ThinkProgress Logo

Stories tagged with “Paul LePage”

Health

Maine Governor Proposes Throwing 30,000 Off Medicaid: ‘We Should Not Be More Generous Than Other States’

By Igor Volsky on Jul 19, 2011 at 12:35 pm

Maine Governor Paul LePage (R) — a vocal opponent of the Affordable Care Act — is proposing reforming MaineCare, the state’s Medicaid program, by reducing eligibility to the level in place in most states, thereby throwing off some 30,000 Mainers off the rolls. “This is what the level is in 47 other states,” LePage said in an interview. “We should not be more generous than these other states, but we are and we have been and it needs to stop.”

LePage predicted that the newly uninsured population will be able to find coverage though a new state insurance law that allows consumers to buy health insurance across state lines and through employer-based captives, insurance companies that are allowed to finance and leverage risk without having to buy additional insurance to cover that risk. The measure is part of LePage’s market-based approach to health care, but even Republicans are skeptical that it will be able to offer affordable coverage to lower income residents. Sen. Richard Rosen (R), co-chairman of the Appropriations Committee that has rejected similar proposals from LePage, told the Bangor Daily News that while “he agreed with the concept the governor is pushing of having individuals and families pay for part of the their health care costs,” forcing Medicaid beneficiaries to go out and purchase insurance “may be premature.” Democrats argued that the proposal is not feasible:

LePage said the new state health insurance law has provisions to make health insurance more affordable, and he believes many of those who are between the current 200 percent of poverty level and 133 percent can help pay for their own insurance coverage.

Rep. Peggy Rotundo, D-Lewiston, the lead Democrat on the [Appropriations] committee, disagrees.

She said the 133 percent level is $14,484 for a single adult. For a family of four, it is $29,726. She said families and individuals at those income levels simply can’t afford health insurance at current rates.

“The more health care we take away from people, the more those costs are shifted to people who have health insurance and more shifts to local communities and local hospitals,” she said. Rotundo said covering those families and individuals with Medicaid is cost-effective for the state with the federal government paying about two-thirds of the bill.

That last point isn’t even up for debate. LePage would transfer beneficiaries from a fairly efficient government program to the highly inefficient private market, where policies are incredibly expensive (particularly before the Affordable Care Act reforms are implemented). One recent study found that “after controlling for health status, age, gender, income, and other factors, the average per person annual cost of serving an adult on Medicaid was 20 percent less than under private insurance and the annual cost of serving a child on Medicaid or CHIP was 27 percent less than under private insurance.” LePage’s new law — which would allow insurers to cherry pick the healthiest beneficiaries — will likely go even further in dividing the health insurance market and increasing costs for those former Medicaid patients who need the most coverage. Meanwhile, limiting eligibility would “save the state less than $7 million a year–costs they claim will simply be shifted to local governments, hospitals and those with health insurance.”

Climate Progress

Tea Party Governor LePage Is Killing Maine’s Clean Energy Economy

By Guest Blogger on Jun 15, 2011 at 4:30 pm

Our guest blogger is Kiley Kroh, Associate Director for Ocean Communications at the Center for American Progress Action Fund.

Thanks to Gov. Paul LePage’s (R-ME) recent assault on jobs and innovation, investors at this week’s EnergyOcean International Conference in Portland, Maine are wondering if their money would be better spent elsewhere.  Portland was chosen for the conference location because of Maine’s reputation as a leading state to invest in alternative energy and Maine’s entire Congressional Delegation will be awarded the "Political Pioneer Award" for their political leadership in promoting alternative energy.

The state’s Tea Party governor, however, seems bound and determined to undo any progress made under the previous administration.  Last month, the LePage administration unveiled LD 1570, which would repeal the 2007 Act to Stimulate Demand for Renewable Energy requiring power to companies increase the amount of electricity derived from renewable sources by 1 percent a year through 2017.  The law aimed to diversify Maine’s energy portfolio and reduce dependence on fossil fuels – simultaneously, it worked to create jobs and increase investment in the state, including “more than $1 billion by wind energy developers alone.”

LePage defended LD 1570 by claiming that it would help lower what are the 12th highest energy rates in the nation – costs that he contends are “exploding.”  As the Lewiston Sun Journal notes, the governor’s assertion that energy costs are skyrocketing is completely false. 

