Industrial wind and transparency
When LD 2283 came blowing through the legislative signature pad in 2008, everyone thought that the objective behind this push was to implement something green to help with energy. This became an easy sale when the price increase in gas and everything hit the working class in the wallet. When repercussions started occurring, an interest group formed to ask viability questions such as, “why so big and why the big rush, and hey guys, looks like you didn’t finish your homework on impacts.”
My motivator is to ensure that the people of Maine are respected and not sold a bad deal of goods. “There is a lot of money to be made in energy” — this rings through my mind from a class or two. Then I remember the conversation around emissions trading — http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emissions_trading. The cap and trade market was created when the EPA placed caps on CO2 and SO2 emissions to protect us and our future from irreversible harm.
These turbines are being implemented at the industrial scale ONLY regardless of financial nonviability so that the package of green credits they are applicable for are purchasable by other industrial entities so they can pollute beyond regulations and it still looks good on the books. I am betting that no one who is selling industrial wind to the state of Maine and the people who want to be a part of a green solution are telling them the real objectives. They won’t care what you know after they are all up and running. Maybe this explains the expedited nature?
Carolyn Rae
Dixmont
Constitutional rights
Once again Mainers find themselves presented with a referendum on marriage equality. We have voted to ensure our fellow Mainers can marry and then denied them this right.
The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals declared that a ban on gay marriage is unconstitutional, though Proposition 8 has not yet been officially repealed.
The United States Constitution promises equal rights to all of its citizens. Why is gay marriage an exception? This country was built on the principles of freedom of speech and religion. Banning gay marriage violates the very core of these values. Freedom of religion also means freedom from religion. Arguments against gay marriage are often based on biblical readings.
Living by the dictates of a 2000 year old document means endorsing slavery and stoning our daughters for their transgressions. Our country must recognize the rights of all regardless of the religious views of some. Our country has made several mistakes regarding equal rights: denying citizenship to African-Americans, allowing “Jim Crow” laws to exist and prohibiting the right of women to vote. When will we allow all of our citizens the right to marry?
We are juniors from Monmouth Academy. We want to raise our future children in a world where they have the same rights others enjoy, no matter their race, sexuality or gender.
In the words of Bob Dylan, “How many years can some people exist, before they’re allowed to be free?”
Adriana Ortiz-Burnham
Kara Rowley
Monmouth
Offering loan forgiveness
Social services is an ever-growing field in our current economy. Social workers play a major role in an individual’s quality of life for populations of all ages. Offering loan forgiveness would give the field of social work a more appealing facade to students who are deciding what degree to choose. Loan forgiveness would put social workers at ease for the future when the final paycheck adds up to $30,000 a year.
Although recent cuts have emerged to social services, we need to think of loan forgiveness with a “preventative care” type of view. Society has demands for individuals who are in need of services and resources that social workers can offer them; if the number of social workers declines, these populations may not be able to get the services or resources that they need. In turn, they become sicker, more helpless or miss opportunities and build up the need for more services.
In the long run, the government will end up paying for the lack of a helping professional in a society that demands it. If clients are able to use the resources of a social worker to get these services from the beginning, it will create a healthier society and it is less money the government will ultimately dish out.
Offering loan forgiveness would be beneficial to these professionals who are struggling to pay back their loans on a social work salary. It would also be an opportunity to recruit qualified individuals into the helping profession which Maine would benefit from.
Pamela Hashinsky
Sara Richardson
Orono
Health Maine Fund cuts
We are writing as co-chairs of the Maine Medical Association Public Health Committee to express our deep concern for proposed cuts in 2013 to the Fund for a Healthy Maine. The committee, representing over 30 Maine physicians, has made the preservation of this fund one of its top priorities for the coming year. We took this action for two reasons: First, this is not taxpayer money — it was extracted from tobacco companies to compensate Maine for the costs of caring for people who became ill from smoking. Second, this fund is preventive in nature. The money is used to prevent the onset of the terrible chronic diseases that exact high costs, both to the individual and to the state.
Many high-cost medical conditions are entirely preventable through education, lifestyle changes and early interventions. However, Governor LePage is proposing to remove many of those options from our toolkit through cuts to the Healthy Maine Partnerships, immunizations, Head Start, home visiting, family planning, Drugs for the Elderly and other programs.
While moving these dollars may plug a hole in the MaineCare budget for now, in the long run it will be extraordinarily expensive to the state’s bottom line and the health of our residents. We know that Maine can save $7.50 for every $1.00 spent on prevention efforts.
As a committee and as physicians, we urge the Legislature to rethink these proposed cuts. As our founding father Benjamin Franklin wrote, “An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.”
Lani Graham, MD
Daniel Oppenheim, MD
Co-chairs
Maine Medical Association Public Health Committee
Kara Rowley & Adriana Ortiz-Burnham–
“Out of the mouths of babes…….”
Bless you.
