The Ati-thesis , Marxism

"By that definition, a state capitalist country is one where the government controls the economy and essentially acts like a single huge corporation, extracting the surplus value from the workforce in order to invest it in further production.[3] Friedrich Engels, in Socialism: Utopian and Scientific, argues that state capitalism would be the final stage of capitalism consisting of ownership and management of large-scale production and communication by the bourgeois state.[4]"

Quoted from Wikepedia

Monday, August 11, 2014

Rule of Law in Maine In Critical Condition

Continuing where I left off in my last post- addressing the Lepage Campaign talking points as presented by Representative Heather Sirocki in this Portland Press Herald article titled Maine reaping rewards of governor’s commitment to fiscal responsibility
The article says:

Let’s start with the state’s improved credit standing. In June, rating agencies issued their outlooks for Maine’s creditworthiness. Standard & Poor’s Rating Services assigned its AA rating to our long-term bonds, while Moody’s Investor Services affirmed its Aa2 rating and upgraded its forecast of Maine’s debt from negative to stable. The agencies cited several major factors that influenced the strong ratings, including repayment of $748 million in MaineCare’s hospital debt; substantial public pension reform; and measures to control costs in the MaineCare program, which provides “free” taxpayer-subsidized health care to more than 300,000 state residents.

It's a good thing that Maine's credit rating has improved but Standard & Poor does not factor in the means used to achieve the end, which is of importance to a Constitutional Conservative, given that Maine is in the midst of a widely UN-publicized crisis that mirrors a similar crisis we are facing at the national level, which is a constitutional crisis. I submit that Maine's constitutional crisis is actually more advanced than the national constitutional crisis and the transformation of the State of Maine to the corporation of Maine is already complete in practice, if not re-written into our constitution. Our governing representatives take an oath to uphold the state constitution but misconstrue that to mean upholding the statutes, and, as we saw in the last post, even the statutes are not regarded as a rule of law that applies to government, as the rules governing the liquor industry were written over and then patched together with this announcement:

§83. Bureau of Alcoholic Beverages and Lottery Operations(CONFLICT)(CONTAINS TEXT WITH VARYING EFFECTIVE DATES)(WHOLE SECTION CONFLICT: Text as amended by PL 2013, c. 269, Pt. A, §2) (WHOLE SECTION TEXT EFFECTIVE UNTIL 7/1/14)
Recently I discovered a similarly styled fix :

Rule Chapters for the Department of the Secretary of State 

WARNING: While we have taken care with the accuracy of the files accessible here, they are not "official" state rules in the sense that they can be used before a court. Anyone who needs a certified copy of a rule chapter should contact the APA Office.We also offer advice if you're having trouble trying to view these chapters. 29-250          OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY OF STATE

A pattern emerges that discloses a disturbingly overt attitude toward the Rule of Law expressed more openly by this administration than I have previously encountered- Not to say that other administrations did not harbor the same attitude. Angus King signed the Small Enterprise Growth Fund into law, which includes an exemption for the fund to this general law:

3104. Conflicts of interest; purchases by the State 
No trustee, superintendent, treasurer or other person holding a place of trust in any state office or public institution of the State shall be pecuniarily interested directly or indirectly in any contracts made in behalf of the State or of the institution in which he holds such place of trust, and any contract made in violation hereof is void. This section shall not apply to purchases of the State by the Governor under authority of Title 1, section 814. [1975, c. 771, §164 (AMD).]

So not only has the constitution of Maine been conflated with the statutes by Maine's public servants, but even the statutes are not taken seriously as a deterrent to anything that our state government wants to do.

So to the Maine fiscal conservative, the end justifies the means and the political class stands outside the rule of law. Yes it is a fiscally good thing that LePage saved Mainers money by upping the age at which pensions can be collected upon - but lets take a look at how that public debt was created in the first place.