A Press Herald analysis, reviewed by the Maine PUC for accuracy, found the 2007 renewable energy requirement adds only $4.80 a year to the average residential electric bill.

The governor also alleged that creating jobs through "corporate welfare" is not sustainable, as "the majority of these ‘green jobs’ are temporary.”

Those actually working in the sector, however, paint a very different picture.  Jackson Parker, president and CEO of Reed & Reed, a major player nationally in the construction of commercial wind farms, predicted LD 1570 would drive away business investment by creating regulatory uncertainty while yielding only modest energy savings.

It is anti-wind, it is anti-business and it is anti-jobs.

Testifying against the bill, Paul Williamson, director of the Maine Wind Industry Initiative, pointed out that manufacturing of wind power components was the fastest-growing manufacturing sector in the U.S. during the past two years. 

Ray Dackerman, the U.S. director for London-based Condor Wind Energy told the Portland Press Herald that Maine has an attractive wind resource and a skilled manufacturing sector, “but we cannot ignore that the new administration isn’t embracing the offshore wind industry … We need to go to the path of least resistance.”

Killing jobs and deterring investors certainly seems to contradict the giant “Open for Business” sign LePage unveiled earlier this year.

Just as innovators and businesspeople are touting their accomplishments and the potential for both tidal energy and offshore wind development in Maine, the state’s governor looks increasingly out of touch with reality. Here are a few statistics he may want to note: a recent UMaine survey of 6,000 Mainers that shows 95 percent of them in support of deepwater offshore wind.  Another recent poll also found that only three in ten Mainers approve of the job LePage is doing.

Justice

Maine GOP Chair: We Must Make It Harder To Vote Because ‘Democrats Intentionally Steal Elections’

By Ian Millhiser on Jun 13, 2011 at 9:20 am

For nearly four decades, Maine has been one of eight states which provides same-day voter registration to voters at the polls. This policy of enfranchising the greatest number of Maine voters is likely to end, however, now that the GOP-controlled state legislature has passed a bill ending same-day registration and Tea Party Gov. Paul LePage is expected to sign it. Worse, state GOP Chairman Charlie Webster explained it was necessary to disenfranchise the thousands of Maine voters who take advantage of same-day registration every election year in order to save Maine from one of his paranoid fantasies:

“If you want to get really honest, this is about how the Democrats have managed to steal elections from Maine people,” Webster told a columnist for the Portland Press Herald in a piece published Friday. “Many of us believe that the Democrats intentionally steal elections.”

Sadly, Maine’s voter disenfranchisement bill is only the latest example of the Republican war on voting that began almost immediately after the GOP took over several statehouses this year. Numerous GOP state legislatures have rammed through “voter ID” laws which disenfranchise thousands of elderly, disabled, and low-income voters. Republicans typically justify these voter disenfranchisement laws by claiming that they are necessary to combat voter fraud at the polls, but in-person voter fraud is only slightly more common than unicorns. A recent Supreme Court decision upholding a voter ID law was only able to cite one example of in-person voter fraud in the last 143 years.

Nor are voter ID laws the only front in the GOP’s war on voting. As Jonathan Chait explains, their efforts also include measures “restricting early voting, shortening poll hours, [and] clamping down on students voting at their campus.” And in Wisconsin, Gov. Scott Walker (R) even plans to  gut his state’s public financing program — a program designed to make candidates less dependent on wealth donors — in order to pay for a voter disenfranchisement law.

Yet, while the Maine GOP may have won a skirmish in the war on voting with their repeal of same day registration, it is anything but certain that they will win this war. The state’s Democrats hope to invoke Maine’s “people’s veto” process, which allows the voters to repeal a newly enacted state law by referendum. To invoke this procedure, they must collect just over 57,000 signatures before a 90-day window closes.

Alyssa

Republican Governors Use Budget Woes To Wage War On The Arts

By Alyssa Rosenberg on May 18, 2011 at 5:44 pm

After Republican proposals to eliminate the National Endowment for the Arts and the National Endowment for the Humanities died in Congress this year, it might have seemed like there was a momentary lull in the fight over public funding for the arts. But at the state level, Republican governors and Republican-dominated legislatures are using difficult economic times as an excuse to slash the budgets of arts agencies and public broadcasters, or to try to eliminate them entirely.