Adriana and Kara, The future will be brighter for all of our citizens because of young people like you. Never let your passion for equality and fairness for all become compromised. Thank-You
Perhaps if our social worker friends had the foresight to choose a profession that paid enough they wouldn’t have to come to the taxpayer on bended knee to pay their way through school.
If they had they would conceivably earned enough to pay taxes like everyone else.
In all likelihood a social worker who earns $30k pays no Income tax anyway, have a couple kids and you’ll get more back in a refund than you paid in Fica/Medicare.
You make a poor decision and its up to everyone else to pay your way? Really?
Oh, you are going to take the heat for this one. But I agree with you. I think the letter to the editor assignment is a bit wearing. You know, I write letters to the editor on my own initiative. It doesn’t occur to me I should pay about $400 per credit hour to have someone make it an assignment.
I don’t mind. It’s sort of a hobby. :)
Yeah, and we’ll give you equivalent heat. You are really out of touch. read. These students are juniors at Monmouth Academy, that’s high school, not college. And where is anyone, especially a HS teacher or professors going to pay anything to write a letter to anyone. I don’t know of anyone who getys $400/hour for writing anything (except maybe a lawyer writing a brief fore the firm). Your detachmement approaches delusional.
Um, I believe the authors of the loan repayment letter are different. It doesn’t say where they are from. It would be better if they were indeed students in high school so we can give advice: don’t dig yourselves into debt you can’t afford to pay back!
My bad. Too many good letters this time. However, who said thias was a class assignment? At any level? Terse, but succinct. If it was an assignment, unless there was a longer word minimum, I’d give them an A
The writer of the last letter published a few days ago concerning social work and her concern about the cuts that are being proposed. She responded to my comment about this looking like an assignment and said that it was.
Get in touch yourself. The letter in question was written by two social workers who are asking that student loans be forgiven for Social Workers only. There have been any number of Social Workers/Social Studies college students writing letter to the editor in the last few weeks. The only reasonable assumption is that it must be a college class assignment. Find a sense of humor.
I have one but didn’t consider this a joking matter. I do sometimes wonder about some of the rest. And one recognizes sarcasm better from someone you know or who are talking with face to face.
I agree with the ladies from Monmouth Academy, and I think, as a high school level assignment, writing a letter to the editor is a great idea.
As a graduate level college course assignment–well, I would expect a bit more rigorous stuff for the college credit hour money.
Are you for real?? Do you even have a clue as to all the work that social work graduates provide for such little pay? They are the ones working in non profits to better the lives of people with disabilities and others without a voice. They are the ones who are there at 3AM to remove children from harmful situations and place them in a safe home. They work for schools, nursing facilities and hospitals to coordinate services they will need upon discharge. This is just a small sample of all the work social workers do. They know going in there will be a lot of “work” in their profession as the word is already in the title. You like everyone else will need a social worker at some point in your life and a little loan forgiveness for what they will do over a lifetime is a small price to pay.
If what they did really carried that much value they would be compensated accordingly. Instead they are begging for a benefit no one else has.
Yep, just like our teachers. Pff, they get their summers off, why are they complaining?
I have never ever made mention of teachers and summers off. Not ever. That’s all You.
Lot of people do things of great value, many of them are not compensated well for. Others do things of little to no value, and get million dollar bonuses.
Yep, but with social workers they have only a 50-50 shot of getting something right but they generally collect taxpayer money. The people that get million dollar bonuses are from private companies. Perhaps these social workers should have chosen a more profitable job track.
your right, but then so was I.
Got any to recommend? Or fund? We’ve been through these discussions elsewhere. Mene, Mene, Tekel, … (your attitude has been weighed in the balances and found wanting).
To fund? Not at the moment. But I have a several people that work for me now with only HS education that make more than $30k.
Not sure what the threat, in the biblical sense, was all about but I really don’t care what you think of my attitude.
Daniel 5:24-28. Read it and then read my paraphrase.
I have no problemfor just wages for services rendered. If both you and your emplyees think it’s fair, so be it.
I don’t spend much time interpreting the bible. Too convoluted for me.
Maybe not all of us are obsessed with ‘value” as you seem to be. So, can we expect to see you at the forefornt of providing appropriate compensation for these essentail services? Beginning with resisting Draconian cuts in DHHS?
The market according to our letter writers places a value of $30k on them. Not Me. If you have a complaint or a problem with the number work it out with the social workers who provided it.
Poeple like you place a value on people who work for the State/People by complaining about how much they get paid and trying to get their pay cut acordingly
Again, I didn’t place the value. They placed it on themselves. Can you not read?
Market value is determined by how much profit can be made from the worker by the owner/CEO/stockholders. Since there is little or no profit in helping the poor, weak, young and old the market places little or no value on those people who choose to help the less fortunate.