To save myself time I am now quoting directly from A Maine Citizen's Journey Through The Statutes of Transformation

Commentary:  The Maine Public Employees Retirement System is described as established in 1942 but information pertaining to what type of a system it was in its original form is missing and difficult to find in a standard internet search. and so it is reasonable to conclude that it was originally established under general laws that operate in the private sector..

The charter of the Maine Employees Retirement System corporation is clearly unconstitutional. There are only two exceptions to the constitutional prohibition against chartering corporations by special acts of the legislature. The first exception is for municipal purposes. There can be no doubt that a corporation declared as an instrumentality of the state is serving a state purpose, which is arguably the very purpose that Article IV Part Third Section 13 & 14 of the Maine State Constitution are intended to prohibit.

The second exception is that of if the object of the corporation cannot be achieved another way. Prior to 1993, the Maine Public Employees System had been in existence since 1942. For over fifty years the system had been attained in another way.

The intent of the government to provide benefits is stated in a statute in 1985, for which no constitutional amendment was sought. Neither was a constitutional amendment sought when MPERS was chartered as a state corporation, when the legislature obligated the general taxpayer to take on the debt for a public employees retirement system ( which includes the legislature). However  two years after the Public Employees Retirement System is statutorily declared to be a corporate instrumentality of the state, the public was called to vote on constitutionalizing contractual agreements with MPERS. Under general laws, such contractual terms of agreement are part and parcel of an initiating agreement to take on the debt. By the general standards, the agreement to take on the debt should also have been on the electoral ballot  to become a constitutional amendment - were it not for the fact that contractual agreements have no place in a constitutional document intended to establish general governing principles and chartering corporations to serve as instrumentalities of the state is prohibited by the Constitution.

In 2009 a statute was passed encouraging the retirement fund to invest in state economic development projects by offering a refundable tax credit to minimize the risk. A refundable tax credit means  taxpayers are liable for a cash payout if investment falters and the  fund does not owe taxes. The investment plan is explained as a solution  to the public liability to the Public Employees Retirement System, which was receiving attention from the media, a liability brought on by the legislature when it established the Public Employees Retirement System, making taxpayers liable for public employees pensions plans.

1942 established

1985 Legislature States intent to provide benefits to MPERS

1993 Legislature MPERS a corporate instrumentality of the state

1995 Constitutional Amendment enforces MPERS contractual agreement
Legislature creates MPERS investment fund for targeted sector

2010 MPERS Targeted Sector Refundable Tax Credits 
Notice that there are only two years between the legislature deeming MPERS to be an corporate instrumentality of the state and the contractual terms of agreement with MPERS being inserted into the constitution, despite the fact that there was never a consent from the governed sought to take on the MPERS debt in the first place. If Maine is a state the MPERS debt cannot be justified as government employees ( including legislature, courts and administration) constitutes a special interest faction of the general public -NOT justifiable as the benefiting the general welfare- However if Maine is a corporation, then MPERS is just a corporate expense. Every corporation is expected to provide benefits for its workers. The difference between a state corporation and a private corporation is that a state corporation can force the general public to pay.

*All links are active in the downloadable time line. Since the download link never stays functional for long, I am recommending sending a contribution to this independent and unaffiliated research journalism blog via PayPal using as the address and including a note that you are requesting the timeline. Suggested minimum contribution is $10.00. 

Saturday, August 9, 2014

Fiscal Conservative VS Constitutional Conservative

The moderator of Maine Taxpayers United FaceBook Page is running for state legislature as a Republican and is actively campaigning for Governor LePage's re-election. I was recently threatened to be blocked from posting for  criticizing Governor Lepage- which she called "tiresome"

Beth O'Connor Mackenzie at every turn you bash our Governor, who is doing a good job. You have also derailed the context of this thread and this is not the first time. The BOD of MTU fully support Governor LePage and your constant assaults on him are becoming tiresome in this forum. I have never limited discussion in this forum, but am seriously considering it. Do you think Michaud or Cutler will be better?