In five states, Republican governors or legislatures have proposed either dismantling arts agencies or entirely eliminating some of their funding streams:

KANSAS: The most pitched battles are in Kansas, where in February, Gov. Sam Brownback signed an executive order dismantling the Kansas Arts Commission to make way for its replacement by a privately-funded group. That move meant Kansas will likely lose $778,200 from the National Endowment for the Arts and $437,767 in funding from the Mid-American Arts Alliance. Both organizations require states to support the arts before they’ll kick in funding. The Kansas legislature pushed back, overriding the executive order and approving $700,000 to fund the agency, but on May 10, Brownback told the entire staff of the Commission that their jobs would be eliminated in June. He has suggested he will veto the legislature’s appropriation when the budget arrives on his desk, a move that will have the same effect as the executive order.

Brownback may also line-item veto $1.5 million in state funding for public broadcasting, though the budget the legislature approved last Friday produces a $50 million surplus even with arts and broadcasting funding included.

SOUTH CAROLINA: Gov. Nikki Haley said in her State of the State address in January that “the role of South Carolina’s government in the year 2011 can no longer be to fund an Arts Commission that costs us $2.5 million. … When you release government from the things it should not be responsible for, you allow the private sector to be more creative and cost efficient.” State lawmakers essentially ignored her requests, moving forward budgets with a 6 percent funding cut and amendments that require the Commission to spend most of its funding to provide grants. Haley reaffirmed her desire to eliminate state funding for the Commission in April, raising the prospect that she will line-item veto funding for the Arts Commission and South Carolina’s educational television program, which she also targeted in her January address.

ARIZONA: Gov. Jan Brewer entirely eliminated funding for the Arizona Commission on the Arts’ general fund, though the agency still gets some money through its Trust Fund, which is supported by businesses filing fees in the state.

FLORIDA: Gov. Rick Scott initially proposed keeping the Division of Cultural Affairs alive, but declined to fund its grant programs; the state legislature sent him a budget with $2.5 million in grant funding. Scott’s still considering line-item vetoes to trim the budget further.

NEW HAMPSHIRE: The Republican-dominated House of Representatives moved to dissolve the state’s Department of Cultural Resources in March, but the Senate Finance Committee has stood behind the Department’s continued existence, though it has proposed $530,000 in cuts.

The National Assembly of State Arts Agencies, which has been tracking proposals to eliminate or reorganize the organizations it represents, is also following proposals in Georgia, Pennsylvania, Texas, Washington, and Wisconsin to cut state arts funding by between 30 and 80 percent.

And state-level public broadcasting also remains vulnerable:

VIRGINIA: Gov. Bob McDonnell used a line-item veto to eliminate $424,000 in funding for public broadcasters to develop educational materials for the state’s public schools, efforts he said were “not core services of government.”

MAINE: Last week, Gov. Paul LePage proposed cutting all state funding for the Main Public Broadcasting Network.

NEW JERSEY: In December, Gov. Chris Christie moved to privatize the formerly public New Jersey Network—WNET, another public television outlet, may acquire NJN.

The sums of money involved in these fights are minuscule: at $11 million, New Jersey’s subsidy to the New Jersey Network is the largest appropriation at stake. Cutting funds for arts agencies and public broadcasters won’t balance state budgets. But it does give Republicans an excuse to strike a blow in the culture wars that it will be very hard for arts organizations to recover from.

Politics

Fax That Compelled LePage To Take Down Labor Mural Conspicuously Missing Date/Time Stamp (Updated)

By Alex Seitz-Wald on Mar 24, 2011 at 3:15 pm

As ThinkProgress reported yesterday, Maine Tea Party Gov. Paul LePage (R) ordered the removal of a labor-themed mural from the state’s Department of Labor offices. LePage’s administration said they had received complaints from business owners who objected to the mural’s allegedly pro-labor undertones. But LePage has so far produced just a single complaint — an anonymous fax, a copy of which was released today. But as Maine progressive blog Dirigo Blue points out, the fax is missing the date/time and phone number stamp that fax machines automatically place on faxes:

Mural Fax

If the LePage administration wanted to redact the sender’s phone number to protect their identity, they could have simply removed the number, instead of the entire stamp. But more importantly, why is LePage making policy decisions based on a single fax from an anonymous “Secret Admirer”? Especially from a sender who saw the mural as reminiscent of “communist North Korea where they use these murals to brainwash the masses.” Even LePage’s spokesperson recognized the eccentricity of the sender, telling TPM that the administration was not trying to “give validity” to the specific sentiments in the fax. So far, LePage has failed to produce evidence showing any kind of major public opposition to the mural.

