Author: Michael Martin

Janet Mills is notorious for her abuses of power and seeming disregard for the best interests of Mainers in favor of what her subjective opinion dictates or agenda requires. When given authority, either as attorney general or now as governor, she pushes the limit of just how much she can use that power. Frequently, she goes beyond what is appropriate. As attorney general, Mills would consistently impede the efforts of former Governor Paul LePage to exercise his executive duties, including her refusal to undertake necessary actions for the enforcement of laws with which she disagreed. She could only do this…

Have you heard of the latest health-care cost reduction proposal before our state legislature?  Don’t feel bad if not, few have.  The bill is LD 1305.  It seeks to accomplish two objectives; the first is a mandate for health insurance carriers to establish both a toll-free telephone number and publicly accessible website providing enrollees with transparent information regarding health care costs; the second is the establishment of a shared-savings program that encourages those seeking medical services to “price-shop” on these price-transparency databases.  The encouragement comes from the incentive provided by the shared-savings program, which dictates that if an enrollee finds…

After a thoroughly objective evaluation of the many aspects and implications surrounding state TANF drug-testing programs, this series has reached its conclusion.  This comes with perfect timing, as one of the several initiatives proposed by the Maine GOP for the upcoming referendum question seeks to expand application of Maine’s TANF drug-testing program to all current or potential beneficiaries. The proposal is akin to the current program targeting TANF recipients with former felony drug convictions.  It is accompanied by a mandate for those testing positive for substance-abuse issues to complete a treatment program in order to regain their eligibility.  This crucial…

For too long politicians have successfully used professional lobbyists as scapegoats.   They mislead constituents into believing these inaccurately stigmatized professionals are to blame for legislators’ own incompetence or malfeasance.  Catalyzed by the Abramoff scandal, politicians increasingly continue to capitalize on the negative misperceptions most Americans hold regarding the role lobbyists play in legislative processes. Such misperceptions rely on false characterizations of lobbying as an extrinsic force corruptively extorting political outcomes. Politicians strategically play the part of victim to nefarious “interest groups” and their shrewd lobbyists.  In response to unpopular political outcomes, politicians often employ this tactic in claiming their incapability…

As promised in part four, this fifth installment explores how the courts have made it impossible for states to implement effective drug-testing programs for TANF recipients. In 1999, Michigan became the first state to enact a pilot drug-testing program in just three counties. Shortly after the program started, the ACLU filed a lawsuit on behalf of Tanya L. Marchwinski challenging the constitutionality of requiring a drug test in order to receive welfare. In ensuing federal case, Marchwinski v. Howard (2000), they alleged the drug-testing condition violated fourth amendment protections.  The plaintiffs were fortunate to have Judge Victoria A. Roberts preside…

One of the most common criticisms lauded against state TANF drug-testing programs is their consistent failure to effectively identify sufficient proportions of substance abusers within the number of welfare recipients tested.  This critique is often asserted to support claims contending these programs are ineffective, and their inability to produce adequate results fail to justify their continued existence.  As noted in part two of this series, this is by no means because substance abuse rates among welfare recipients are anywhere close to the detection rates in past state programs.  Rather, it is due to the abysmally ineffective methods states use for…

Since June, condemnably unfounded accusations of “blackmail” and “power overreach” in regards to the LePage administrations decision to withhold a $125,000 quarterly state grant from GoodWill Hinckley (GWH) in reaction to a rash hiring decision have been continuously purported.  Claimants allege that, amidst a personal vendetta against House Speaker Mark Eves, Governor LePage “blackmailed” GWH into terminating his employment by threatening to withhold state funding.  Since an absurd premise leads to absurd conclusions, such “blackmail” apparently constitutes an impeachable offense. The decision to withhold funding had absolutely no basis in attempting to personally hurt Mark Eves.  It was made only…

There is a heavy dose of irony in the efforts of those who actively oppose policies for drug screening/testing programs for welfare recipients.  The road these “defenders of the poor” take is obviously paved with good intentions.  They genuinely believe barring state policies mandating current or potential welfare beneficiaries, having screened positive for existing substance-abuse disorders, to participate in substance-abuse treatment programs to maintain benefit eligibility serves the best interests of these individuals.  They are dreadfully mistaken. In copious studies, beneficiaries with substance-abuse disorders have been found to exhibit the greatest barriers to achieving employment, in comparison to the remainder…

Following the first phase of screenings in Maine’s new drug-testing program for TANF recipients with prior felony drug convictions, state and national media outlets unleashed a wave of criticism directed at the program.  Beginning with censorious articles in the Portland Press Herald and other state media, it did not take long for like-minded national media outlets to partake in the disingenuous portrayal of  Maine’s new program as an ineffective, misguided policy. Arthur Delaney of The Huffington Post brought this demagoguery into the national media circuit, publishing an article featuring a collection of long-echoed, cliché criticisms opponents to Maine’s TANF drug-testing…

This is the first installment of a weekly series focused on discussing how drug-testing programs for TANF recipients benefit the state, taxpayers, and most of all the recipients themselves.  It is proper to begin by clarifying the facts surrounding Maine’s current drug-testing program.  In addition, a syllabus of the entire series’ topics is provided at the bottom. In April, Governor LePage initiated a new drug-screening requirement for TANF recipients with prior felony drug convictions.  According to federal law, these individuals are ineligible for TANF benefits, unless states opt to grant them eligibility, something only Maine and four other states have.…

There has been much discussion in the media in recent years of a “GOP civil war.” Pundits describe an internal struggle between so-called establishment Republicans, and their Tea Party counterparts. Many claim this inter-party struggle for the power to control the party’s agenda has the potential to divide the GOP, eventually leading to the party’s dissolution as competing political philosophies attempt to independently advance their agenda through the creation of separate conservatively-based parties. While the internal struggle in the GOP is very much a real event, the same seems to hold true for the Democratic Party. The only difference seems…

If Maine had an Attorney General (AG) that was publicly elected, Janet Mills would, and should, be out of a job.  Mills’ frequent reluctance to execute the important responsibilities of her office is not simply irresponsible, but unprecedented throughout the history of Maine AG’s. No other current, nor recent, state AG has behaved in a way as disruptive to their state’s constitutional balance of powers as Mills. To understand what motivates her behavior, one must look at two underlying causes.  First is her clear intention to advance partisan goals, while neither competently executing the responsibilities, nor respecting the limitations of…

Over the past few weeks, there has been significant discussion in the Maine political discourse on whether or not sixty-five bills were vetoed by the Governor or have become law. However, much of this discussion has consisted of personal attacks and false information, and has failed to focus on the legal arguments being made by the Governor, the Maine Legislature, and other political figures. So what is this veto dispute really about? Background on Vetoing Legislation According to clear language in the Maine Constitution, the Governor is allotted ten days to veto legislation while the legislature is in session. However,…