Preserving The American Political Philosophy

TWEET THIS: http://goo.gl/Dyh8Ql CONSTITUTION OF THE STATE OF MAINE 2013 ARRANGEMENT Article X. Additional Provisions. Section 3.  Laws now in force continue until repealed.   All laws now in force in this State, and not repugnant to this Constitution , shall remain, and be in force, until altered or repealed by the Legislature, or shall expire by their own limitation. ( emphasis mine ) In 2013 when the Maine legislature amended the bond ratification process. the bill that was passed and signed into law by Governor LePage  it was written in such away as to do away with  ALL compliance with the constitution at the voting booth: Article IX. General Provisions. Section 14.  Authority and procedure for issuance of bonds.   ........ Whenever ratification by the electors is essential to the validity of bonds to be issued on behalf of the State, the question submitted to the electors shall be accompanied by a statement setting forth the total amount of bonds of the State

  Tweet This  http://goo.gl/mQ4e0l Administrative law is commonly defended as a new sort of power, a product of  the 19th and the 20th centuries that developed to deal with the problems of modern society in all its complexity. From this perspective, the Framers of the Constitution could not have anticipated it and the Constitution could not have barred it. What I will suggest, in contrast, is that administrative power is actually very old. It revives what used to be called prerogative or absolute power, and it is thus something that the Constitution centrally prohibited.  The History and Danger of  Administrative Law   Philip Hamburger, Columbia Law School Jonathan Gruber, an architect of Obamacare bragged about how the United States legislature passed ObamaCare , turning over a sixth of the U.S. economy to the government , Gruber admitted that the Obama administration went through "tortuous" measures to keep the facts about the legislation from the American people,

TWEET THIS http://goo.gl/VcBj8O UPDATE NOV 11 2014:  Since I wrote This post- I cam across the statute governing Bond Ratification- as amended by the 2013 legislature It looks to be that the sentence "To meet the requirement that the signed statement of the Treasurer of State accompany any ballot question for ratification of a bond issue, the statement may be printed on the ballot" was amended by adding this "or it may be printed as a separate document that is made available to voters as provided in Title 21-A, sections 605-A and 651" Section 605-A no longer exists and I am tracking it down. Section 651 says it can be posted outside the guardrail which separates voters from the rest of the world. I am writing a new post to cover this new information Update Nov 12, 2014!   The link I originally referenced is here ,  THIS IS HOW THE LAW WAS WRITTEN IN  2011 - showing the process of incrementalism at play In this link  part of the sentence below is struck out

TWEET THIS  http://goo.gl/L29LbO UPDATE! I just voted in Boothbay, Maine, where the bond questions on the ballot are not compliant with what is essential for the validity of the bonds to be issued pursuant to the Maine Constitution. None of the requirements set forth in Article IX Section 14 were on the ballot. Only the total amount of the bond debt and the interest is listed with each bond question. This means that constitutionally, what ever the outcome of the vote, the enactment of the bonds cannot be ratified. Article IX. General Provisions. Section 14.  Authority and procedure for issuance of bonds.   ........Whenever ratification by the electors is essential to the validity of bonds to be issued on behalf of the State, the question submitted to the electors shall be accompanied by a statement setting forth the total amount of bonds of the State outstanding and unpaid, the total amount of bonds of the State authorized and unissued, and the total amount of bonds of t

SHARE ON TWITTER: http://goo.gl/AjjYSS Here we are at the day before the vote and I still have a lot of territory to cover regarding the 2013 Maine legislative session which I researched for my time line, A Maine Citizen's Journey Through The Statutes of Transformation , which you can receive in full by sending a contribution to this otherwise unfunded independent research blog to mackenzie@andersenstudio.com via paypal. I will then send it to you via PayPal as download links never seem to stay functional for long.                      In my last post I covered the No-Contest between the interests of the general public's need to know about toxic materials and the business interests of Maine State Inc . In the same legislative session a bill was passed confirming Maine's friendship with Chi na 2013 JOINT RESOLUTION AFFIRMING THE FRIENDSHIP BETWEEN THE STATE OF MAINE AND THE REPUBLIC OF CHINA Beginning with this statement: WHEREAS,  the United States and