Update

After dozens of news reports from local newspapers all the way to the New York Times reported the mural complaint was a fax, LePage is now claiming that it was in fact a letter, not a fax. Is unclear why LePage didn’t dispute these myriad reports until now.

Politics

Maine Gov. Paul LePage Orders Labor History Mural Removed From State Offices

By Guest Blogger on Mar 23, 2011 at 2:05 pm

Maine Tea Party Gov. Paul LePage (R) has ordered the removal of a 36-foot mural depicting Maine’s labor history from the lobby of the state’s Department of Labor offices, claiming they received “some complaints” from business owners. The Governor has also directed that eight conference rooms named after labor leaders — including Cesar Chavez — be renamed “after mountains, counties or something.”

The directive comes amidst rising tensions between the LePage Administration and organized labor over the governor’s support for a right-to-work bill and efforts to roll back the state’s child labor laws.

While the state’s AFL-CIO called the removal “mean-spirited”, a spokesman for the governor has said that the removal was not meant to “antagonize” labor, but rather to correct the office’s “one-sided decor.” In an e-mail to Labor Department employees, acting Chief Laura Boyett sought to explain the decision:

We have received feedback that the administration building is not perceived as equally receptive to both businesses and workers – primarily because of the nature of the mural in the lobby and the names of our conference rooms. Whether or not the perception is valid is not really at issue and therefore, not open to debate. If either of our two constituencies perceives that they are not welcome in our administration building and this translates to a belief that their needs will not be heard or met by this department, then it presents a barrier to achieving our mission.

The mural was funded by a $600,000 $60,000 grant from the federal government and includes depictions of Rosie the Riveter at Bath Iron works, a 1937 shoe worker’s strike, and a 1986 paper mill strike. “There was never any intention to be pro-labor or anti-labor,” the mural’s artist, Judy Taylor, told the Sun-Journal. “It was a pure depiction of the facts.”

Meanwhile, Chavez, FDR Labor Secretary Frances Perkins — the nation’s first female cabinet secretary — and William Looney, a 19th-century lawmaker who sponsored a 10-hour workday law, would all have their names removed under the order.

– Kevin Donohoe

Update

An earlier version of this post incorrectly reported the price of the mural — it has been corrected. There are also conflicting reports about the source of the funds, with the Sun Journal reporting a federal grant and MPBN reporting a private donation.

Economy

REPORT: Three States Propose Massive Tax Cuts For Millionaires, Tax Hikes for Middle Class

By Guest Blogger on Mar 22, 2011 at 5:30 pm

Last week, ThinkProgress documented conservative efforts in twelve states to shift the tax burden onto the middle class even while cutting taxes for corporations and the wealthy. In three states, conservatives are going even further, proposing massive estate tax cuts for millionaires even as income inequality is at its worse since the 1920s. Here are the details:

MAINE: Tea Party Gov. Paul LePage’s (I) tax reform package would raise the state’s estate tax exemption from $1 million to $2 million — allowing four hundred of the state’s wealthiest estates to escape taxation. At the same time, the tax plan would raise property taxes on middle class Mainers while freezing healthcare funding for working parents, cutting money for schools, and raising the retirement age for public workers. Republican legislators want to go even further, and are currently considering eliminating the estate tax altogether.

OHIO: In January, House Speaker William Batchelder (R) called Gov. John Kasich’s (R) proposal to completely eliminate the estate tax one of the Republican-controlled legislature’s “top priorities.” But already the bill has garnered strong opposition from local governments, who depend on estate tax revenue and are already concerned state spending cuts. Even while finding room for estate tax reductions, Kasich’s proposed budget cuts 25 percent of funding for local schools, $427 million for nursing homes, $1 million for food banks, $12 million from children’s hospitals, and $15.9 million from an adoption program for children with special needs.