Market value is a poor indicator of the true value of the work done in the name of humanity. It is up to the State to determine the value that those people provide and compensate them accordingly. One of the ways the State could compensate those unselfish people would be to pay them what they are actually worth to society, which I am sure most people on the Right would disagree with, or they could forgive some or all of the debt incurred in getting the necessary knowledge/training.
This could also be expanded to EMT’s/Paramedics, nurses, Police and other safety professionals for example.
And for the record I am not in one of those fields.
So? That’s still not my comment.
You need to read the letter writers again. Then follow the thread. Your comment are irrelevant to their problem (wanting someone to pay their tuition)
Actually, nurses in some places make a lot due to the dreaded forces of supply and demand.
No one will argue that all activities should be judged by the market for compensation. The issue is whether people should take on piles of debt KNOWING the market won’t compensate them “properly” and then ask for everyone else to pay their bill. If they knew full well social work paid poorly, why would they take on loans they can’t pay back?
I stand by my original post.
I believe that people who help others should be compensated better then they are while people on the right yell about how overpaid, lazy or stupid they are to take on those jobs.
People in Public Service for all but the very top are underpaid, underappreciated and overworked
I still don’t think that we should be responsible for their tuition merely because they are going to be low earning social workers.
I completely agree. It is the salaries that are the problem, not the disciplines.
Pretty screwed up “market” when prosecutors, as an example, receive student loan forgiveness over a fairly short period of time, but Public Defenders (and Federal Defenders), who fight to protect constitutional rights that prosecutors work diligently to convince courts to overlook, get nothing.
So then teachers should be getting paid $100,000 a year but they are not. No value in a teaching profession?
It was not me that provided the numbers. It was the letter writers.
That said, Obviously there is a personal choice to perform the job at the offered pay or not. It would be up to that person to decide if they felt valued at the salary offered. That’s not for me to say.
Our society does not pay people based on what they are worth to society but instead they pay people based on entertainment (ie. pro athletes, actors, radio talkers) or greed (ie Wall Street Bankers, CEO’s).
People who make a difference (teachers, social workers, police/firefighters, soldiers) are not paid what they should be based on the good they do for thier country/society.
Now that would be an interesting conversation, ‘what do we value and why’.
So we should let them default on their loans because they’re doing “good work”? How about working through college and not taking on enormous debt?
No where in Cheesecake’s comment do I see any mention of the value of the job, just that it is a poor choice when one takes on large amounts of debt. Didn’t they think “How am I going to pay this back?” when they signed on for the loan? Did they even ask “What is my earning potential with a degree in Social Work?”Let me guess…no.
And what kind of message does it send when we allow those entrusted with distribution of public funds to reneg on their obligations? Do we really want to reinforce the culture of n0n-accountability?
So, did you work your way through college? Post graduate degree? No? Then don’t even try to be an expert in such matters. It’s tough enough to get through a college degree program nowadays without incurring debt, eventougher in grad school, especially the socail sciences where, unlike the physical sciences, grant money is hard to get or non-existent.
So, are you fully “accountable”. Members of your family? How good for you.
Yes and yes. And I took on loans, chose a field carefully and have paid them all back. Can’t afford a social sciences advanced degree? THEN DON’T GET ONE! An MSW is not a right, but an option. Choose that path if you wish, but please don’t ask the rest of us to bail you out when the bill comes due.
And yes, I am accountable for my choices, as is my family. Shouldn’t we all be?
Costs are no where near the same. They’ve likely doubled and tripled since your time in school.
But you know what that cost is, and you know what your monthly loan payment will be, so how is this a mitigating factor? Law school is crazy expensive as well, but many lawyers I know had no problem paying off their debt because they made a lot of money with their degree. Choose wisely, and school will pay off.
By the way, I believe the Army still has the GI bill.
So, everyone should become a lawyer? Way too many of them anyway.
OK, now you’re being deliberately argumentative. That was an example. Are yo u telling me you can’t think of a career path that makes college education worth the investment? One of my relatives just received her degree in nursing having paid for much of college with loans and can make the payments just fine. There is a nursing shortage around the country and nurses make big bucks in Boston and other cities (over $100K/year at Beth Israel Deaconess). Or software engineer. Or doctor. Or electrical engineer. Plenty of high paying options for those who have loans to pay off.
That presents another question. Why has college tuition increased by twice the rate of inflation over the last few years?
Personally I think it’s because Universities are run by liberals.
So conservative colleges cost have not increased just as much as universities run by liberals?
Spunds more like money-grubbing conservatives. Seems to be an affliction of the group.
Just for clarities sake . You believe that an increase of tuition costs over twice the rate of inflation is not enough.
Hophead2, it’s that personal responsibility thing again. These people didn’t do the numbers and believe someone else should bail them out.
The cost of getting an education has exploded. The other day you said they should get a part-time job. Many do and you know what? That money earned doesn’t cover more than a fraction of the costs. Books alone can be up to 1,000 a semester.
