St. Louis-City of Danger

The city of St. Louis, fresh on the heels of a World Series victory in baseball, apparently has a serious issue with violent crime, earning the dubious title, as America’s “most dangerous city,” as selected by Morgan Quitno Press, which publishes an annual report of America’s most dangerous, as well as, safest cities.

For me, an outsider, St. Louis would seem to be an idyllic city. Located on the banks of the mighty Mississippi, the place rhapsodized by the likes of Mark Twain and others and settled neatly in the center of America’s heartland, the city has been overrun by violent crime, recently. Since 2004, the violent crime rate has risen 20 percent.

While watching the Series with my son, Mark, who had passed through St. Louis over the summer on a nationwide hitchhiking odyssey, he mentioned that St. Louis was a “pit.” When queried, he just said the city was a “dump, with nothing going on.” Granted, his take is anecdotal, but the statistics from the report seem to bear out that there’s not much going on in St. Louis, but murder and mayhem. I never would have guessed it? The Midwest is in fact, where danger lies. Boston (31st) fared better, but New York (at 139) was a real surprise to me, a much safer place than say, Tampa, Florida (at 24).

Nearing decision-making time

I’m not ready to endorse a candidate just yet. That is rare for me, as I tend not to be one of those damn “undecideds” that have so much attention foisted upon them each election cycle. This year’s gubernatorial race, up here in Maine, has been different, however. Unlike most years, when you have two sorry choices between twiddle dum and twiddle dee, the inclusion of two strong independent women candidates, very focused on the issues, has forced the two front runners to talk about issues, as difficult as that can be at times, particularly for consummate politicians.

Actually, I mean no offense to the colorful Phillip Morris NaPier, who speaks from the heart and has garnered some press with his insistence that his name be listed on the ballot as, “Phillip Morris Napier, Thu People’s Hero,” a case which was ultimately struck down by a federal judge. In reality, however, NaPier has no real chance at winning and most of his votes will be those that fall in the “none of the above” category.

I’ve been unenrolled as a voter, an independent, for two years now. The 2004 presidential election convinced me that no substantive chance can ever come from the two major parties. The only hope we have as a state and a nation, is to alter our current voting system in order to give third party candidates a real chance at victory. Instant runoff voting might be one way we could do that.

Maine has attempted to level the playing field with its Clean Election Act, as an attempt at removing the influence of money on our state races. While a step in the right direction, it has shown some serious flaws. Realistically, it was intended specifically to allow the two women, Independent Barbara Merrill and Green Party candidate, Pat LaMarche, a chance to compete with and legitimately contend for the Blaine House.

Merrill has gone as far as to write a book, following in the footsteps of Maine’s last successful Independent, Angus King. Merrill lays out in detail her positions on the issues that are germane to a state like Maine. Addressing not just the hot button issues that pertain to Portland, or Augusta, Merrill, who hails from Appleton and has represented a rural area of the state, understands the issues that the rural communities of the state face. Subsequently, her positions reflect that understanding.

Two weeks ago, I had the privilege of attending a candidates breakfast, hosted by the Androscoggin Chamber of Commerce, where I got to see the candidates up close and hear them speak to some of the issues. At that point, I was leaning towards Merrill as my candidate of choice, to occupy the Blaine House. Unfortunately, Merrill revealed a very “catty” public persona, going to great lengths to attempt to pin down and even embarrass some of the other candidates, particularly the incumbent, John Baldacci. Of the four candidates, Merrill comes across as the least likeable for me, on a personal level. Call it shallow if you want, but being able to exhibit some personal charm and humanness goes a long way towards building consensus, something Barbara should be aware of, considering her legislative experience.

The one candidate who surprised me, and in all honesty, I shouldn’t have been, is Pat LaMarche. No stranger to politics, having run for both governor and as the Vice President on the Green Party ticket during the 2004 presidential race, LaMarche is personable, well-versed on the issues and the most genuine of the four. A single mother, who raised two children, selling her house to put them through college, LaMarche, of the four, understands the economic realities of most Mainers on a very personal level. As a result, her ideas for economic development, taxes, education and health care reflect the thoughts of many who reside east and west of I-95, in our state.

