Maine State Representative Erik C. Jorgensen

Drilling off the Coast of Maine? Bad Idea

3/5/2018

Here's a photo I took on a visit to Penobscot Bay a couple of years ago. It points up both the pristine quality of the water and the amazing natural beauty of the Maine Coast. I am happy to report that I and 226 of my colleagues from other coastal states recently signed on to a letter of protest organized by the National Caucus of Environmental Legislators to Secretary of the Interior Ryan Zinke reiterating our opposition to the Trump plan to expand drilling for oil and gas off the Continental US.

The letter, spearheaded by Washington State Senator Kevin Ranker and California State Senator Kevin De Leon, cites numerous issues that come with offshore drilling. These issues range from the large-scale, irreparable damage caused by oil spills, to the long term damage to coastal economies after these disasters.

“This reckless proposal opens over 90 percent of US shorelines to new oil and gas drilling, putting our economy and marine environment at risk of a catastrophic oil spill,” said Sen. Kevin Ranker. “States across the country are standing up together against the Trump administration to protect our communities, our marine and coastal environment and economy.”

The Full Announcement be found here: http://www.ncel.net/2018/03/05/legislators-oppose-proposed-offshore-drilling-program/
And the Letter itself is available here:

ocs-oil-and-gas-leasing-program-sign-on-letter.pdf
File Size:	430 kb
File Type:	pdf

Download File

1 Comment

A Tax on Cleaner Cars?

3/1/2018

1 Comment

Recently, a legislator from Southern Maine submitted LD 1806 - a bill "To Assure Equity in the Funding of Maine's Transportation Infrastructure by Imposing an Annual Fee on Hybrid and Electric Vehicles." The premise of this act is that electric and hybrid vehicles, by paying less in fuel taxes, are not paying their "fair share" of road costs.

On the face of it, this seems like a fair concept. In fact it garnered some spirited debate among members of my own family, who like all Mainers, are subject this time of year to a profusion of bone-shaking potholes. In my mind, however, this is a punitive bill designed to mask (and not mask effectively) the fact that our gas tax has not kept up with inflation, while simultaneously zinging the perceived liberalism of economical car owners. Moving as we are now, out of a period of historically low gas prices, we missed a perfect opportunity to painlessly raise the gas tax and better keep our roads in shape. Instead, the governor wants to penalize people who are seeking to mitigate their carbon footprints.

If 10% of our 1,500,000 Maine-registered cars were plug-ins, I think the argument that there might need to be some sort of alternative tax to cover road wear, to offset what would have been paid in gas tax, is a debate that would at least be worth having. But certainly not right now, when we should be doing all we can to increase the use of those vehicles. Plenty of fossil-fuel subsidies support, at least indirectly, Suburbans and Denalis. I'm more than happy to give-drivers of low emission vehicles a tiny little tax savings.

We do need more funding for our roads and bridges, and I support ways to develop that. Ultimately, I would like to see road taxes based on total miles driven and, even better, vehicle weight, possibly metered in conjunction with the gas tax. Those factors are what are busting up the roads, not a few Priuses and Nissan Leaves.

1 Comment

Why I did not support the Dakota Access Pipeline Bill

10/27/2017

2 Comments

Having been called out by the Maine People's Alliance for voting against the so-called "Dakota Access Pipeline Divestiture Bill" I wanted to share my reasoning for this position. The bill would have instructed the State of Maine to divest from deposits in any bank that has helped to finance the Dakota Access Pipeline. This would have fallen most heavily on the State Retirement system.

I need to be crystal clear that I am no friend of the Dakota Access pipeline. That project is is an outrageous abridgment of tribal sovereignty and I think that the issue of risk to clean water has been vastly whitewashed by the proponents of the project.

So I support the issue very much. But I didn't support that bill.

My primary reason for opposing that bill was a simple one: The purpose of the Maine State retirement system is to provide return for retirees who do not qualify to receive social security and who have trusted their lifetime pensions to that fund. It's not the state's money - it is all owed to the individuals who paid into it. Therefore I oppose any sort of restrictions on its investments for specific political causes (however valid those causes are) unless the people who own the funds have voted that whatever restriction is being proposed is okay with them.

