When I started this post, I envisioned it as a short concise piece tracking the financing of Kestrel and then attempting to do the math on how that works out for the taxpayer. I had a specific outline but as I started writing I found there were a lot of unanswered questions to confirm and what do you know- before I knew it I was "surfing the internet' in hot pursuit of my theme until my short concise idea became rambling and complex. Perhaps after I ride out this wave I will write another piece that achieves the original intent but for now I have decided to publish this in a series of parts and do so as I go along as I do not have the luxury of taking the time to compose the whole journey into a contemplated, organized whole. I always feel like I am stealing time from other activities that I need to get back to - So recording the journey as it unravels is the now Da Plan!
From piecing together two articles, one from CEI Capital Management LLC, in April 2011 and another from Areo News on January 03 2012, it appears that it $20.7 Million from the New Markets Tax Credit Program, fell through. This is a federal tax credit program designated low income areas. It can be used for any kind of business. The website states the following:
The New Market Tax Credits program targets areas of low income and applies to any kind of business, not only those in the Maine legislature's "targeted sector", but that description is in the federal program. However the state agencies that I have run across all target the legislature's "targeted sector" and seek to satisfy the "social benefits" justification for use of taxpayer money under the tenants of the green science theocracy that rules in this state. This is the list of Coastal Enterprises investments, many of which are located in other states. I only did a quick scan on this list looking for recipients that fell out side of the states "targeted sectors". It seemed every instance that caught my attention turned out to be an investment in a state other than Maine- but since the investigation was hardly thorough, I say that with reserve.
CEI Capital Management, LLC (CCML) is a for-profit subsidiary of Coastal Enterprises, Inc. (CEI) that furthers CEI's mission to help create economically and environmentally healthy communities in which all people, especially those with low incomes, can reach their full potential by working to help attract capital to low-income areas using the U.S. Treasury Department’s New Markets Tax Credit (NMTC) program.
This is the CEI's Mission Statement:
CEI’s philosophy and mission are rooted in the civil rights movement. Since its inception in 1977, CEI has grown and adapted to changing markets and new possibilities, always focused on helping people, especially those with low incomes, reach their full potential. Targeted sectors have included:
…all to achieve social and economic justice within sustainable communities.
- value-added fisheries, farms and forest projects
- microenterprise development
- targeted job creation
- the creation of supported, rental and privately-owned housing
- assistance to women business owners
- child care facility development and
- support for refugees and new immigrants
Now where have we heard that term "social justice" before? I googled "coin "social justice" and found this from a Website called First Things.
Today, political activists often use the phrase “social justice” to justify government redistribution of wealth. In the mid-1800s, however, Taparelli prefaced “justice” with “social” to emphasize the social nature of human beings and, flowing from this, the importance of various social spheres outside civic government. For Taparelli, these two factors were essential in formulating a just approach to helping those in need.
For full disclosure this is a statement from First Things About Us page :
First Things is published by The Institute on Religion and Public Life, an interreligious, nonpartisan research and education institute whose purpose is to advance a religiously informed public philosophy for the ordering of society.
So it looks like there is a historical basis for my personal nickname for the legislature's institution of "social benefit" as part of their economic development program. I think of it as the the green science theocracy - a theocracy that I encountered in living color at the Juice conference in 2009 and which envoked a strong and visceral and abhorrent reaction with in me as I sat in observance of the dispaly before me- but that is another story.
Some may take issue with my calling the green science "social benefit" agenda a theocracy. My reasons for this label are that the green science agenda is based on selective views from the scientific community that uphold the chosen belief system. Alternate views from the broader scientific community are discounted meaning that the selective belief system is effectively upheld as an absolute truth in the same way that indoctrinated religions posit absolute truths. Since these absolute truths are then administered by government, it functions as a theocracy, with the concept of God being replaced by unquestionable scientific truths and concepts of "good and evil" transposed as government indoctrinated "social benefit". To my experience the term "social benefit" is a misnomer since the green science theocracy doesn't put much weight on human needs other than material needs, which is just one level of functioning within a human society. I think I share some of Taparelli views in that regard.