I am for no current candidate running for the Governor of Maine.I know some would argue apparent "fiscal responsibility" reasons for voting for LePage but LePage is a corporate state CEO and governs with a philosophy in which the end justifies the means. That's how Maine lost its constitution in the first place, when in the late seventies the legislature reasoned that Maine did not have a centrally managed economy and so instituted them selves as the authority to centrally manage Maine's economy. Ever since then, the justification for transforming a state into a corporation has been framed as economic responsibility - as if the political class were completely occluded from concepts of political philosophy- and YET, the legislature, having assigned themselves jurisdiction over educational matters at the University of Maine, once they had decreed said university to be an "instrumentality of the state", have long maintained a minor at said instrumentality in Marxist and Socialist Studies- and so they can hardly be as NON-cognizant of political philosophy as they so feign.*

Lepage Campaign Posters Accurately Portrays the Role he Covets as that of  a  Corporate CEO

The moderator of Maine Taxpayer's United posted a Portland Press Herald article written by  Representative Heather Sirocki
Maine Voices: Maine reaping rewards of governor’s commitment to fiscal responsibility
OK- it's true that the Governor's policies are more fiscally responsible than his predecessors but does his end justify his means? And when we hear of lowered taxes- the question becomes "for whom " with a further nagging question:  Does our Governor's special interest economics, spun as "fiscal responsibility' mirror the meaning of that term for other governors of other state's, especially those running for the presidency of the USA ? In my fantasy organization, this question would be answered by research journalists across our nation- but I don't have time to do that, I don't even have the time to be writing this article- I am just taking it away from other pressing matters.

My "bash" of Governor LePage was a short comment:

Mackenzie Andersen Maine taxpayers & workers are the beneficiaries?!/ I wonder if that includes the increased burden of corporate welfare that our Governor doesn't mind dumping on their backs!

Which received this response:
Les Gibson Mackenzie Andersen....what corporate welfare are you speaking of? Do you have any examples? 
Funny...I haven't felt any corporate welfare burden placed on my back...but I certainly do have an increased tax burden on my back thanks to the tax and spend policies of Justin Alfond and his merry band of happy people....See More
It was when I answered Mr Gibson's post that I "derailed the context of this thread" according to Ms OConner.

How about the "Expanded and Improved Seed Capital Tax Credit" voted for unanimously in the Senate last year- and I don't know the roll call for House but they voted for it too, It expanded by eight fold the rate at which the legislature authorizes itself to transfer money from middle class pockets to the bank accounts of capitalists and the specially selected new owners of the means of production. It's a refundable tax credit so if the capitalist does not owe taxes, then the taxpayers owe the capitalist a cash payout- and of course the capitalists won't owe taxes having picked up his Pine tree Zone tax credits first ( of which Lepage is a A+ fan) -Pine tree Zone includes mandates that taxpayers will cover up to 80 % of the owner of the means' s of production payroll taxes in addition to 100% exemption from corporate and personal taxes for the owners of the means of production- and then he might have stopped by Maine's public charity for capitalists- The Maine Technology Institute to have his original investment ( probably borrowed possibly with notes from the state saying he qualifies for all the corporate welfare programs) matched 100% also financed by taxpayers - and/or by "any source" as most of the state's corporations have slush funds that can accept money from any source- So by the time he collects his 60% tax credit ( cash payout from taxpayers) -it is really a 120% cash refund of his original investment- probably enough to cover the remainder of his payroll taxes- and then there is Maine's publicly funded workforce - which covers the cost of training his employees and the taxpayers are forced to pay for the marketing of that program as well- even though it is unfair competition for the "UN-targeted sector" - UN -targeted sector is the sector that pays taxes- along with the workers in the targeted sector.

Lepage's favorite location for speeches are the state courts of MRRA and Lorring- which are hotspots for Pine Tree Zone tax incentives and the whole package of corporate welfare that the state keeps on escalating on a yearly basis- especially Lepage.

