Use taxes for peaceful purposes
What can we do to ensure our tax payments go to constructive, nonviolent solutions rather than violence forced upon people here and around the globe? One legal way is to examine your finances and earn less than a taxable income. Another way is to re-direct all or some of your tax payment to life-affirming projects in your community or the nine alternative funds set up around the country.
President Donald Trump’s proposed budget slashes the social safety net and critical agencies such as the Environmental Protection Agency to pay for $54 billion in increased military spending. We need investment in infrastructure to lift people out of poverty with good-paying jobs, not big raises for “defense” manufacturer executives. For example, in 2013 General Dynamics, which owns Bath Iron Works, gave its CEO a nearly $12 million raise for a total salary of nearly $19 million.
Military personnel opposed to war may become conscientious objectors against war and killing. But taxpayers don’t have the same option because the Peace Tax Fund, which would allow conscientious objectors to redirect their taxes for peaceful purposes, has never been seriously considered by Congress. By taking back the power through how we invest our taxes, we can change the dynamic, pass the Peace Tax Fund and divest from military spending.
Our children deserve a better future and the schools to make the future possible. Our elders deserve economic security, and we all deserve affordable health care. It’s our money, let’s choose to spend it in a way that serves us all.
Ginny Schneider
Leslie Manning
Jason Rawn
Maine War Tax Resistance Resource Center
Portland
Physician-assisted suicide not ethical
The Maine House of Representatives voted correctly to defeat the flawed physician-assisted suicide bill proposed by advocates for this particular procedure.
Reporting on the bill’s outcome, the observation was made about how, “Some raised religious and moral objections” to the practice of physician-assisted suicide. This comment underscores the important occasions when public policy and morality can, and should, be collaborative.
In fact, hospice care provides quality of life to those facing the end of life and should always be considered before physician-assisted suicide is offered as an unnecessary alternative. Hospice is the moral choice, and it is consistent with ethical health care policy
Juliana L’Heureux
Topsham
Implement ranked-choice voting
Recently, the Maine Supreme Judicial Court released its opinion on the state Senate’s “solemn occasion” request on the ranked-choice voting law passed with the second-largest number of votes for a referendum in Maine history last fall. The court ruled that ranked-choice voting for general election state offices, including governor, state senate, and state house races, conflicts with the Maine Constitution’s plurality provision.
Ranked-choice voting is still the law of the land here in Maine, and there is no conflict in federal elections. In their opinion, the court lays out how the Legislature could rectify the situation by either advancing a constitutional amendment or repealing the portion of the law that conflicts with the Constitution.
Very soon two ranked-choice voting bills will be reviewed by Maine lawmakers. One bill — LD 1624 — seeks to amend the Maine Constitution to correct the question regarding plurality. The other — LD 1625 — seeks to abolish the law.
The time for the implementation of ranked-choice voting is now. For example, four decades of Maine gubernatorial elections have largely resulted in a candidate winning an election by getting as little as 35 percent of the vote. The result is elected officials who are often delegitimized by the majority of voters who did not choose them, and legislative leadership that may question their authority.
The will of the people is very clear here. We must block the repeal of ranked-choice voting and insist that our legislators pass the amendment that will ease the implementation of this law.
Denise Schwartz
Harpswell