The question remains unanswered as to why the federal funding for Kestrel fell through. Considering the amount of tax money invested in the MRRA on the promise of federal funds this is a question that should concern the general taxpayer. The question in my mind is whether it fell through for the Kestrel project or fell through for MRRA, which would have a more far reaching impact, especially if it concerns the unconventional merging of two mutually exclusive legal entities- a municipal corporation and an instrumentality of the state. If the loss of the federal capitalization had to do with this, it would likely apply to the other federal funding for the MRRA, which gets the bulk of its funding from the federal government.
The CEI used these words to describe the MRRA "a public municipal corporation established by the Maine State Legislature" . One would think that CEI would understand the legal complications of the MRRA's impossible structure as both a municipal corporation and an instrumentality of the state and so I interpret that language as a cover to make it all sound copacetic. The words "established by the legislature" are often used as if to convey authority, while overlooking that the legislature has an authority that governs it- the Maine constitution and United States law to which they must take an oath to uphold. I find it incredulous that no one at CEI would see the obvious, - that a municipal corporation and an instrumentality of the state cannot be merged. I have read court opinions on this matter in which it is very clearly stated that the two are mutually exclusive. The CEI board includes Peter Pitegoff ,the sixth Dean of the University of Maine School of Law and so seems reasonable to conclude that the CEI willfully looked the other way when they awarded the capitalization for this project. The words "chartered by the legislature" probably make it alright in the minds of those who made that decision.
The University Of Maine is in the inner circle of the legislature's "targeted sector". If you search the term 'socialism" on the University of Maine website, you will get 129 results.
This diagram found for the first course on the list Models of Market Socialism makes my case that the operative government of Maine is socialist. Unfortunately, this diagram is too wide for the space but I have transposed the top layer of content so that it can be presented here. I think it clearly demonstrates that the The State of Maine, post disregarding Article IV, Part Third , Section 14 of the Maine State Constitution, is unquestionably a socialist government
Aside from my italicized comments- this is directly quoted from the University of Maine course.
Ownership of wealth/means of productionCapitalism: private and inheritable
Soviet Socialism: State
Capitalism: Exploitation; private savings; private banks
Accumulation, control & use of surplus (e.g., investment)
Soviet Socialism:State appropriation and investment
The minute opinionated adjectives are inserted such as the word "Exploitation" - applied exclusively to capitalism above, the course goes from one of education to one of indoctrination. The comparison between socialism and capitalism is already a form of indoctrination as it compares a political philosophy (socialism) not with another political philosophy (democratic republic or the American political philosophy) but with the economic principals of the American political philosophy and thereby reducing the whole of the American political philosophy to its economic part, when it is actually a philosophy based on esoteric principals such as inalienable rights. If one uses language that signifies a complete political philosophy for one- then a similar signifier should be used for the system of comparison The fact of the matter is both systems are capitalistic but Marx successfully reconfigured the word 'capitalism" to signify private capitalism, when it's pure meaning is actually inclusive of "state capitalism" and "private capitalism". The economic system of socialism is state capitalism. The economic system of the American political philosophy is private capitalism. Using these terms would be a more equitable comparison. -that is what the diagram explains. If equitable language were used in the first place then the inclusion of the adjective "Exploitation" would rightly be distributed equally across both systems- but that's a fact of life.
Coordination: market vs. planning
Capitalism: markets in consumer and producer goods, capital and labor; fiscal & monetary policy; minimal state investment
Soviet Socialism: central planning
Capitalism: to non-working owners (note the exclusion of working owners- i.e., the micro economy)
Accountability of management
Soviet Socialism: to state bureaucracy
Place the MRRA in this map- where does it fit? A business development owned and operated by the state and granted the power of eminent domain in its charter. It's goal is the central planning of Maine's economy.
Take the Small Enterprize Growth Fund- truly an example of socializing the risk and privatizing the gain and to whom does it submit it's annual report? The legislature who chartered this hybrid corporation. I think that falls into the category accountability to the state bureaucracy.(socialism)
It is time for me to get back to other activities but I will leave you with this very interesting link to another course of socialism being taught at the University Of Maine, a state institution of higher learning that has had Bill Ayers as a guest speaker twice in recent months to my count. It all fits together like a glove.
From The University Of Maine
To be continued .