Unfortunately for LaMarche, being elected governor is probably remote at best, if not impossible. The race has really been a two person affair, up until Chandler Woodcock’s tax problems. That even may have opened the door, just slightly for one of the two women candidates to sneak into the number two slot, which would be an accomplishment. It appears to me, handicapping the race, that Governor Baldacci, despite the many legitimate issues dogging his candidacy, will be reelected governor of the state of Maine.

As of yesterday, I’m leaning strongly towards voting my conscience, rather than once again, throwing up my hands and voting for the lesser of two evils, as I often do. If I had to choose today, then Pat LaMarche would be my choice for governor. In all honesty, I don’t think I’d be too disappointed to wake up on November 8th, knowing we had both a woman and a third party candidate occupying our state’s highest seat.While Pat’s positions on the issues are very much in line with my values and with where I’d like to see our state go, it is Pat’s humanness that has ultimately won me over. I heard her speaking on John McDonald’s Saturday morning radio call-in show. On numerous occasions, McDonald gave her a clear opportunity to plunge the dagger into Woodcock’s candidacy, over his tax snafus. Time after time, LaMarche exhibited a diplomacy that is rare in politics today. Rather than skating around the issue because of political expediency, she refused to take the bait because she legitimately had empathy for Woodcock’s predicament, particularly for his family and how they must feel. While being a nice person doesn’t necessarily mean one will make a great leader, in LaMarche’s case, it dovetails nicely with this woman’s clear positions that have the interests of Mainers and not some party, or rich benefactors, at their core.

We still have over a week to go and something might come up to make me shift my orientation, but stopping short of an endorsement, Pat LaMarche is the only one of the four legitimate choices that I feel good voting for on a personal level.

FMI information about the upcoming elections, check out Maine Impact, a new twice weekly podcast hosted by Lance Dutson and Jason Clarke.

Are Maine's taxes too high--Chandler Woodcock thinks so

As they say, “all politics is local.” As such, our local politics just got a bit more interesting when it comes to our four-way gubernatorial race. Readers of this blog have some context of the nature of our race, at least in terms of the Republican candidate, the bow tied tax crusader, creationist and now we find out, tax dodger.

One of our three major local television stations (and yes, we do have flush toilets and even TV), the ABC affiliate, WMTW-TV Channel 8 reported on their 6 pm newscast that Woodcock has 10 liens placed on his Farmington home over the past nine years. Since 1997, through last year, 2005, Woodcock has experienced tax difficulties. In 2005, the Maine Revenue Service placed a lien on his home for unpaid income taxes from 2003. Additionally, Woodcock has also had difficulty paying his municipal sewer charges. A total of $2,686 was owed to the town of Farmington, with the largest outstanding bill being for $900 and the smallest for $49. Maybe that’s why Woodcock has been so adamant about cutting taxes? We all thought his was a philosophical argument—the typical supply-side conservative at work. Instead, maybe he figured that if he was elected governor, he could find a way out from under his tax difficulties?

Like all good Republicans, when caught with their hand in the scandal cookie jar, Woodcock’s campaign manager, Chris Jackson, trotted out the “timing question,” as in “the timing is more than ironic.”

Jackson claimed that this release of tax information on his candidate was likely a dirty trick by an opponent. Oh yeah! Well, try this on for size.

The story actually broke, not as a result of any investigative work being done by Maine’s crack reporters at one of our supposed award-winning dailies, but as a result of comments that were posted on the Kennebec Journal website. On both October 14th and 25th, readers posted specific information in the comments section about the liens on Woodcock’s home. The first one was posted in response to a letter to the editor in support of the folksy candidate for governor. Both included information about the liens and directed readers to the Franklin County Registry of Deeds website. This is public information and it shows how poorly most journalists (dare I call them that—maybe scribes might be a better term!) do their job. It would seem that public records in a public registry would be a good place to start in investigating a candidate’s background, particularly when running for governor of the state, at a crucial juncture in our state’s history.

Stoic, rather than jocular at this development, Woodcock had this to offer. “I take it for what it is,” in speaking with the Lewiston Sun Journal. “It’s politics. It’s not the politics that I like or practice, but its politics.”

The politics that Woodcock and his fellow conservatives practice is the kind that guts services at the beckon call of their rich benefactors, all in the name of lower taxes. His party and stripe also dictate morality via legislative fiat, maybe because they live so close to the reality of man’s inclination to do wrong.