LePage did not sign the Expanded and Improved Tax credit saying it wasn't "impactful enough"- we saw why in his failed jobs bill to expand corporate welfare to BIG business (1500 employees)- the Expanded and Improved Seed Capital tax Credit would have had to be re-written to allow it to be extended to BIG business ! So it's seems clear why Lepage thought it wasn't "impactful" enough! Imagine the payroll tax bill that taxpayers would have to finance if that bill had passed!

So I was supposed to NOT answer Mr Gibson's question? Is this Maine Taxpayers United- Or Is it the Lepage for Governor Facebook Page? The political class in Maine has it's designated talking points. Public is not to go off-script?

Ans so, I have decided to address the talking points of the Lepage Campaign beginning with this:

BETH The agencies cited several major factors that influenced the strong ratings, including repayment of $748 million in MaineCare’s hospital debt; substantial public pension reform; and measures to control costs in the MaineCare program, which provides “free” taxpayer-subsidized health care to more than 300,000 state residents

MAC : I would want to see the figures for how this was done- as noted above we are told it was repaid by taking back the liquor industry as a government function and so that would require also seeing the figures of the states liquor bureau. It is provided in the legislation that :

5-B. Report on expenditures. Expenditures and investments made by the alcohol bureau, including but not limited to reductions in the list price at which all spirits are sold and incentives offered to agency liquor stores, must be reported annually to the joint standing committees of the Legislature having jurisdiction over appropriations and financial affairs and alcoholic beverage matters. The report must include the impact of those spending initiatives on the number of cases of spirits sold in the State and on sales generally.[[2013.][ 2013, c. 269, Pt. A, §2 (NEW) .]
However since the law repealing the state's interests in the liquor industry has only been out of effect for little more than a month, How can there have been the time and date to generate such a report in such a short time span?Just now · Like
§83. Bureau of Alcoholic Beverages and Lottery Operations
(WHOLE SECTION CONFLICT: Text as amended by PL 2013, c. 269, Pt. A, §2) (WHOLE SECTION TEXT EFFECTIVE UNTIL 7/1/14)

5-B. Report on expenditures.   Expenditures and investments made by the alcohol bureau, including but not limited to reductions in the list price at which all spirits are sold and incentives offered to agency liquor stores, must be reported annually to the joint standing committees of the Legislature having jurisdiction over appropriations and financial affairs and alcoholic beverage matters. The report must include the impact of those spending initiatives on the number of cases of spirits sold in the State and on sales generally.

2013, c. 269, Pt. A, §2 (NEW) .]
6. Certification; annual report.  The alcohol bureau shall certify monthly to the Treasurer of State, the commission and the Commissioner of Administrative and Financial Services a complete statement of the revenues and expenses for liquor sales for the preceding month. The alcohol bureau shall make an annual report to the Governor of its activities and of the amount of liquor license fees collected by the bureau, together with other information it considers advisable or that the Governor requires.
[ 1997, c. 373, §28 (NEW) .] 
So technically, The above section ( & whole section) is no longer effective as we have passed July 1 2014.

Isn't the administrative branch of government supposed to faithfully administer the law?  Not re-write it?

That's all I have time for today .. to be continued

* links to statutes mentioned in this article are available in my downloadable timeline- which you can procure by sending a contribution to this blog ( suggested $10.00) via Pay Pal to with a note that you are requesting the timeline and I will email it to you- You can read the table of contents HERE but the download link never stays functioning for long and I do not have time to keep on fixing it.  

Sunday, July 27, 2014

In 1981 Maine Legislature Grants Itself The Authority to Centrally Manage Economy

A Free Enterprise System Cannot Co-Exist with A Centrally Managed Economy

The following are out-takes from the statutory downloadable timeline ( With headlines added)  which I constructed by researching the statutes- A Maine Citizen's Journey Through The Statutes of Transformation available for a minimum contribution for the many hours of research required for both this blog and the timeline.The only income I make from this blog comes from contributions in exchange for the downloadable timeline which includes internal and external links and bookmarks for ease of navigation. All links are active in the downloadable timeline.They do not transfer over in the cut and past function.