It's difficult, because this year it's DAPL - two years ago, it was a proposed plan to force the fund to divest from all fossil fuels. I could think of many other things that I would like us not to invest in, like Monsanto, or various drug companies that in my estimation fleece the American people, or, for that matter, Wal-Mart. Another bill this session, from right-wing activists, would have forced us to stop any investments or business with any company that has boycotted Israel. We killed that, too, thankfully.

The difficulty with these issues is that if you start placing legal restrictions on investment options, you quickly end up with a whole grid of restrictions that makes investing harder, and puts Maine retirees at a relative disadvantage. Many of those retirees already have pensions that leave them in poverty because they were paid poorly during their working careers, and I am troubled by that.

Oil is something that every single American uses every single day of every year, either directly or indirectly. It would be very hard to single out specific DAPL investments in companies in that sector and in the financial services sector, which is so interlinked with the whole US economy. This particular bill was very vague in how it defined investment in DAPL, and I think that even if I was able to ignore the issues above, I would have opposed it for that more technical reason.

Finally, I think it's worth noting that the Maine Retirement system already takes into account environmental and social considerations when it makes its investments. I don't know if the fund actually holds any specific assets that were directly tied to the DAPL project, but if there were serious concerns about a specific company, those factors would be considered by the fund as part of that process. The legislature is not equipped to make investment decisions, and that's why we have people whose sole job is to consider all these issues in managing the billions of Maine State Workers' dollars that they've been entrusted with.

I don't know if you are moved by these arguments, but I hope I can offer at least a glimpse into my reasoning. This was neither a reflexive nor an idealogical vote for me. As much as I support those who object to DAPL I had no problem saying no to this idea.

2 Comments

A Visit to Quebéc

9/13/2017

0 Comments

As a member of the legislature's commission that deals with Maine-Canada relations, I was honored to have the opportunity to visit Quebéc in September to tour hydroelectric facilities and to meet with various officials involved in US-Canadian affairs. This is a picture of our delegation visiting with US Consul General Allison Aerias-Vogel (fourth from the left) in Quebec City. Certainly my favorite Canadian province, Quebec is a leader in land conservation and resource management, relations with its sovereign first nations, and of course it is endowed with a fabulous French culture that permeates everything.

It is a super-entrepreneurial and business-focused place, yet it celebrates this posture while proudly acknowledging the value of the Canadian health care system and the presence of excellent child care, two factors that present nothing but a drag on businesses on our side of the border. Because my colleagues on this trip all happened to come from the other party, I thought that the message could not have been heard by more important ears. I was not surprised that virtually everyone North of the border is alarmed by the protectionist rhetoric of the Trump Administration. They reminded us that while American and Canadian companies physically occupy one side of the border or the other, the supply chains in both countries rely heavily on trade. A lesson worth remembering.

0 Comments

From the Department of Excuses...

8/4/2017

0 Comments

The first session of the 128th Legislature was, if not the longest session in history, then the longest session in anyone's memory. Our statutory adjournment date was June 15th, and we were still in session on August 2nd.

We'd been advised long before not to make any travel plans for July - but that August would be "safe". And so I made plans to leave town at the start of August. When I heard we would be back at the state house to try and overturn vetoes on August 2nd, I tried to make changes to my flights but those proved cost prohibitive and so I was away that day.

It's always hard to reassemble the legislature outside of its normal dates of operation. And that was a costly day to miss - we took final votes on a number of bills, including closely-watched issues like solar power legislation and toxic chemical reform, both of which are particularly important to me. I take my attendance seriously, and was sorry and pained to have missed those votes in particular.

0 Comments

Thank You, Senator Haskell!

12/2/2016

0 Comments

By Representatives Erik Jorgensen and Richard Farnsworth
THIS IS A STORY FROM THE DEERING SQUIRREL

Oh, how all of us who represent Portland will miss Anne Haskell! Her impending retirement from Augusta represents a major change in Portland’s legislative landscape. We’ll miss her wisdom, her humor, her generosity, and her stunning skill as a legislator, drawn from a public service career that has spanned decades, including six terms of the House and two in the Senate.

While it’s hard to generalize about Anne’s enormous body of work in Augusta, it’s fair to say that she’s never forgotten the everyday people who sent her there. It’s easy to point to her hard work around big issues like health care access and social justice, but it’s her list of small, pragmatic accomplishments that might best show her legislative personality. She knows the value of incrementalism, which is truly the way that change happens in divided government.