NEW JERSEY: In his 2011 budget proposal, Gov. Chris Christie called for raising the state’s estate tax exemption from $675,000 to $1 million even while proposing cuts to the state’s Earned Income Tax Credit and homestead rebates for working poor families. And last year Christie vetoed a bill passed by the Legislature that would have raised taxes on the state’s millionaires to help fund property tax relief for Main Street.

Last December, the federal government set the precedent for estate tax cuts when the bi-partisan tax deal signed by President Obama cut the estate tax rate to its second lowest level since 1931.

– Kevin Donohoe

Politics

Maine GOP Gov. Paul LePage Stole Candy From Children, Wants To Undo Child Labor Laws

By Alex Seitz-Wald on Mar 17, 2011 at 4:07 pm

At an event in Lewiston, ME last night, the state’s tea party governor Paul LePage (R) told a crowd of French-Canadian-Americans that when he was 12 years old, he used to hide out in the French-Canadian part of town and steal Halloween candy from children. “Isn’t that awful? And now I’m governor of Maine,” LePage said with a laugh.

But now that LePage is governor, he’s still targeting children. A bill sponsored by state Sen. Debra Plowman (R) and “backed by” LePage would roll back the state’s child labor laws, with the pretext of giving kids more liberty to work. “We have no other restrictions on any other things they do,” Plowman explained. “They can watch TV 32 hours-a-week.”

Her original bill would have removed all protections on the number of hours 16 and 17 year olds could work during the school week, and allow them to work until 11 PM. Maine’s current child labor law — which allows only 20 hours per week during the school year — was passed with bipartisan consensus because educators warned that their students were falling asleep in class due to long work hours and their grades were suffering. But industry groups that employ teens want more:

The bill, filed by Sen. Debra Plowman, R-Hampden, was supported by industry groups including the Maine Restaurant Association and the Maine Innkeepers Association during a public hearing Wednesday in front of the Labor, Commerce, Research and Economic Development Committee. [...]

[The Restaurant Association's Dick] Grotton said Maine’s law “penalized” employers.

In response to opposition from labor and education groups, Plowman revised her bill to cap hours at 32 per week, but as Sarah Standiford, the executive director of the Maine Women’s Lobby, told ThinkProgress, “there’s really clear data” that when students work “beyond 20 hours a week, the impact [on their education] is clearly detrimental.” “Everybody says this is for the kids,” state Rep. Paul Gilbert (D) said during a committee hearing last week, “but I don’t see any kids.” “When you’re a teen, you’re not in a position to try to contradict or try to stand up to work hour requests from an employer,” Standiford said, noting that employers often pressure teenagers to work longer hours.

Indeed, as in Wisconsin and Ohio, LePage’s effort is part of a much bigger campaign to undo laws that protect workers’ rights. “There are more rollbacks than we can count,” Standiford said.

Related Posts

Economy

Maine Gov. LePage Asks For ‘Shared Sacrifice,’ But Is Exempt From His Own Pension Changes

By Pat Garofalo on Mar 15, 2011 at 11:10 am

Gov. Paul LePage (R-ME)

Gov. Paul LePage (R-ME) has called for “shared sacrifice” when it comes to balancing his state’s budget. “If you want prosperity, you have got to make sacrifices,” LePage said. However, as Zaid Jilani pointed out, LePage’s proposed budget asks the middle-class and public employees to bear the brunt of filling the state’s budget gap, while cutting taxes for the state’s wealthiest residents.

As part of his budget, LePage proposed raising the retirement age for public employees and freezing their cost-of-living adjustments. He also increased the amount that public employees are required to pay into their pension fund from 7.65 percent to 9.65 percent, which constitutes a cut in take-home pay for these employees. However, as Mike Tipping at the Kennebec Journal reported, the change doesn’t apply to LePage’s own compensation:

One public employee currently paying 7.65 percent, however, won’t see an increase.

The governor has exempted himself…If LePage faced the same increase as state employees, it would cost him $5,880 over his term.