From The Table Of Zingers

This chapter (Municipal Bond Bank)  shall be construed liberally to effectuate the legislative intent and the purposes of this chapter as complete and independent authority for the performance of each and every act and thing authorized in this chapter and all powers granted in this chapter shall be broadly interpreted to effectuate that intent and purposes and not as a limitation of powers.

There is a need to establish a new basis for a creative partnership of the private and public sectors for economic development, a partnership which can capitalize on the interests, resources and efforts of each sector, but which does not compromise the public interest or the profit motive. The state's solitary burden to
provide for development should lessen through involving the private sector in a leadership role. [1977,(emphasis mine)

Commentary No compromising of public interest or profit motive? Destined to failure!

The Middle Class Is The Back Bone Of A Free Enterprise System. It's Growth or Decline is the Measure of Public Benefit and Detriment

The Economic Growth Council collects data on the economy Governor John R. McKernan, Jr.

  • Data on the size and growth of the middle class is missing.
  • The data provided is an aggregate figure for personal income and a figure for the poverty rate.
  • Comparison figures over time only go back only as far as the previous year.
  • No mention of adjustments for inflation.
I emailed the Maine Development Foundation ,asking if there is any data collected on the size and growth of middle class. To date no answer is forth coming.

1~to be created as a body corporate and politic to have full powers to borrow money and to issue its bonds and notes to make funds available through the facilities of the instrumentality at reduced rates and on more favorable terms for borrowing by such governmental units through the instrumentality's purchase of the bonds or notes of the governmental units in fully marketable form; and [1987, c. 737, Pt. A, §2 (NEW); 1987, c. 737, Pt. C, §106(NEW); 1989, c. 6, (AMD); 1989, c. 9, §2 (AMD); 1989, c. 104, Pt. C, §§8, 10 (AMD).](emphasis mine)

B. Granting broad powers to the instrumentality to accomplish and to carry out these policies of the State which are in the public interest of the State and of its taxpayers and residents. [1987, c. 737, Pt. A, §2 (NEW); 1987, c. 737, Pt. C, §106 (NEW); 1989, c. 6, (AMD); 1989, c. 9, §2 (AMD); 1989, c. 104, Pt. C, §§8, 10 (AMD).]

§5904. Liberal construction of chapter

          This chapter shall be construed liberally to effectuate the legislative intent and the purposes of this chapter as complete and independent authority for the performance of each and every act and thing authorized in this chapter and all powers granted in this chapter shall be broadly interpreted to effectuate that intent and purposes and not as a limitation of powers. [1987, c. 737, Pt. A, §2 (NEW); 1987, c. 737, Pt. C, §106 (NEW); 1989, c. 6, (AMD); 1989, c. 9, §2 (AMD); 1989, c. 104, Pt. C, §§8, 10 (AMD).](emphasis mine)

Comment Although the Home Rule Amendment establishes the relative sovereignty of local government, the legislature here refers to municipalities as (the state’s) governmental units conveying that the municipalities are simply subsidiaries of the state government, which is exactly what a state municipal bond bank will help to bring about through the means of controlling and distributing capital, just as the federal government controls the states through distribution of freshly printed paper bills

Is this saying what it looks like it is saying? That the Municipal Bond Bank- as a complete and independent authority does not need to obtain taxpayer and legislative authority? See 1951 Most recent Maine State Borrowing Power Constitutional Amendment (#8)  

General Provisions.

