Health Insurance/Health Care/Privatization
    I believe that the time has come for universal, single-payer health care. If I were in Congress today, I would support H.R. 676, the United States National Health Insurance Act, sponsored by Representative John Conyers (D-MI). H.R. 676 is a proposal for a single payer healthcare system for America. In addition, there are a variety of proposals being discussed by the Democratic presidential candidates to move toward universal health care. While I don’t believe they go far enough, these proposals at least take us in the right direction, reducing costs in the system, insuring the uninsured, and expanding access for children.

    While insuring every American and guaranteeing access to healthcare is a crucial step that we must take, we must also ensure that Americans live healthier lives. Chronic
    illnesses and conditions like diabetes, obesity, heart disease and asthma aren't solely a hardship for the millions of Americans that suffer from them, they are a major contributing factor in the skyrocketing cost of healthcare for everyone. The lack of preventative care for the millions of Americans who are uninsured or underinsured costs our whole system money that could be saved - not to mention lives saved, diseases caught early, and lives that could be improved. Providing greater incentives to encourage primary care is essential. We lack primary care doctors in this country – especially in rural areas like Maine, and our poorest citizens who rely only on Medicaid often are unable to access primary care services. Focusing on primary care, increasing physical activity among our kids, providing incentives for wellness programs within businesses and the health care field, and vastly increasing funding for chronic care programs are all essential to lowering our health care costs. While programs like head start, quality child care, and our national school nutrition programs, and other early intervention programs aren’t directly linked to health care, the funds and quality of these programs will be directly born out in future health care costs – not to mention the long-term chances of success our kids have.

    I believe that if Democrats are in power after the 2008 election – with bigger majorities in Congress and control of the White House – and we fail to provide guaranteed access to a choice of affordable coverage for every American family, we won’t deserve to govern and voters will never have faith in us again. As a state senator and the Maine Senate Majority Leader, I worked extensively on health care reform, particularly expanding coverage to children and other uninsured Mainers. This included passing a comprehensive Patients’ Bill of Rights to protect the rights of individual patients in the healthcare system and lowering the prices of prescription drugs, because it was the right thing to do and it was on the front line of the battle around who controls our health care system. I am committed to lowering the cost of health care for those who are already insured, covering more people and improving the quality of care in this country.

    Having fought some of these battles, I know that the time for incremental reform has long past. Finding solutions to our health care problems requires the courage and political will to stand up to the armies of insurance and pharmaceutical industry lobbyists who have often gone to great lengths to block change. This I’ve learned this through years of fighting these special interests, but learned that we can win. Several pieces of legislation that I sponsored or supported in the Maine Senate continue to have positive impacts on the people of Maine, including several first-in-the-nation health care reforms, such Maine Rx.

    “How are we going to pay for it?” has been the excuse to not pass health care reform for far too long. We will be letting the American public – and especially the hard working people of Maine – down if we continue lack the courage to have the hard conversations about how to afford something that should be a basic right. As the country that spends twice as much per capita than every other industrialized nation does in health care and still has 45 million uninsured (and millions more underinsured), we should start by asking ourselves – how can we continue on the flawed course we are on? There are economies of scale to be gained in covering every citizen and in providing preventive care to all Americans. We could eliminate the huge cost shifts that occur today if we just had coverage for everyone and hospitals didn’t have to offer charity care. The federal government has shown that it can run an efficient system – Medicare spends 3% of its money on administrative fees while the average for-profit insurance company spends 15% - and there are several feasible funding methods currently on the table, whether it’s that in H.R. 676 or one of the proposals put forward by the major Democratic candidates for Congress.

    Perhaps, most importantly, I would like to see us go back to the conversation of who sets the priorities for spending in this country. No one asked me – or most Americans -- if we wanted to spend $275 million a day on the war in Iraq. I would vote to shift defense funding from the war and repeal the tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans to help fund universal health care and health care programs in general.

