December 2009 Archives

Again we find Maine leading the way in the wrong direction.

In a story that is making national headlines, Maine state rep. Andrea Boland, a Democrat from Sanford, wants to force cell phone manufacturers to include warnings on all devices and packaging that state that cell phones carry a risk of causing cancer (although, much like global warming, no scientific evidence exists to verify that "fact").

Boland has convinced the appropriate people in the state house to let her bill come through in the 2010 session that is normally reserved for "emergency" and "governors" bills only.

Nowhere in the country is this required, and only the extremely liberal San Fransisco is trying to push through a similar requirement.

Interestingly enough, Boland is listed as a "Independent Nutriceutical Distributor" (nutriceuticals is the practice of adding "vitatmins" to regular food and then claiming them to be more "healthy") an industry that is known for its extreme lack of regulations...

These salespeople, of which Boland is one, also claim their "nutriceuticals" help prevent cancer, another unproven claim that at least one doctor says is rubbish. 

Two quick thoughts about Obama's directive to make government more accountable.

First, he asked this directive (11 pages total) to be drafted on January 21st, 2009. It's now December 8, 2009, almost a full year later.

Second, one of the very first items on the directive is the date, which reads "December 8, 2008". Ummm...isn't it 2009?

Government...they can't get the date right, can we expect them to offer true transparency?

They are at it again.

Our friends at the Maine Arts Commission are looking for artists to complete three art projects, one at the new Brewer Elementary/Middle School (a brand new school needs brand new art projects already?) one at  Aubert Hall at the University of Maine in Orono, and a third one at the University of Southern Maine in Portland.

These three projects will cost taxpayers a total of $122,000 at a time when the state is facing about a $380 million shortfall.

We've highlighted some of the state's expensive "art" projects before, including a feature in the 2009 Maine Piglet Book of the out-of-state artist's dog paintings that reside in some choice rest-stops along I-95.

As the article mentions, Maine law designates one percent of consturction funds as "art funds," but this writer, for one, thinks there should be a "no new spending" provision on that law during budget shortfalls like the one the state is currently facing.

When you are facing a budget crunch in your household, do you immediately run out and buy "Mona Lisa" for the living room? I don't think so...

In a refreshing bit of news out of Augusta this morning, a deputy commissioner for the Maine Department of Transportation stated the need to "prioritize like we never have before" when it comes to spending.

Why does government wait for tough times to prioritize how they spend taxpayer dollars?

We hear today from the anti-business, Maine "environmental officials" who are letting us know that "federal laws to protect the public from toxic chemicals are too weak."

Maine already has stringent laws and regulations regarding toxins, along with plenty of "anti-toxin" programs including "policies to promote safer chemicals in child products and prioritize hazardous chemicals."

I have heard from sources that there is a "list" of "toxins and chemicals" on the table that these "environmental officials" would like to see banned from use, one of which is some type of binding chemical that is used in everyday items, and has no known replacement. Banning products like this, or others, would come at a huge expense to already struggling business.

As if over regulating business isn't enough (not like it's anything new for Maine government) the "environmental officials" would also like some more of your money, to fund their efforts to further handcuff business, making the products you buy everyday more expensive than ever.