Last session, she added a new title to her list of distinctions, as she became “the Senator who made hair braiding legal in Maine”. Astonishingly, braiding, which carries special importance in the African immigrant community, required a beautician’s license to perform. Anne led the effort to de-regulate this activity, providing a small but important benefit to many of our immigrant neighbors as well as to the general business climate in Maine. This work around “hair liberation” is just one example of the breadth of her work. Over the years her legislation has included bills to enhance screening for breast cancer, improve housing security deposit options for low income Mainers, reform the juvenile justice system and make unemployment compensation fair for seniors, to name a few.

Beyond what she does in Augusta, Anne’s impact here at home is every bit as impressive. Both of us have repeatedly stood on stages with her, at events and in forums, and at every turn, we learn new things about our neighborhood and city. She’s paid a lot of attention to the details of this place, its history and its operation, yet she never lets her deep experience turn into superiority. Anne is always self-effacing, good humored, and unfailingly attentive. At the same time, she’s tough, and willing to fight for both our city and policies that are important for Maine.

She’s been the ideal citizen lawmaker, a great friend, and the kind of colleague one rarely finds in the real world. And so we wish you all the best, Anne, but understand that you can say goodbye but never really leave - we have not forgotten where Higgins Street is, and you’ll still be on our speed-dial lists in the years to come.

0 Comments

New York Times Story on Maine's Demographic Winter

9/19/2016

0 Comments

From my perspective, the the two most important issues facing our state are issues relating to climate change and demographics. These two factors profoundly touch on every aspect of Maine's economy and identity, from likely changes in our natural resource economy, sea level rise threatening our coastal communities, to work force availability, education policy, and tax base, just to name a few. These issues are even more vexing because they are long-term problems where any solution or mitigation is going to need to go beyond one legislature, one gubernatorial administration, and, truly, one generation.

I was honored to have been consulted on this story, which deals with immigration to Maine. While immigration is certainly not the only answer to our demographic puzzle, it is going to have to play an important role, and current administration policies (as well as those being favored on the Federal level by one of the Presidential Candidates) are doing nothing to encourage it.

Here's the Story by NYT reporter Kit Seelye.

0 Comments

Solar Meltdown at end of Session: A Bitter Disappointment.

5/2/2016

3 Comments

As you likely know by now, we were unable to muster the votes needed to override the Governor's veto of the solar bill. This was is a bitter disappointment for me, and represents a victory of "feelings over facts" about the nature of this power source, and this very bold bill.

We lost by just a handful of votes - 3 or 4. Adding insult to injury is the fact that no fewer than five Republicans decided to "take a walk" during the voting, suggesting that they did not have the courage let their positions be shown, likely because they were so out of sync with their own constituents on this issue. As he was urging his members to vote against this measure, Minority Leader Ken Fredette emphasized that "Republicans Support Solar." I find that a very difficult statement to reconcile with what I saw yesterday.

I am very frustrated by the fact that there is now very little regulatory certainty for people across Maine who installed solar arrays based on a set of ground rules that have been in place for a long time. I am equally concerned about the fine growing businesses that have taken hold in Maine to meet what, until now, was a steadily growing market for solar power.

I do want to express my sincere thanks to those members who worked hard on this issue, especially my colleagues Marty Grohman, Bobby Beavers, Chris Babbidge, Deane Rykerson, Jennifer DeChant, Norm Higgins and Mark Dion; I am very grateful for the extraordinary hard work of Assistant Majority Leader Sara Gideon who negotiated this down to the last minute, when Paul LePage signed the veto letter in her presence; and I appreciate the innovative thinking of our public advocate (and Portland neighbor) Tim Schneider, who determined how this bill would save money for all ratepayers.

I appreciated every one of the hundreds of calls, letters, hall visits and communications I received - not one of them suggested that this was something to vote against. Not one. Not one told me how this was going to raise costs for ratepayers - because, of course, that was only a mythological reason to oppose this.

This was a bill that had the support of solar installers, CMP, municipalities, various environmental advocacy groups, and others (including the Public Advocate, who represents ratepayers). I really appreciated that this was crafted in collaboration with all those groups, and I hope that coalition will continue to work on solving this issue.