Don’t attend school full time. Many corporations will offer tuition for those who want to take classes while they work. I know many people who take classes one at a time while they work.
Whatever your choice, you can’t sign on the dotted line for a loan, deliberately pick a poorly paying career path and then look for “loan forgiveness” when reality sets in. Try that with a house and see how forgiving the bank is!
Your house comparison fails though. You can declare bankruptcy or be forclosed. Can’t do that with student debt.
Bankruptcy really shouldn’t be considered an option. It sticks to your credit report for 10 years. But regardless, I don’t agree with the current loan system that hands them out without regard to the risk: not altogether different the housing bubble built on shoddy lending practices.
The non profits who don’t pay taxes and pay their execs six figure salaries? The ones who are constantly advocating for higher taxes that they don’t pay? You mean those non-profits?
“place them in a safe home” – Someone should tell that to Logan Marr.
The fact that you can name an unfortunate case where a child was not protected so that the social workers do an incredible job. If they were not doing such an incredible job there woudl be too many children harmed by their actions to name.
You do know the saying “It’s the exception that proves the rule.”?
We already bribe students to stay in Maine after graduation with the “Opportunity Maine tax credit” since the business climate is so bad. Now they want loan forgiveness too? I guess some animals ARE more equal then others.
You should be asking why the university is charging you so much. Seems like the 1% in the Ivory towers is never the target of these rants even though they are the ultimate crony capitalists taking public money and then raising their prices to whatever the market will bear.
The real problem is that you’re being overcharged for your degree.
It is my understanding that college tuition has doubled the annual rate of inflation annually for some time now.
I think the number of folks in Academia who are also part of the 1% is quite small. Professors don’t make very much.
But you’re right: a degree in social work is way too expensive. Folks need to do a little math before they taken on a huge loan burden and then pursue a poorly paying career path. Of course, math skills may be an issue…
Animals? Absolutely insulting. Oportunity Maine exists for those professions that are underrepresented for the needsfor those services in Maine. You and others are on record (contiually) for “why would anyone want to move to Maine?” Why indeed.
Poor decision? Who are you to say? I think I remember that you’re a business owner and employer. Are you doing what you like to do or only that it pays you what you think is enough? did your choose your profession or was it “chosen” for you? Do you pay your empoyees enough to live their dreams or do they toil for their taskmaster in anger? Did you ever have dreams and they were thwarted? Is that why you’re a consistent Grinch?
Remind us all not to come to you for career advice. Note the difference between career and job. Sure, before embarking on any career path we should be aware of employment and conpensation (hopefully there are still good mentors out there). But, compensation is not always monetary.
I see, so it’s “mean” to suggest people make choices they can afford, rather than knowingly dig themselves too deep in debt and ask the public to bail them out through loan forgiveness. PERFECT attitude for our state social workers…
YES, it’s a poor decision to take on debt and then choose a job that can’t pay the bills. Don’t want to follow the money? Don’t take the loan. Why is this so hard?
You sure are tense today. Bad night’s sleep maybe? As I posted earlier all of my employees make more than the average social workers $30k. They are good hard working people and don’t deserve to have been insulted like you just did.
Of course I choose my profession. Opportunity drives by most people every day. Most don’t recognize it when they see it….
I was fine today until I started reading some of the comments, often arbitrary. And, I hadn’t read your wage statement before that reply. I insluted no one (who’s too intense?). I’m a firm believer in respect for the person and their abilities regardless of education. I would ask for respect for others, not denigrating thier choices.
If people want to be Social Workers, more power to em. Go ahead. But they shouldn’t expect the world to be handed to them if things don’t work out.
—–
Ok. Then let ’em pay for their own education. Why should the taxpayer?
—–
The problem is not so much they receive something I can’t have. It’s more than I am being asked to actually pay for it.
—–
There is a place on your income tax form for you to contribute as much as you like, or are you going to be hypocritical about it.
So getting into teaching is a poor decision too? New teachers get paid less that that.
Yes it is according to the Right. You should only chose jobs that make you rich. To H*ll with anything or anyone else.
I don’t care if they get rich or not. Up to them. It should not be up to the taxpayer to pay for their education.
Only if you sign on for an enormous loan and need the money to pay it back! If you want to be a social worker, knock yourself out. But don’t ask the rest of us to bail you out of your loan obligations!
It’s time we started decommissioning the bird choppers and getting pro-wind people out of government.
Yep, lets cut down some more mountains in W. Va., Ky, Pa. Lots of mountains of coal there with the benefit of we can’t see them from here. We can breathe the polution from them but we still can’t see them. You know what they say, ‘if you can’t see it, it won’t hurt you.’
Maine Medical Association Public Health Committee, I think your plea for common sense is falling on deaf ears in Augusta. The bunch down there now seem bent on taking that money to cover the shortfall that they created by giving a tax break for votes.