Section 14.  Authority and procedure for issuance of bonds.
        The Legislature shall not create any debt or debts, liability or liabilities, on behalf of the State, which shall singly, or in the aggregate, with previous debts and liabilities hereafter incurred at any one time, exceed $2,000,000, except to suppress insurrection, to repel invasion, or for purposes of war, and except for temporary loans to be paid out of money raised by taxation during the fiscal year in which they are made, and except for loans to be repaid within 12 months with federal transportation funds in amounts not to exceed 50% of transportation funds appropriated by the federal government in the prior federal fiscal year; and excepting also that whenever 2/3 of both Houses shall deem it necessary, by proper enactment ratified by a majority of the electors voting thereon at a general or special election ( emphasis mine)

§5951. Creation of bank and membership

1987 1. Bank established.  There is established a public body corporate and politic to be known as the "Maine Municipal Bond Bank" in accordance with Title 5, chapter 379. The bank is constituted as an instrumentality of the State exercising public and essential governmental functions. The bank's exercise of the powers conferred by this chapter shall be deemed and held to be an essential governmental function of the State.[ 1987, c. 737, Pt. A, §2 (NEW); 1987, c. 737, Pt. C, §106 (NEW); 1989, c. 6, (AMD); 1989, c. 9, §2 (AMD); 1989, c. 104, Pt. C,§§8, 10 (AMD) .](emphasis mine)Governor John R. McKernan, Jr

§5954. Corporate powers

Comment It’s always “deemed” when the constitutional process is by-passed !

1987 §5681. State-municipal revenue sharing creates a general pool for municipal expenditures controlled by state Governor John R. McKernan, Jr.

§13051. Legislative findings

The Legislature finds that the State's economy is linked to the national and international economies. Economic changes and disruptions around the world and in the nation have a significantly impact upon the State's economy. The rise of 3rd-world and 4th-world countries as manufacturers of commodities for mass markets and the gradual evolution of the national economy to a technological, informational, specialty product-based economy have significantly more

Commentary Statement establishes a philosophy based on the rule of law by global capitalism- constructed on layers of truisms and borne out by the direction followed by Maine's corporate state governance since to present.)

"In order for the State's economy to grow and gain a solid footing, it is necessary to determine the State's assets and the economic opportunities that are or will be available to the State's enterprise, municipalities and labor force. ( emphasis mine)

Were the word "state" replaced with "Maine- it would come across with another meaning but as is it comes across in the sense of state ownership of enterprise, municipalities, and labor force- See Developing the Publicly Funded Work Force 2013)

The Legislature finds that the decentralization of economic growth and development programs among several state agencies without any coordination of programs and agencies and without coordination with the State's municipal and regional economic efforts is not in the best interest of the State. The Legislature further finds that the State's economic development programs and policies and the economies of municipalities and regions mutually affect each other. [1987, c. 534, Pt. A, §§17, 19 (NEW).] (emphasis mine)  

Centralized management of economy fifth & sixth planks of the Ten Planks of The Communist Manifesto

Thursday, July 10, 2014

Maine Media Goes into A Tizzy as Readers of Maine Constitution Come Out Of The Woods !

I was recently in a conversation with a candidate for the Maine legislature. I am not revealing his identity as the intention is not to hurt his campaign, being that he was decent in engaging in conversation and he is in the regard that I write about here representative of the culture in Augusta in general. Henceforth I will refer to him as Candidate

 I was questioning Candidate's support of a Maine Bank, a movement that I had become cognizant about during my research efforts for A Maine Citizen's Journey Through The Statutes of Transformation.

We debated many of the points for and against such a new government function but during the course of our dialogue, my question about how one reconciles the establishment of a State Bank, which would surely be established as yet another corporate instrumentality of the state, with Article IV Part Third Of The Maine State Constitution:

As it is presented in Time Line

Part Third. Legislative Power

Section 13.  Special legislation.  The Legislature shall, from time to time, provide, as far as practicable, by general laws, for all matters usually appertaining to special or private legislation.