LePage, upon leaving office, will be eligible for a $26,000 annual pension. A Maine teacher has to work for 25 years to receive the same benefit. Adding insult to injury, the money raised from increased employee contributions won’t even go towards immediately shoring up the state’s pension system, but “will instead pay for other budget priorities, including $203 million in tax cuts.”

The increased attention on LePage’s treatment of his own compensation led state finance commission Sawin Millet to say, “I won’t speak for where [LePage] would be on it, but I suspect that he’s not aloof from, or opposed to, considering that idea for himself.” “I intend to have that conversation, given the stories that have occurred over the weekend,” Millet added. As the Lewiston Sun Journal reported, “previous governors have reportedly sought separate statutory changes to their compensation to match their budget messaging.”

(HT: Dave Dayen)

Politics

Nearly Identical Anti-Labor Bills Appear In Maine, Missouri, New Hampshire, Other States

By Lee Fang on Mar 12, 2011 at 1:00 pm

Reporting for the progressive Maine blog Dirigo Blue, Gerald Weinand has discovered that a proposed “right to work” law in Maine mirrors similar proposals in several other states, like New Hampshire and Missouri. The legislation in Maine, LD788, sponsored by State Rep. Tom Winsor (R), would make Maine like other low-wage anti-labor states by weakening unions. Right to work laws typically allow workers to opt-out of union dues while benefiting from union contracts, a cycle that usually kills a labor union over time. But the assault on worker rights in Maine appears to be part of a larger attack coordinated by conservative front groups. Winsor’s bill contains phrases and language strikingly similar to other right to work proposals from Republicans across the country:

Maine’s anti-union bill LD788:

§ 653. Right to refrain
A person may not be required, as a condition of employment or continuation of employment, to:
1. Become a member. Become or remain a member of a labor organization;
2. Pay dues. Pay any dues, fees, assessments or other similar charges, however denominated, of any kind or amount to a labor organization; or
3. Pro rata portions. Pay to any charity or other 3rd party, in lieu of payments under subsection 2, any amount equivalent to or a pro rata portion of dues, fees, assessments or other charges required of members of a labor organization.

New Hampshire anti-union bill HB 474:

273-D:4 Freedom of Choice Guaranteed, Discrimination Prohibited. No person shall be required, as a condition of employment or continuation of employment:
I. To resign or refrain from voluntary membership in, voluntary affiliation with, or voluntary financial support of a labor organization;
II. To become or remain a member of a labor organization;
III. To pay any dues, fees, assessments, or other charges of any kind or amount to a labor organization;
IV. To pay any charity or other third party, in lieu of such payments, any amount equivalent to or a pro-rata portion of dues, fees, assessments, or other charges of a labor organization.

Missouri’s anti-union bill SB109:

Section A.290.590.2. No person shall be required as a condition or continuation of employment to:
(1) Become or refrain from becoming a member of a labor organization;
(2) Pay any dues, fees, assessments, or other similar charges however denominated of any kind or amount to a labor organization; or
(3) In lieu of the payments listed under subdivision (2) of this subsection, pay to any charity or other third party any amount equivalent to, or on a pro rata basis, any dues, fees, assessments, or other charges required of members of a labor organization.
In fact, the bills, excepting legaleese required to make the bill fit with each state’s laws, are nearly identical, down to unusual vocabulary and phrasing.

David Koch’s Americans for Prosperity group has beefed up its presence in Maine since the election of Gov. Paul LePage (R), a far-right tea party favorite. Meanwhile, Maine’s Republican Speaker of the House hired Trevor Bragdon, the former director of the Americans for Prosperity state chapter in Maine. And Trevor’s brother Tarren is the executive director of the Maine Heritage Policy Center, a conservative state-based think tank with ties to several corporate donors, including Koch Industries. Both Americans for Prosperity and the Maine Heritage Policy Center appear to be laying the groundwork for the same type of anti-labor effort as Wisconsin’s led by Gov. Scott Walker (R-WI).

The conservative strategy for decimating the labor movement is being replicated with great speed — and little creativity. Each state, from Wisconsin, to Ohio, to Maine, and others across the country face a similar threat of phony Tea Party groups, business front organizations, and even nearly identical legislative proposals.

Older

Newer

Switch to Mobile
ThinkProgress Signup Overlay Skip and Continue to ThinkProgress Skip and Continue to ThinkProgress

Sign Up