Adriana Ortiz-Burnham
Kara Rowley
You go girls. Keep your hearts free of hate if you can. Don’t abandon religion, just religion that preaches hate.
Adiana & Kara – My thanks to you. I have been working for gay rights since the 1970’s. Back then, marriage was out of the question. We were more concerned about being arrested and thrown in jail. We could lose our jobs, our careers, and be blacklisted forever. Police had carte blanche to arrest us, beat us up, and there was little we could do. Thankfully, times have changed.
Reading your letter tells me that there is hope for the next generation taking over. Don’t let the bigots and malcontents, and those who claim the religious high ground, dissuade you. They are wrong for all the reasons you mentioned. They are going to die off soon enough, anyway.
An older gay-rights friend of mine (a Colonel who fought at the Battle of the Bulge) who since has passed away told me that every generation must be reminded of human rights of all kinds. There is that old saying from George Santayana, “Those who cannot remember the past, are condemned to repeat it.” So, my request to you both is to always be vigilant. There are many corrupt people in corrupt institutions whose sole purpose is power and control and money. They are manipulative and justify their bigotry and intolerance by cherry-picking selections from within the bible. I know you both can see through this, but some cannot.
The best of luck to you both. I am very proud of you.
Thank you for your great letter, Kara Rowley & Adriana Ortiz-Burnham!
Im all for loan forgiveness but just mine
Yeah, me too. Accountability for my choices is too hard…
Andriana & Kara – The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals is the most left-wing, anti-Constitutional court in the land. Most of the judges on that court detest the US Constitution and do their best to ignore it or shred it. In addition, the Supreme Court of the United States overturns more NCCA decisions than any other court.
Pamela & Sara – You want loan forgiveness while everyone else has to pay their loans back? This doesn’t seem fair. What makes Social Workers special? Bottom line, when a student signs up for education loans, he or she knows that it is his or her responsibility to pay them back. So, do what you signed up to do, quit whining and asking for special treatment, and pay them back.
EJ, many courts have been ruling in favor of equal access to civil marriage, and it is coming here one day too. The sky is not falling, any more than it did when we allowed women, renters, and americans of all races equal treatment in other civil matters.
Allowing same sex marriage is the right thing to do for families across Maine.
My comment was on the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.
Apparently, they’re not alone in seeing the light.
What makes it OK for banks to charge more, for Pell Grant loans then almost any other.
6.4% seems kind of high to me, but then we don’t want kids educated any way do we?
Pell Grants are just that – grants. I don’t believe they have to be paid back. Student loans, on the other hand, are supposed to be paid back.
It is my understanding that banks control very few college loans these days. As part of the healthcare act (and in part to fund it) the government took over 80% of the college loan portfolio. The private-government loan program no longer exists. There are some completely private loans but not many as the government requirements are pretty stiff and these will eventually be forced out of the market. .
http://www.csmonitor.com/Business/Donald-Marron/About-that-government-takeover-of-the-student-loan-business
According to an MSNBC story Since July 1 2010 all student loans go through the federal government.
I’m sorry,I confused Pell grants and Stafford loans, My Bad!
And Pell grants are becoming extinct.
Don’t forget, the whole point of this is the make all the kids go to college where they will learn to be elitist liberals.
Incredibly hateful. The judges don’t detest that US Constition. What a horrible thing to say.
http://www.post-gazette.com/stories/news/politics-national/supreme-court-overturning-numerous-9th-us-circuit-court-of-appeals-rulings-348270/
http://articles.latimes.com/1995-07-03/news/mn-19894_1_supreme-court
That’s not the point. Your comment is hateful. Just because you disagree with someone, it doesn’t mean you get to portray them as an evil monster. That’s not right. They’ve dedicated their lives to the law, I sincerely doubt they detest the Constitution.
Never said evil or monster. And many in the judicial system detest the Constitution. Just check out what Ginsburg wrote when she told another country not to use the Constitution as a blueprint for their new constitution. And just read some of the many comments from high judges where they consider the US Constitution a living document that needs to be changed to better fit the times.
They’re not evil monsters; that’s just the way they believe. And I believe they are wrong. No hatred there.
You said detest and then you said they want to shred the Constitution. Your sentiments are the same. You are trying to imply 9th circuit judges are evil monsters.
That’s not what Ginsburg said either. Go look at her statements in context. She was speaking about equality for women.
I think your comments are hateful. If you have to smear a person’s character, their actions and comments just because you disagree with them. That seems like hate to me.
Well, you should know.
“I would not look to the U.S. Constitution, if I were drafting a constitution in the year 2012,” Ginsburg said in an interview on Al Hayat television last Wednesday. “I might look at the constitution of South Africa. That was a deliberate attempt to have a fundamental instrument of government that embraced basic human rights, have an independent judiciary. It really is, I think, a great piece of work that was done.”
