Skip to main content

Maine State Inc Tries a Banana Republic Takeover of Central Maine Power




One of the first things a member of the Maine Legislature does is to take an oath to uphold the Maine Constitution. After that the Maine Constitution is out of sight, out of mind until it is needed to beat down an opposition policy. Some unconstitutional policies are not opposed by any side, Democrat, Republican or Independent. One such unconstitutional policy is the right of the Maine Legislature to charter corporations by special act of legislation, prohibited by the Maine Constitution in Article Iv, Part Third, Section 14.

Ever since Governor Longley and the 1976 Maine Legislature deemed the centrally managed economy and the public-private government into existence, every administration and Maine Legislature has been chartering corporations by special act of legislation, willy nilly. This is what I mean when I use the term Maine State Inc- specifically the network of corporations chartered by special act of legislation, which are in most cases public-private relationships.

The standard language used is to identify the newly formed corporation as "a body corporate and politic serving as an instrumentality of the state". Maybe the Maine Legislature thinks that a corporation is not a corporation if it is called a body corporate but the  Merriam Webster Dictionary makes the meaning perfectly clear:

body corporate
Definition of body corporateCORPORATIONFirst Known Use of body corporate15th century, in the meaning defined above 


The latest, currently being attempted addition, to the Maine State Inc corporate network, is a Maine Sate Inc electric utility monopoly, achieved by enacting a law forcing CMP to sell its company to Maine State Inc. This violates the Maine Constitution in a multitude of ways.

The bill is strategically titled,"An Act To Restore Local Ownership and Control of Maine's PowerDelivery Systems"

Local ownership implies local control, but in this case "local ownership" is used to signify state control over a publicly financed corporation. The newly proposed monopoly is referred to in the bill as "consumer-owned" which means paid for with a public debt at a suggested price of four billion dollars.

Conversations in social media project a "democratically governed consumer owned public utility" but there is no democratic governing proposed in the bill. The only public vote is pursuant to the Maine Constitution which imposes a bond spending limit of 2 million dollars. Any amount over that requires 2/3rds approval by the Maine Legislature and an approval by public referendum.

3. Cost of service. "Cost of service" means the total amount that must be collected by the authority to recover its costs but does not include any return on capital investment unless a return is required as security for debt service. 
4. Customer-owner. "Customer-owner" means a person to whom the authority provides electricity.

The proposed bill, "An Act To Restore Local Ownership and Control of Maine's Power Delivery Systems", does not include  public referendums in governing the state owned monopoly. The governing board will be  appointed solely by the Governor. The only role played by the Legislature is approving the Governors choice. The governance of the consumer owned utility is closer to an autocracy than a democracy.

The original unelected board created under Governor Longley for the purpose of establishing the centrally managed economy and the public-private state submitted a report which included only two objectives, one was to eliminate the public referendum on municipal bonds, which is not to be found in the latest special act of legislation proposed to charter a new state-run public utility corporate board.
1. Governance; board. The authority is created as a body corporate and politic and a public instrumentality of the State and is governed by the Maine Power Delivery Authority Board in accordance with this section.
Paragraph 1 of the proposed act is a violation of the Maine Constitution, Article IV , Part Third, Section 14, states:

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.

"An Act To Restore Local Ownership and Control of Maine's PowerDelivery Systems" is a special act of legislation whose purpose is to form a corporation (body corporate). It is indisputable that the object of the corporation- Maine power delivery- can be attained otherwise, as is currently the case.

An instrumentality of the state does not serve a municipal purpose, it serves a state purpose. Central management is a state function, not a local function. The governor, the sole authority in appointing the governing board, serves a state purpose, not a municipal purpose.

The chartering of a state governed electricity corporation does not meet either of the exceptions to the Maine Constitution's prohibition against the Legislature chartering corporations by special acts of legislation.

The taking of private property does not rise to the level of "urgent need" and so the proposed bill violates Article 1, Declaration of Rights, Section 21 of the Maine Constitution:

Section 21.  Private property, when to be taken.  Private property shall not be taken for public uses without just compensation; nor unless the public exigencies require it.

Government seizure of private property, compensated or otherwise is a Banana Republic Tactic and will send a warning to any business considering locating in Maine. If the Maine Legislature can simply deem that CMP is forced to sell to the state, then what is next ?

It is worth considering the impact of a state controlled energy monopoly on the common practice implemented by the State of wheeling and dealing in corporate welfare to attract businesses to the state. If the state owns a monopoly on energy delivery will Maine taxpayers find themselves covering the cost of free electricity for global corporations as part of the Maine corporate welfare package?


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

An Incomplete Theory of Inflation Made to Order for Mass Consumption.

M oney is not what it used to be, so must our ways of thinking about it adapt. jaakko-kemppainen-unsplash The message treads across the media terrain, beating louder and louder as if to drown out the beat of the distant drummer. W arning! The only thing the stimulus will stimulate is inflation. The people will pay as the wealthy elite invests their windfalls in financial assets. Doom and gloom set to march across the land to the beat of the distribution of stimulus funds. In recent years as past predictions of fiscal disaster following stimulus spending failed to materialize and so the thinking about national debt and deficits has evolved, most noticeably with the development of  Modern Monetary Theory . In the   fall of 2020,  National Affairs  published a story,  Does the Debt Matter ? by Peter Wehner & Ian Tufts. Peter Wehner is vice president and senior fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy Center and served in the last three Republican administrations. Ian Tufts is a recent g

JECD Group Holds Master Plan Pow Wow for Boothbay Peninsula

The most honest statement to come out of the ringleaders of the Joint Economic Community Development Group in their first workshop program was "none of us are experts on economic development", which in my most humble opinion is evident in the fact that the JECD begins with the premise that economic development can be master minded by central management. The article in the Boothbay Register begins with this paragraph: The Joint Economic Development Committee master plan workshop on Thursday, Oct. 12 discuss findings from stakeholder interviews conducted early last month. The interviews centered around building an overall economic development strategy for Edgecomb, Boothbay, Boothbay Harbor and Southport. Who are the stakeholders?  A search for articles in the Boothbay Register comes up short. Why is the public not told who the stakeholders are. Since the taxpayers of Boothbay and Boothbay Harbor footed the bill for the JECD's consultants, why are they not the stakeh

Why are social impact investors trying so hard to defeat smaller shelters for the homeless?

  "Social Impact” developers in Portland, Maine seek to squelch a referendum for smaller shelters called for by qualified practitioners with concrete experience in the field. A large sign says Vote C to support the Homeless, small handmade sign next to it says Untrue! That sign is paid for by developers who want / Photo by Jess Falero In   the 1970s under Governor Longley , Maine became a centrally managed economy that expanded Maine’s wealth gap and merged, almost seamlessly, the public and private and the non-profit and for-profit economic sectors into one mutually beneficial wealth-concentration & distribution system. Currently, mutually benefitting factions are coming together once again in hopes of building a mega-shelter for the homeless in a Portland, Maine industrial development district. In addition to beds for the homeless, the project will include, dining, and locker facilities, as well as offices and an attached health clinic. The promotion  describes the facility