Section 14.  Corporations, formed under general laws.  Corporations shall be formed under general laws, and shall not be created by special Acts of the Legislature, except for municipal purposes, and in cases where the objects of the corporation cannot otherwise be attained; and, however formed, they shall forever be subject to the general laws of the State. Governor Seldon Connor

I.n Governor Seldon Conner's Inaugural Address he said these words pertaining to the new constitutional amendment:

Section thirteen presents a discretionary field of action which your own honor will impel you to occupy to the fullest extent.'The title of 'Special and Private Laws,' which includes so large a portion of the laws of former Legislatures, is an obnoxious one, conveying suggestions of privilege, favoritism and monopoly; though happily these evils have not in fact, stained the character of our legislation, they should not be suffered to have, even in the form of our laws, any grounds of suspicion that can be removed. Other weighty objections to special laws for private benefit are, that they are obtained at the public expense, and in their passage distract the attention of legislators from matters of public interest. The opportunity is now afforded, and the duty enjoined upon you, by the amendment, to restrict the necessity for such laws to the narrowest possible limits. An analysis and classification of the private and special laws upon the statute books, will inform you of the objects for which it is desirable to provide by general laws, if practicable. 'Many objects have been hitherto specially legislated upon although they were amply provided for by general laws. I have distinguished authority for the statement that sixty or more of the corporations created by a special act for each, by the last Legislature, could have been created and organized under general laws. The reason why the general laws have not been resorted to to a greater extent, is not, so far as I am informed, to be found in any insufficiency or defect of those laws, but in the greater ease and simplicity of the method of application to the Legislature and in the fancied higher [146 Me. 323] sanction of an authority proceeding directly from it. Section fourteen, relating to corporations is compressive and peremptory.. It relates to all corporations, except only those for municipal purposes. It clearly prohibits their creation by special acts if the objects desired can be secured under existing general laws.' ( emphasis mine) From Governor Seldon Conner's Inaugural Address  1876 - I don't have a link for this - it was found in The Maine Constitution- A reference guide by Marshall J Tink

Candidate :Mackenzie, I honestly don't know about the constitutional prohibition against corporations, and Article IV.unfortunately, don't have enough time to research this! All I can say is that there are similar entities which, to my mind, are valid, such as state chartered non-profit credit unions

A few posts down on Candidate's page there is a video in which Candidate tells us that he supports a strict interpretation of "the Constitution", by which Candidate clearly means the United States Constitution, because Candidate doesn't have time to read the Maine Constitution and so how could he begin to know what comprises strict adherence to the Maine Constitution?

In a different world, it would have been a huge mistake on the Candidate's part to give such an answer but in Maine 2014, his answer merely reflects the current culture in Augusta. Our representatives take an oath to uphold the constitution, and then use the statutes as a constitutional reference.

Article IV Part Third is Legislative Powers. It is the job description for the position that the Candidate seeks but he doesn't have the time to read it as he campaigns on a platform of ideas about which he has no idea if they are reconcilable with the constitution or not. His measure is the status quo- the statutes that have been entrenched. As I have come cross. many times over, said by those influential within the political class: "Nobody Reads The Maine Constitution"

Such was said by John McDonald on WGAN Radio in his interview with Phill Merletti, one of the four men of the Constitutional Coalition Of Maine, whom have been used by blogger and activist Mike Tipping as a sensational news story to promote his crowdfunding project for a book on Governor Lepage.

 Mr Tipping is Communications Director for The Maine People's Alliance, and The Maine People's Resource Center, a columnist for The Portland Press herald,and a blogger for The Bangor Daily News,  where in Mr Tipping spreads such dis-information as the following:

The chapter details a series of at least eight meetings Gov. LePage held with members of a group called the Constitutional Coalition who identify themselves as “sovereign citizens,” a loose network of conspiracy theorists recognized as one of “the nation’s top domestic terror threats” by the FBI and Maine law enforcement.