    My record and past experiences in health care policy are extensive. I have considered it a privilege to work on this extremely important issue and am eager to take a firm stand for universal health care. I’ve mentioned just a few of my experiences above, which I believe make me well-qualified be on the front lines of this fight. I’ve received several awards for my work on increasing access to health care-- including the Families USA 2001 Consumer Health Advocate of the Year Award and the Center for Policy Alternatives 2000 Arthur S. Flemming “Courage to Lead” Award – and I’ve been privileged to travel the country in support other state legislatures as they’ve tried to pass some of the same reforms we won here in Maine.

Campaign Contributions
    Absolutely. I am a huge proponent of the Clean Elections system. I am proud that my daughter, Hannah Pingree, has been able to run for the Maine Legislature using Clean Elections and that the system here in Maine has proven effective over several election cycles with 84% of current lawmakers using the system. I supported the passage of the Clean Election Act and, as a legislator, I contributed my own stories and experiences as evidence for the defense of the law when opponents challenged the Act in court.

    For these reasons, and because I believe that our current system of financing campaigns is one of the core obstacles blocking progress, I have been a strong advocate of public financing for a number of years. As President of Common Cause, I championed new public financing laws in several states, including Connecticut, California, Maryland, and New Mexico. During that time I helped to lead the campaigns for reform -- traveling to all of those states, testifying, and lobbying. I even arranged for Senator Peter Mills to accompany me to California to a small meeting with Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger to lobby him to support this reform in his state. The role we played in Connecticut – a state which was the first to pass this law in a legislature (not via referendum) – was critical. We worked through a variety of avenues – from designing the campaign, raising the funds to support it and spending many hours meeting with individual legislators. At the federal level, I personally met with Senator Dick Durbin and described the stories collected from our successes in Maine to help convince him to be the prime sponsor of the bill we helped craft based largely on the Maine plan – now called the Fair Elections Now Act. Recently, I met with Rep. John Larson of CT, and we discussed the bill he is introducing in the House that is modeled on the Maine law. I hope that it will be one of the first bills I go to work on if I am fortunate enough to be elected to Congress.

    I have probably raised as much money as anyone in Maine politics, and I know the importance of having sufficient funds to make sure that the voters know what I stand for and the issues I care about. That said, I have also done as much work as anyone in Maine on both the state and federal level to radically change the system because I have seen how money unduly influences the process and how it requires candidates to spend more of their time raising money than almost anything else. Changing how we finance campaigns in this country may do more to restore our democracy than any other reform, and it has my full commitment.

Global Warming/Alternative Energy
    1) This bill (and a similar bill in the Senate sponsored by Sen. Barbara Boxer) are the best chances we have at keeping climate change to what will hopefully be a manageable level (less than 2 degrees Fahrenheit). The Safe Climate Act caps greenhouse gas (GHG) emission in 2010 and then reduces those emission levels by 2% a year until 2050. This steady and predictable reduction, combined with a market-based cap and trade system, makes environmental and economic sense. This approach is better than some proposals, which put off too much of the reduction for too long.

    2) Already 29 states (including Maine) have a Renewable Electricity Standard (RES.) A national RES is long overdue. Unfortunately a RES was removed from the energy bill passed last year. The Safe Climate Act, which contains a RES requiring utilities to get 20% of their electricity from clean energy sources by 2020, is an obtainable goal and in addition to reducing our GHG pollution, would provide a guaranteed and predictable market for renewable energy producers.

    Many consumers can already buy renewable energy from their utility companies, but don’t because of misconceptions about its expense and reliability. With a little investment in marketing and outreach, many more consumers would voluntarily choose clean energy.

    3) Although Congress has recently increased CAFE standards for fuel efficiency, we need to do more and act more quickly to reduce GHG emissions from cars and trucks. The Supreme Court has ruled that carbon dioxide is, in fact, a pollutant and should be regulated under the Clean Air Act. Unfortunately the Bush Administration has not only dragged its feet on this, they’ve actually blocked efforts by states like California and Maine to create tough standards for GHG pollution from cars and trucks. (Here’s a blog post and action I recently put together on this particular issue: http://chelliepingree.com/journal/tell_president_bush_let_maine.html)

    The Clean Air Act allows California to apply for a waiver to create tougher emission standards which other states can then adopt as well. That waiver has never been denied until last year, when the Bush Administration acted in the interests of automakers and the oil and gas industry instead of the environment (despite EPA staff recommendations that the waiver be approved).

