Skip to main content

Reality VS Truth as Deemed by Legistation

Before I move on with my story, I want to make one point perfectly clear about the insights I have been relaying about TexTech, which came to my attention because Alan Hinsey of MaineBiz Sunday heralded TexTech as the "poster child" of Maine's "creative economy" movement.

When the Maine state legislature rose above the will of the people as expressed in the Maine state constitution to charter, by special ct of legislation, that corporation known as the Finance Authority of Maine, the legislature there in deemed the following to be true:


The authority will serve a public purpose and perform an essential governmental function in the exercise of the powers and duties conferred upon it by this chapter. Any benefits accruing to private individuals or associations, as a result of the activities of the authority, are deemed by the Legislature to be incidental to the public purposes to be achieved by the implementation of this chapter. [1985, c. 344, §5 (AMD).] Special Act of legislation chartering FAME

In fact and in regards to TexTech, having received at least seven wealth transfusions from MTI, the exact opposite is true, The public purpose is defined in the special act of legislation that chartered the non-profit corporation known as the Maine Technology Institute:


2. Purpose.  The institute, through a public and private partnership, shall encourage, promote, stimulate and support research and development activity leading to the commercialization of new products and services in the State's technology-intensive industrial sectors to enhance the competitive position of those sectors and increase the likelihood that one or more of the sectors will support clusters of industrial activity and to create new jobs for Maine people. The institute is one element of the State's economic development strategy and will contribute to the long-term development of a statewide research, development and product deployment infrastructure.
[ 1999, c. 401, Pt. AAA, §3 (NEW) .]


The definition of Industrialization at dictionary .com is :

1. ( tr ) to develop industry on an extensive scale in (a country, region, etc) 2. ( intr ) (of a country, region, etc) to undergo the development of industry on an extensive scale

The extensive scale is not in the prototype design activity but in the extensive scale  production activity. The production activity for Textech as stated on their website is located in China and Thailand where the cost of labor is dramatically less that in Maine, wherein  the legislature promises higher than average wages and all the beast benefits.


When we get to the definition of "incidental' as in "Any benefits accruing to private individuals or associations, as a result of the activities of the authority, are deemed by the Legislature to be incidental to the public purposes to be achieved by the implementation of this chapter.", the interpretation of the legislature's decree is nothing short of incredulous:

The definition of Incidental at Merriam Webster.com

a : being likely to ensue as a chance or minor consequence <social obligations incidental to the job>
b : minor 1
2: occurring merely by chance or without intention or calculation

So we are to believe that the high growth investors with whom our legislature is so cozily in bed in the special act of legislation that chartered the tax payer-subsidized high growth investor's corporation known as The Small Enterprise Growth Fund are unintentionally making a high growth profit for which they demand an "exit strategy" in order to realize!

The other definition of incidental that applies here is found on Thesaurus.com
 
Definition: related; minor

Prototype design is clearly related to production but it is minor in scale to production.

Prototype design provides jobs on a limited and minor scale to the amount of jobs provided in production.

The wealth transfusions going to TexTech from The Maine technology Institute benefit the owners of the means of production, or the high growth investor in the same, on a far greater scale than it benefits the Maine people in providing jobs for Mainers. It provides jobs for people in China and Thailand on a much greater scale than it provides jobs to Mainers.


The jobs provided to Maine are incidental to the wealth created for the high growth investor and the owner of the means of production located in China and Thailand. Those jobs are related but minor in scale to the rest. The practicing reality is the opposite of the truth as so deemed in the unconstitutional charter for the Finance Authority of Maine.

But since The Finance Authority of Maine and the Maine Technology Institute and the Small Enterprise Growth Fund were all chartered by special acts of legislation in violation of Article IV, Part Third, Section 14 of the Maine State Constitution- can the legislature be said to be in violation of statutes that are themselves unconstitutional?

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

How The MPERS Contract Came To Be Embedded in the Maine Constitution

Is The Maine Public Retirement System Unconstitutional? According to the Maine Public Employees ComprehensiveFinancial Report of 2010 , the Maine Public Employees Retirement System was established in 1942 to provide services for retiring public employees. No information is given about how the Public Employees Retirement System was legally structured in 1942. In the report MPERS is described as “an independent public agency of the State of Maine that traces its history to 1942”. Wikipedia  uses the same term but when the link is clicked it reveals that Wikipedia has no idea what " independent public agency " means.  An online search for history of MPERS between 1942 and 1985 comes up empty.  In 1985 during the administration of Governor Joseph E Brennan, the Maine Legislature passed a statute announcing its intentions of using general taxpayer monies to provide for retirement funds and death benefits for public employees, a faction which, incidentally, includes th...

High Brow Art VS the Marketplace and the Maine Juice Conference

TWEET THIS http://goo.gl/xdwZDk Continuing with my story from HERE ...(and incorporating a few paragraphs from this earlier but incomplete telling ) Finally, after a year of receiving stimulus fund notices for non-profits only, in the fall of 2009, I received an email from the Maine Arts Commission about a competition for small businesses for what I took to be, a modest grant for the sum of 30000.00 from an "anonymous source". In a moment of hopeful delusions, I imagined that the Maine Arts Commission had come to its senses and realized that they needed to support the private sector. The competition was called an "elevator pitch competition" which means a pitch delivered in five minutes. Even the written answers to questions on the application were required to be answered in a minimal number of words, brevity being stressed as being so important that if your couldn't explain a business idea in five minutes, then one's business idea is simply not ...

Statutory Bond Question Requirements Amplify -NOT Negate Maine Constituion

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 s...