Mr Tippings, co-conspiratist is another Portland Press Herald Journalist, Colin Woodard , who spread the story the national level in Politico, where in Mr Woodard  tells us that:

Some of the members of the circle have previously identified themselves as “Sovereign Citizens,” [skip to 17:00], a movement the FBI considers a domestic terrorist threat, though at least some of them now deny any such association. Members have espoused the belief that the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks and the Sandy Hook school shootings were perpetrated by the U.S. government, which engages in “mind control” and is preparing a “holocaust” against America’s Christians. They think the government is illegitimate and that top state officials are guilty of treason.
Read more:

Is Mr Woodard relying on people NOT clicking the link that he offers up in support of his claim? Is he targeting the mentality of the lowest common denominator when he makes such claims so easily proven to be false by the very means that he submits as verification. Following through on Mr Woodard suggestions reveals that Mr Woodard is presenting a falsehood. The discussion is about a government -issued document - and a government issued mandate for every law enforcement officer in Maine. The document identifies the four members of the Constitutional Coalition as members of the Sovereign Citizens, which in turn is identified as the most dangerous domestic terrorist group in the country. The Constitutional Coalition and the Governor are shocked and outraged to read it !

Mr Woodard is suggesting that an accusation against anyone can be construed as an admission by the accused of the substance of the accusation.

The Aroostic Watchmen Radio program begins with a tirade claiming that the United States is now in a stage similar to that of Germany in the thirties. Tippings and Woodard in their twisting of the words said by the others lend credence to the Coalition's perspective. Tipping and Woodard spin the Constitutional Coalition as anti-government, themselves occluded to the understanding that the basis of government in Maine and the USA is the Rule of Law and that the constitution is the Rule of Law to which all other law must reconcile itself.

The coalition is using a little known constitutional process called remonstrance. It is outside the scope of this post but you can read about it at The Maine Republic

There are lot of people speaking as though they have authority in the case of  the Constitutional Coalition- But once Remonstrance has been set into motion, who has authority to interpret it's meaning except the Justices ?

Tippings spins that the Constitutional Coalition admitted to being Sovereign Citizens because, as Merletti , says in the WGAN interview 97% of Americans qualify as Sovereign Citizens according to the document issued to the police department. The intent is clearly that the standards are so ludicrous that just about any one qualifies, but integrity-challenged Tippings, leaves out the context of the 97% and just claims that the Constitutional Coalition admitted to being Sovereign Citizens. Tippings delivers clearly biased third party spin on the message of the Constitutional Coalition. Taken out of context and fragmented beyond recognition, Tippens statements can be said to be true but delivered with intent to dis-inform.

In the Bangor Daily News Tippens milks the story for all the publicity he can get- clearly helping to promote his crowd funding project. He tells us of a new yellow journalism coalition that is forming spontaneously in response to his slanderous spin. However the tide is turning on Tippings and his ilk. Due to Tipping's yellow journalism the cause of the Constitutional Coalition is getting media time. WGAN has interviewed Phill Merletti and Wayne Leach. The Sun Journal published a piece that aired the Constitutional Coalitions's side of the story, dismaying poor Tippings that his own newspaper would allow its news department to betray the direction of its opinion department:

The news side of the BDN seems to be ignoring the warnings of their own editorial page. They chose to publish a long profile piece on members of the Constitutional Coalition by Sun Journal reporter Mark LaFlamme, who apparently hasn’t listened to a single minute of the group’s radio appearances or read any of the documents from their meetings. He gives credibility to their conspiracy theories by allowing them to claim “evidence,” “facts,” “research,” and “knowledge” of government and constitutional issues without ever requesting that they back up a single word or speaking to anyone who would refute their claims.
Poor Tippings! Our hearts bleed for the injustice being done against him! But like Phil Merletti said- If you think your neighbor is a terrorist- what do you do? Call the FBI? The CIA? Homeland Security? the Police? NO! You write a book and contact the media- and I might add- you run a crowd-funding project of course!