She was talking about equality for all. Our Constitution didn’t begin that way. It had to be amended and that’s what she was speaking about. If you’re willing to lie and mischaracterize what people do and believe because you disagree with them, you are being hateful.
And just what is your problem with her very wise words?
My problem is that Ginsberg has sworn to protect and defend the Constitution, and she’s violating her own pledge. But, that’s typical of liberals that have no respect for our founding documents.
You have a blatant disregard for the truth. Again, you’re misrepresenting what she said. Her words did NOT violate her pledge. That’s a lie.
It is done all the time, just that is usually aimed at the evil, bloodsucking, greedy, … conservatives, not so much to the humane left.
EJP, you may have been away from Maine too long to be aware of the shortfall in socail service providers in Maine. You’ve said that you do local community service. Maybe you should move back to Maine and provide some of those missing services.
I’ll reserve judgement on your omniscient judgement on court judgements.
The social service system is broken and lacking throughout the country, not just in Maine. However, my comment was on the unwillingness of people to abide by their contracts to pay back the loans they took out for their education.
We in Maine never voted in favor of “marriage equality”. The legislature and former governor passed it into law, then the people of Maine voted the other way.
When that vote was held it was an off election year. Which translates to a low voter turnout. Most people don’t feel threatened by same sex marriage. When we have a major election year like this one the haters will be out numbered and SSM will pass. The sun will still rise in the east and the sky won’t fall.
No doubt the sun will continue to rise but your historical political analysis is lacking. SSM has always been passed by the legislature or initiated by activist courts. It has never passed by virtue of public referendum in any election nationwide, off year or not, that I recall. Maine will probably be the first to pass it.
With your acute historical political analysis, I’m sure your aware that equal rights, and women’s suffrage were also passed by “activist courts”. If it were up to public opinion there would stil be slavery in the South.
Sometimes Cheese, the right thing to do is not the popular thing to do.
And Maine did indeed grant women the right to vote via popular vote back in the day. We have a long history of leading the nation in the fair treatment of all citizens.
I am really interested in a source. Thanks in advance.
NVM Found it.
http://www.ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php/Maine_Women%27s_Suffrage_Veto_Referendum_%281920%29
It was by popular vote not courts. It was used to uphold The States ratification of the Nineteenth Amendment.
Yep!
Maine also allowed interracial marriage long before it became legal nationwide (1883 vs. 1968). I don’t believe that was held to popular vote at that time, but was enacted by our legislature at the time.
http://windowsonmaine.library.umaine.edu/view.aspx?objectId=4-37¤tfile=0
I am hopeful we will again lead the nation by being the first state to offer same sex marriage via popular vote.
I would be willing to say it will pass this time around.
In order to pass an amendment to the Constitution it must first be passed in Congress by a two thirds vote in both Houses before going to the popular vote where it must be passed by three-quarters of the individual States.
Again, it is started by an act of the Legislature.
Good. Seems you do understand the difference between the States and the Constitution Amendment process and a referendum.
An amendment to the US Constitution is started by legislative action, voted for or against in legislative action and becomes the Law of the Land by legislative action. At no time is there a popular vote to amend the US Constitution.
http://www.usconstitution.net/constamrat.html
“However an amendment is proposed, it does not become part of the Constitution unless it is ratified by three-quarters of the states (either the legislatures thereof, or in amendment conventions).”
My understanding is that woman’s right to vote while challenged in the courts actually came about with the passage of the Nineteenth Amendment to the Constitution. It was ratified by the states.
Women’s Suffrage was started by court action and later made legal by legislative action.
http://law2.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/conlaw/nineteentham.htm
“In 1872, a suffragists brought a series of court challenges designed to test whether voting was a “privilege” of “U. S. citizenship” now belonging to women by virtue of the recently adopted 14th Amendment. One such challenge grew out of a criminal prosecution of Susan B. Anthony for illegally voting in the 1872 election…..”
“In May, 1919, the necessary two-thirds vote in favor of the women suffrage amendment was finally mustered in Congress, and the proposed amendment was sent to the states for ratification. By July 1920, with a number of primarily southern states adamantly opposed to the amendment, it all came down to Tennessee…. …..Women had finally won the vote”
On a side note, why do we continue to give such power to southern states? They are always on the wrong side of the issues and history.
Oh My…. You do understand what it means to “ratify”? /sarcasm
Oh, my…. can you read a link?
An amendment to the US Constitution is started by legislative action, voted for or against in legislative action and becomes the Law of the Land by legislative action. At no time is there a popular vote to amend the US Constitution.
http://law2.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/conlaw/nineteentham.htm
“….It appeared that the amendment might fail by one vote in the Tennessee house,
but twenty-four-year-old Harry Burns surprised observers by casting the deciding
vote for ratification.”