WHAT"S NEXT:

Time to move on - good solar policy will happen eventually, of that I am confident. But in the meantime, I am very sorry that we could not provide a framework to support those who have already invested in this power source, and to allow solar energy to start making some of the inroads it has made in other New England states. This issue now lies with the Public Utilities Commission, an agency with a narrow mandate that does not necessarily take into consideration ancillary benefits to the state and society of solar power. We don't know yet when they will be taking this issue up - but I will certainly pass the relevant information along once it's available. While they may not be amenable to proactive solar regulation, there is some likelihood that they might be receptive to "grandfathering" those people, like many of you, who have invested in home solar.

I can also virtually guarantee that this legislation will be back - There is also talk of a referendum campaign. Neither of these would be immediate fixes, but it's clear to me that this issue is not going to disappear.

My fingers are crossed, which is not exactly the most effective policy strategy, but that's the one we currently have open to us.

3 Comments

Bangor Daily News: Students Urge Maine Lawmakers to Support Arts Education

3/25/2016

2 Comments

On March 24, the State House was swarmed by a lively group of middle and high school kids arriving to advocate for the importance of arts education in the schools. I was delighted to meet with several of them who had come from Portland, including Maeve Porter Holliday and Maggie Ruff.

All too often art, theater, music and dance are dismissed as expendible items in a society that is ever more focused on so-called "STEM" education. To be sure I support STEM, though, as a person who has had a career in cultural administration, and one who is married to a person with degrees in both English and Engineering, I am a strong believer in the importance of both domains if any education is worthy of the name. You can read the whole story of the kids and their message here:

https://bangordailynews.com/2016/03/24/living/students-urge-maine-lawmakers-to-support-art-education/?ref=moreInstate

2 Comments

So Long Cary, Farewell Oxbow

3/22/2016

1 Comment

Next week or maybe the week after, I’ll be voting to end the existence of two Maine towns. I’ve taken votes like this before and I am guessing that these will likely occur without any floor debate and without opposition, reflecting the desires of local residents. The deorganization of a town is always a poignant moment, and it’s one that I think deserves more notice than it gets, tucked into a corner of the House agenda, along with water district and rural cemetery charter changes.
Just a few weeks after these votes pass, both former towns will become part of Maine’s unorganized territory. This is a vast region, with a land area larger than Maryland, but with a population of just around 8,000 people. Consider that Portland’s average population density is over 3,000 people per square mile, and it quickly becomes clear that trying to maintain even a skeletal municipal government in the most rural areas of Maine becomes costly. As the industries that created these communities in the first place (lumbering mostly) shrink and become less locally based, many of our smallest towns are simply fading out of existence. I’ve not found exact statistics, but it appears that at least half a dozen Maine townships have deorganized in recent years, ceding their self-government, and becoming mere names on a map, just wide spots on rural roads. Later this month, the municipalities of Oxbow and Cary Plantation, both in Aroostook County, will join that list.

We often hear that Maine has the oldest population in the nation, and deorganizations like this directly illustrate the problem. My office mate, the walking history book known as Representative John Martin, notes that “there’s just nobody left in these places except for few elderly folks. No students, no jobs.” And while it’s not likely that any policy change will reverse this trend for Oxbow and Cary, shifts like these point up the need to keep our population growing and our young people in Maine. This is a tall order, but it’s going to involve for starters, proper funding of public education at all levels, encouragement of diversity and immigration, and extensions of some of the business development efforts that have helped make greater Portland and Bangor the engines for whole regions. In my estimation, our aging population is the number one challenge facing Maine. And if we fail to find a way to change that, the consequences are serious—whether in a deepening inability for Maine businesses to find workers, or in a shrinking tax base, or even in our state losing national clout in going from two to just one representatives in the US Congress, a likely outcome of the next census, if current trends persist.

So as we say farewell to Oxbow and Cary—and it will be a quiet farewell—I’d like to raise a toast before I press the button. Alas, that’s not permitted in the Maine House, so instead, I’ll urge you to see this not as something happening to a few folks up near Canada, but as something happening to all of us across Maine, something in which we all have a stake and of which we should all take notice.

1 Comment

<<Previous

Drilling off the Coast of Maine? Bad Idea

A Tax on Cleaner Cars?

Why I did not support the Dakota Access Pipeline Bill

A Visit to Quebéc

From the Department of Excuses...

Thank You, Senator Haskell!

New York Times Story on Maine's Demographic Winter

Solar Meltdown at end of Session: A Bitter Disappointment.

Bangor Daily News: Students Urge Maine Lawmakers to Support Arts Education

So Long Cary, Farewell Oxbow

Author

Archives

Categories