals. This attempt to CYA changes nothing.
Just because it’s legal for the legislature doesn’t mean it’s right. I think we should be allowed to see the working paper, reports, etc… of the legislature as well. But you know that would never happen.
Politicians feed off of what will keep them in office, if there was enough public outrage about their working papers, then it very well could be in their best interest to change that law.
The legislature is finally doing what’s best for the state of Maine, not what’s best for Paul LePage!!!! Way to go!!!
I was wrong. Unlike those on the radical right who will cling to their flawed ideology in the face of verifiable facts I will admit when I have been wrong. I have been wrong about Paul Richard LePage. I have been saying that after November 6th it would be easier to find snowballs lining the walls of hell then it would to find a republican in Augusta. I have felt that after the election that Paul Richard LePage would become a lame duck. I was wrong. Based on the actions of the Republican controlled Maine Legislature this week it appears that the Republicans have already turned LePage into a lame duck.
LePage did not campaign for any of the four Republicans running in special elections over the last year, and my guess is that nearly every Republican will try to run from him during this year’s campaign.
And every Democrat will try to make sure they can’t.
Boy, that surly would be a nice present for you, wouldn’t it? Dream on.
Not to mention ME is being ignored in the national media except when Paulie does something ignorant.And the R’s did SUCH a good job with their caucauses (cough)It seems nobody in that party can count.
I’m glad you have a sense of humor when your party in sinking. Life for you and your kind would otherwise be unbearable. On second thought you always have your friends in this venue to sympathize with you when your humor is lacking. Go LePage!
LOOK – LAUREN IS AWAKE:)
You must have some kind of mental deficiency. LePage ran on transparency, then creates secret task forces and tries to pull this crap. Blatant nepotism, favoritism, lack of courtresy and common sense, you name it. Get your head out of the sand and look around. He is on a one-way trip to has-been land.
Is that all you can come up with. Too bad for all those free-loading people who have been vacationing on government expense. Their vacation is coming to an end. I think they would rather die than work for a living.
What more do you want, movies of him stealing candy from little children?
I agree with you on one thing at least.Go,(home to fla) LePage!
You’ll get your wish in about seven years from now. Do you think you can survived the mental torture that long knowing we have a governor with common sense for a change?
He’s got about as much chance of being re-elected as my dog does. And I don’t even have a dog.
“Common sense”? I’m glad you told me that that’s what he exhibits. I myself prefer some one who has uncommon sense. Common sense usually means that some one is not a very deep thinker.
Boy, that some cloudy thinking! Okay, go ahead and live by “uncommon” sense, and get burnt besides. You must totally ignore your heritage and everything else to live in such fashion. As far as I’m concern, if someone tells me the stove is hot I’m surely not going touch it to find out. Uncommon sense however would tell you to touch it nonetheless to find out if it’s hot.
Keep thinking deeply. Who knows, maybe you’ll wake someday.
It’s too bad that my logic has proven to be ellusive to you. I had no doubt that it would. Those that blindly follow their notion of common sense usually end up boxed into one and only one way of acting. Thinking outside of the square has always propelled the planet’s doers and shakers.
couldn’t agree less..at the deepest level of thinking one arrives at common sense and wisdom
(check my speling wuld you roostook???)
Then candidate-LePage had an entire page on his campaign website about transparency in government, called Your Right to Know.
From it:
Every Maine citizen has a right to know what government is up to and how it spends our tax dollars. Paul will require all state spending to be posted online, and he will fight for stronger laws to protect and expand Maine citizens’ right to access information from state and local government. When Paul is Governor, open government will be a reality, not a talking point.
While Paul is Governor, he will:
Strengthen Maine’s Freedom of Access Law. Any roadblocks Mainers face in the pursuit of public information from a governmental entity must be torn down. Paul will fight for a timelier, more inclusive Freedom of Access law, and require each governmental entity to designate an officer to oversee all requests for public information.
But Gerald, it’s very transparent…we can see right through it.
oh wow..thanks so much for this!!!! a gem!! a real gem!!! I would have used it in my testimony.
So, what do you know? The house did the right thing. Congrats to all!!
Wow! No Kidding ! The sheep really are starting to revolt against their herder !
Maybe the R’s are smelling what the rest of us are….. And they are looking at Nov. 6, 2012 and think we might mean it. Well, the tea party may be over, Alice.
I guess transparency is still just a day away and a dream becoming a nightmare. Can you say same stuff different day? I promise to be transparent until I change my mind 1 second after I swear to honor the Constitution. After that I will just be a big bully. When will they ever learn?
I think we found ourselves a spoiled brat, wants everything his way.
This is a good thing because when you have a Governor that acts like a child, talks like a child we also need to watch him like a child.
I wonder if Ms. Bennett actually believes the drivel she spews. Does anyone truly believe this was an effort to get the legislature to play by the same rules? If so, why not state this goal and introduce a bill to remove the exemption rather than taking an underhanded approach?
I hope the Governor’s office hears the clear message being sent to it recently. Time to stop working for the Koch’s and get back to the middle ground where most of his constituents fall.
Ms Bennett is a spokesperson that George Orwell could love.
No matter how bad you are,somebody will take your $$ to be a flack.
I wonder who he will call a spoiled bratt this week.
you
Well, it appears that the political handbook reads that the American voter remembers actions/voting records after April 1st. It appears that the intelligent individuals who were content riding the trainwreck we were forced aboard are finally doing an intelligent thing and restoring common sense. One can only hope this not only carries through, but also beyond, election day.