Harry Burns, a member of the Tennessee house. The Nineteenth Amendment was not passed by a popular vote, depending on the state constitution it was voted on the State legislature.
http://www.usconstitution.net/constamrat.html
“However an amendment is proposed, it does not become part of the Constitution unless it is ratified by three-quarters of the states (either the legislatures thereof, or in amendment conventions).”
And yes, I do know what it means to “ratify”. Do you?
Politicians and voters have no business telling someone who they can and cannot marry. I’d say since heterosexual marriage has been such a failure, we should revoke the privilege.
Ok, But that’s not up to me.
Patom1 claimed that the voters rejected the SSM bill before because of a light turnout. All I did was remind him/her that no SSM has yet to pass muster before any voters anywhere in the country. I think it will pass this time.
Your wrong, heterosexual marriage is still the only marrigae that works the way God meant for marriage to work, for pro-creation.
In the beginning marriage was not for procreation, it was a business transaction between one father and the woman’s prospective husband usually including a dowry from the woman. The goal of marriage was to improve the standing of the father by binding a man to his daughter to improve the his families power or wealth.
Marriage was also a means to cement political allies by joining two ruling families together in marriage and providing an heir to carry on the family line.
Marriage for love and procreation did not become common until the Nineteenth Century. In English Common Law, Common Law Marriage was created to protect the child after it was born and has been law for over 500 years. American Common Law marriages were taken from English Common law for the same reason, to protect the child not for procreation.
All Civil Rights have been passed by the legislature or initiate by activists courts.
How do you think minorities got the (equal) rights they have now? It was not from a groundswell of public support, especially in the South.
Or how do you think you got the right to vote? One hundred years ago you could not have voted.
Please give me one Civil Right that was not passed by the legislature or “activist” courts.
I am not challenging voter turnout, off year elections, or indicated a stance on the subject. I simply pointed out that the piece was written with inaccurate statements. “Once again Mainers find themselves presented with a referendum on marriage equality. We have voted to ensure our fellow Mainers can marry and then denied them this right”. This at the very least is misleading. This validates what most of us already know. Our school systems mentor our young people into good little liberals. Writing articles with misconstrued statements to confuse the issue is stereotypical liberal. As far as ” marriage equality” is concerned, I really don’t care either way. I don’t hate anyone. Hate is a powerful word. I just don’t like the way the gay lobby is going about it.
You are correct. The writers seems to say that the voters ok’d it once. That is not true.
As an”expert” in education, I’m sure that you’re aware of data that shows that K-12 and college education does not consistently produce “good little liberals”. Would you prefer “good little indoctrinated conservatives”, incapable of real critical thinking? Probably and unfortunately so.
68 percent of people age 18-24 voting for our current president would probably be a good indicator for starters. It is well documented that here in Maine, many traditional students enrolled in higher education feel pressured in how they interact with their professors on political issues. On occasion, some have been called out on the matter publicly, but flat out denial is always the case. Our educational systems should not teach curriculum, or present it in a fashion that invokes any political ideologue at all. They should be able to form their own value system over time and maturity. So what you are saying is conservatives are not capable of “critical thinking”. We must all be uneducated, misled and outright stupid to even have conservative beliefs! I guess nothing surprises me.
Sorry, I’m probably guilty of as much stereotyping as I was responding to. At least I wasn’t calling anyone ‘stupid” or worse as is so often hurled at alleged “liberals”.
Ah, but we elected these officials. You probably also chamion the Republican form of government, don’t you?
We did elect them, but as one knows, they always don’t always vote in the same manner as their constituents. Wonder why the Dems lost both the house and senate in 2010? Must have been low voter turnout.
Certainly the elected officials were elected. But, the people of Maine did not fully subordinate their collective judgement to the legislature. The people reserve the power to overturn those acts that are inconsistent with the will of the people. The people also reserve the right to pass laws that the legislature refuses to consider by the same process.
That process will probably result in “same sex marriage.” In my opinion, passing SSM through referendum is the way to go. That process is a definitive statement by the people and takes away arguments of “liberal judges” or turncoat legislators.
I signed the petition to bring it to a vote, even though I was undecided as to how I would vote. I don’t see SSM as a Constitutional right. It is not listed in the great document and it certainly is not “deeply rooted in the nation’s history and traditions”. Marriage has always been regulated and many are not allowed to marry. In Maine, 1st cousins may marry but not in most states. Genetics do not depend on state borders. But, states may bar cousin marriage. Why? Because it is not an outright Constitutional right. Therefore, the test is “rational basis” and not “strict scrutiny”. There are “rational reasons”, even if disagreed with, for barring it.
That being said, I’ve come to believe that it is the right thing to do. These fellow Mainers have families, property and all the trappings and problems of relationships. Marriage is the most efficient way to deal with all of issues that these families face. When one dies, the law covers it. When relationships end, there is an efficient mechanism to end the relationship, take care of the kids and divide up the property.