The Woodcock revelation is just one more case of Republicans saying one thing and doing another, ala Mark Foley. Better yet, Maine's own history of anti-tax support has come from some fairly dubious corners. Does anyone remember convicted felon, Carol Palesky, and the last anti-tax referendum?

I’m sorry that Chandler Woodcock can’t pay his taxes. Maybe in his case, they are too high. However, many more of us who struggle to make a living in a state that needs a more creative solution than mere tax cuts, gallantly suck it up and send off our checks from our meager funds and are offended when others don’t particularly, someone running for governor.

Operating on several fronts

My life is a veritable whirlwind right now. Between work, my publishing venture and alot of last-minute fall type chores that need to be done to batten down the hatches for winter, something has got to go, at least for part of the week--unfortunately, its probably the blogging I do hear at Words Matter.

For those of you who follow my publishing endeavor, RiverVision Press, I have some new and interesting things in the works and I hope to post details soon at Write in Maine, where I focus on all things related to writing.

It's the start of the holiday book buying season, so small press publishers that hope to reap some sales from this busy time in the book industry, have to hustle.

I hope to have something more substantive posted here, later in the week.

Do (Maine) Republicans hate black people?

Chandler Woodcock seems like a nice guy. With his bowties and corn pone, “aw shucks” humor, he comes across as genuinely likeable—that is, until you look at where he stands on the issues.

• Supports the teaching of creation, as science, in public schools
• Opposes a woman’s right to an abortion
• Is pro-TABOR, a pathetic “slash and burn” attempt at corralling taxes in Maine; the only thing TABOR will do is hurt those on the margins in Maine
• Talks in vague terms about reforming state government, a government that he has been a key part of for the past six years, as a state senator
• His program for job growth seems unsustainable, given his penchant to cut taxes across the board; how the hell can you fund R & D, when, under Woodcock’s tax policies, there won’t even be money to maintain our roads?

On top of all of his, Woodcock seems unable to structure his schedule (or maybe it’s muster the courage) to attend forums in front of people who may not share his views. The bow tied wonder’s latest dodge, involved a forum sponsored by Portland’s NAACP, at the Westbrook campus of the University of New England, on Thursday. Prior to that, he missed a forum sponsored by the Women's Policy Center (who probably wanted to speak to him about his views on abortion) and the Maine Education Association (who probably had a question or two for Chan).

While I admit that my title is a bit over the top, Republicans, from Woodcock, all the way up the Republican ladder, to the man at the top, GW Bush, have a disturbing track record at snubbing people of color. The previous Republican gubernatorial challenger, a man with more “urban” sensibility than the small town Woodcock, “handsome” Peter Cianchette, also apparently had scheduling issues when it came to speaking before the NAACP, back in 2002.

In a statement issued by Democratic Party chair, Ben Dudley, Woodcock’s apparent lack of leadership is questioned.

“Avoiding those with whom you disagree isn’t leadership. Leadership is about listening to all sides of an issue and working with all parties, even those you disagree, to achieve the common good.”

Despite spokesman Chris Jackson’s protestations and cries of “foul,” Woodcock has spent his entire campaign being vague and relying merely on the bowties and his corny humor to obscure his obvious lack of any real ideas on how to run the state of Maine. Whatever your inclinations are towards the other three candidates (I'm not counting Phillip NaPier, "The People's Hero" other than for comic relief), they are quite clear on the issues and their direction for Maine.

As they say, actions speak louder than words. Certainly, the impression that Woodcock left with one group is that he doesn't care about their issues.

Rachel Talbot Ross, the president of Portland's chapter of the NAACP had this to say about the snub.

"I think it's irresponsible of (Woodcock's) campaign to allow us to think that he doesn't care about the constituencies we represent."

Note to Woodcock:

While Maine is a fairly white state and Farmington is even whiter, snubbing Portland’s NAACP and its constituency isn’t a savvy political move. The fact that two Republican candidates in a row have skipped the NAACP’s forum, I think, speaks volumes about the party and is one indicator that Woodcock is just another right-wing Republican ruled by a narrow agenda. Add to this the fact that the agenda of many Republicans benefits only the wealthy, powerful and predominantly white male base that keeps propping up the party and you have a pretty good reason not to choose that direction for Maine, a direction that is by-and-large, ruled by ideological straitjacket.