On first reference, Freedom of Access Act should be spelled out. On second reference you can use alphabet soup.
“Adrienne Bennett, spokeswoman for the governor, said the bill was meant to challenge the legislative branch to live by the same rules as the executive branch.
“’If we are a government committed to transparency it should be equal all the way around,’ she said.”
Miss Bennett, you make about as much sense as the governor…
Well, they’re counting on people being unable to distinguish between the executive and legislative branches, and judging from the Lepage can do no wrong supporters here, it’s a pretty safe bet. Let’s just say that civics isn’t their strong point.
Since most of said supporters are bought and paid for by the MHPC after they got their fat tax breaks.
Good thing the BDN has people like you folks commenting on here, otherwise they wouldn’t have anything to print in the “what they are saying” section of the paper.
Quick, how much distance can you guys create between now and November! LOL
Paulie got caught and now everyone knows it. What is gonna be more interesting is the review of everything that he’s done to this point now being re-examined. Between his hiring family outright, based on loyalty not competency, and his ‘subtle as a brick thru the plate glass window’ influence in the East-West Road Bill, which is about as biased as you can get, LePage is gonna be the Poster Child for the 1 Term Governor right up there with Snyder in Michigan. Public ‘sunshine law’s’ were legislated to prevent and expose public corruption and influence pedalling that were growing by leaps and bounds during the Nixon day’s of political ‘Slush Fund’s’. Regretablly we have seen these same type ‘fund’s’ return, only now they are called SuperPAC’s. It’s gonna be interesting to see just who starts donating, and in what amount, to LePage’s re-election campaign, and how soon. If we all thought ‘Eagle Lake’ Martin and the Irving’s were interesting, well, Paulie and the Cianbro connection is gonna play out like Saturday Night Live on Broadway. And the public that’s gonna be watching is both educated and, now a days, a lot less forgiving when it comes to their ‘chain’ being jerked.
The Public Trust needs to be brought back, more so now than at any other time. The recent GOP ‘moose and pine tree show’ has shown that everytime the public’s trust is abused, that trust takes both a terrible beating and, when it comes back, has a terrible price to be paid. Not to re-hash old arguement’s, but the recent Planned Parenthood issue is one that’s both tragic and is gonna wind up right back where it started. No one that takes a clear and objective look at it can deny that. What is wrong is that this one ‘trust’ issue has been so inflamed that it it now being used as the GOP litmus test for every Candidate”s right to run, not as a issue to be discussed, debated and accepted. Again, this is a public trust issue in that PP has a mandate, thru OUR ELECTED LEGISLATURE, to provide health services to the ladies and the kid’s. Choice or Pro-life are, for obvious reason’s, an issue that they specifically, and we as the public, are something that we have to deal with and accept, both on a personal level as well as publicly. PP has, in every State, taken great care to keep their money ‘trail’ for certain services seperate and clearly trackable in order to comply with both Federal and State law’s. Maybe it’s about time we all took a monent to re-examne our own idea of Public Trust and see who measure’s up. Given that it’s an election year, I for one, can’t think of a better time. Can you ?
Mike,
Really good analysis and excellent points. Thanks so much for this.
Who does he think he is anyway !!! What is it he wants to hide from us taxpayers —nothing worst than whispering and secrets !!!!!
Imagine….And all this time I thought he worked for all the citizens of Maine….I guess he has his own agenda so why is he in the Blaine House ?
Want to read something screwed up?
“Without that exemption, Cianchette said, the governor and his staff
likely would stop creating records for fear that they might be made
public.”
>>>>>
Adrienne Bennett, spokeswoman for the governor, said the bill was meant to challenge the legislative branch to live by the same rules as the executive branch. “If we are a government committed to transparency it should be equal all the way around,” she said.
I’m laughing out loud at this absurd attempt at spin. The LePage administration has been anything but committed to transparency. In fact, it has been the most opaque, obfuscatory administration in our lifetime. Once again Bennett and the administration talk to the people of Maine as if we’re all a little bit slow.
You’ve got to shake your head over Mr. LePage’s actions. Throwing two legislators in his own party (Sen. Rector and Rep. Fitts) under the bus by urging voters to not support them in November is just plain nuts. No one should wonder why the rational Republicans are distancing themselves from the man. LePage allows his anger and hubris to prevail over common sense and diplomacy, making him his own worst enemy. He is doing everything he can to ensure his own failure, and it’s kind of like seeing a train wreck occur in slow motion…it’s causing a lot of damage, you can’t do anything to stop it, but it’s fascinating to watch.
Priest, a Democrat says the members of the legislature enjoy the exemption so what is the big deal about affording our governor the same status?
Just another daily attack on our Governor.
governor meathead deserves every attack he gets and then some.
people like you are in the vast minority which you will discover in the future
Poor Paul. Boo hoo, you know what he is using state bought paper, state bought pens, living and working in a state owned building. He has no expectation of privacy, he cannot hide. Same should go for the rest of those yahoo’s
For real?! How many more days before his term is up? I don’t understand where he is coming up with all of these nutty ideas.
He was elected to a “public” position. He is suppose to be working for all of us, not just a select few. He already has his panties in a bunch over every democrat and probably independent, how can he be “fair”to all? Why is it when either party is elected, it’s one side or the other? Where is the happy medium? I don’t know about anyone else, but for those out there that are resentful of footing the bill for welfare recipients, I am resentful of footing the bill for his foolishness at times. I respect the fact that he had a hard childhood and that he has worked very hard to get where he is at, but so has many other people overcome some very difficult obstacles. My husband and I for one.