I am deeply religious, but I have to acknowledge that it has nothing to do with my religion or my relationship with God. It has everything to do with a civil institution by which we give families the civil tools to manage their families.
So, although as an attorney I can make a “rational basis” argument for supporting the same-sex ban, as a compassionate citizen I cannot make one that will cause me to turn my back on these families and denies them the protections and obligations of marriage.
Simply, the time has come.
Kara,
I fully believe in equal rights for gay couples and I believe that the term marriage should be removed from the state and federal laws and simply called a union of 2 people. The term marriage should be left for use in a religious “rite”. Practicing Christians view marriage as solely between a man and a woman. They consider it an offense to their religion when the term is utilized otherwise. If under civil law the term marriage is changed to union then everyone would have the same rights and there would be no argument over the term marriage.
That would be constitutional, but so far the organized opposition to same sex civil marriage has been just as opposed to civil unions or any other arrangement that treats gay and lesbian couples the same as heterosexual couples.
The fact of the matter is that civil marriage is a state matter, and so far I have yet to meet anyone who is truly hung up on the word being used for the state granted benefits couples gain from a marriage license.
When I made such a suggestion in the past, I have been told that would not do. It is marriage only.
I am sure you will agree neither you nor I control the outcome of this issue, nor does anyone who may have told you that civil unions across the board for all couples gay and straight “won’t do.”
If the folks who told you that are members of the US Supreme Court, you may have a point, but otherwise we are all just sharing our individual opinions here… Neither side is an organized, homogenic cabal making decisions in perfect alignment.
The problem with the word union is that the word marriage appears hundreds if not thousands of times in various statutes and laws that would all have to be changed to union. It is much easier to identify them all as marriage then to change everything.
It is not just Christians, the jewish religion does not, Muslim law doesn’t … I don’t know enough about Shintoism, Confusican but outside of religions vast countries don’t do SSM
Maybe Jewish religion does not, but Isreal may be on the verge.
“There is no same-sex marriage in Israel, but the state does recognize, for some administrative purposes, same-sex marriages performed overseas. In 2006, Israel’s high court issued a precedent-setting ruling that five gay couples already residing in Israel but wed overseas could be registered as married couples in Israel.”Read more: http://www.forward.com/articles/139923/israel-wrestles-with-how-or-whether-to-recogni/#ixzz1sy7k1byn
Sara,
People make a choice what field they want to enter. They sign a master promissory note for their student loans and they agree to pay their loans back. You know what you are in for, if you cop out, everyone else will be paying for your education. While you may believe you are helping others, it says to me you can not keep a commitment.
hahahah just so everyone knows, Pam and I are social work students at the University of Maine. This was an assignment for one of our classes, to pick a macro problem and present it. I’m not sure what other people pick their careers based from, but I did not chose mine based on salary (obviously). That is not to say that other people don’t. Our point was simply that social work is a needed career… and those on here so say it’s not are absolutely clueless about social services. There are many other professions that do offer loan forgiveness……teaching among those. I know that especially with all the cuts to social services, getting money for loan forgiveness would be unreasonable. Again, this was an assignment for our senior class, and was meant to generate thought (and it looks like that’s exactly what it did). I am not planning on not paying back my student loans and “refusing to abide by what I agreed to”. But when you are all old and unable to care for yourself, or have a child that needs accommodations or services, good luck getting them without a social worker. :)
I say NO to all three.
Why do you say no to constitutional rights? They protect us all, including you.
My comment was against wind power,gay marraige, and student loan forgiveness.
Good letters all.
Re loan forgiveness for education loans to workers in the social fileds, I know of some programs for loan forgiveness by “working them off” in Maine through the employing organization. These should be publicized and expanded.
Just read an article in today’s USA Today, “Colleges, Student Loans, and Majors: Choose Wisely” (p. 7A). Unlike a lot of the commnets here, quite realistic, middle of the road, and not insulting. There’s also a wonderful quote: ‘As the saying attributed to Confucius goes, “Choose a job you love and you will never have to work a day in your life.” ‘. For the most part, i believe I’ve accomplished that task and I advised my kids similarly. Fortunately, they too are living their dreams. Far better career counseling than the hard-nosed “advice” coming from the cynics on these forums.
Agreed, and think how awful it would be to be working for them.
—–
I agree about choosing a job you love. But don’t expect everyone else to pay your loans out of the money they earn just because your job doesn’t pay so much. I don’t think people are being hard-nosed and mean. I think most are being practical. Everyone knows the cost of education. Everyone should know about how much they will earn upon graduation. Plan accordingly. As a social worker, if you cannot exhibit personal responsibility, how well will you be able to counsel others about taking care of themselves?
I have pretty much lived by taking only jobs I am interested in doing. None of them has paid well, but I have managed to pay off most of my loans from school (still a couple more years to go on them) and have helped support my family. Interest on government student loans is the best deal one will probably ever get on credit. There is no reason to default on paying them back.