    It’s time to pass tough national standards for GHG emissions from cars and trucks, so California and other states don’t have to do what the federal government should have been doing all along.

    4) According to the UN, energy efficiency is the most cost effective way to reduce GHG emission. In the past we have made the mistake of promoting conservation without having a broader conversation about efficiency. The truth is that we can maintain our current standard of living while using a lot less energy. Energy efficiency standards for appliances, vehicles, homes and businesses would not only reduce our contributions to global warming, they would also save a lot of money. Incentives and subsidies to improve the efficiency of older buildings make a lot of sense too. Maine has some of the oldest housing stock in the country, and anyone who lives in an old house knows there is a lot that can be done to reduce energy consumption.

    I agree with the approaches in the Safe Climate Act. While in the Maine Legislature I co-sponsored a bill (the Cleaner Car Rebates Program) that used market incentives to promote the purchase of more fuel-efficient new and used cars and trucks. The bill helped people save money and reduce air pollution generated by vehicles in Maine and assisted automobile manufacturers and dealers in meeting the requirements that the low-emission vehicle program established.

    The US leads the world in per capita and absolute GHG pollution. Climate change is truly a global problem, but it is difficult to convince other countries to do their part if we don’t do ours. Simply put, we have to be bold and go from a world polluter to a leader on the issues of global warming and renewable energy.

    I believe that green jobs and producing renewable energy in a state like Maine could be an enormous boost to our economy. As a member of Congress, I would work to roll-back the enormous giveaways we have given to the gas and oil industry in exchange for significant increases in research and development in tidal power, conservation programs, initiatives like those at the University of Maine to make wood waste into ethanol, as well as increased federal renewable energy tax credits. For much of our country, investment in renewable energy is the right thing to do and a positive way to drive our economy.

    My thinking on qualifications and decision-making is that everyone who serves in public office calls on a wide variety of experts to comment on the enormous number of policy decisions that need to be made in elected office. Beyond policy expertise, there are a variety of other skills that are essential -- keeping an open mind, listening to many diverse points of view, coming to a decision that you believe will best serve the people you represent, being able to both explain those decisions to your constituents and colleagues (and persuade them if necessary as everyone doesn’t always agree with you) and be willing to fight like hell against all those who have a vested interest in keeping you from doing what you believe is right.

    That said, I do have some unique qualifications regarding energy policy and the environment. I was a graduate of College of the Atlantic in the 1970’s where I studied a wide variety of environmental issues and developed my lifelong commitment to a healthy environment. I spent several years of my life as an organic farmer and have always been committed supporting local agriculture, reducing toxics in our food and environment and decreasing our energy use caused by the transport of food and petroleum based fertilizers.

    I raised my family in a house that my husband and I built from the ground up – including cutting and sawing our own logs and using non-petroleum products for heating our house and our hot water. I am proud of the fact that I have had an efficient wood burning kitchen stove and heated my home primarily with passive solar. While that doesn’t make me an expert, I have been worried about and paying attention to these issues for a long time!

National Security/Military Spending
    The next President and Congress are going to be faced with critical decisions regarding the size and distribution of resources devoted to national defense. At $541 billion (54% of the discretionary budget), President Bush’s FY09 Pentagon budget request (Department of Defense plus the nuclear weapons portion of the Department of Energy) eliminates no major weapons systems and is 5% larger in real terms (adjusted for inflation) than the FY08 budget request. If this budget is approved, which observers expect it to be, it will be a 44% increase since 2000. This would make the Department of Defense budget at its highest level ever, in real terms--and that does not include war spending. $200 billion for the war in FY09 is a conservative estimate. We are currently spending $12 billion a month in Iraq.

    What is needed in order to have resources for other needs that keep Americans safe at home is accountability and oversight in an atmosphere of a restrained budget. Beyond this fundamental change in the level of accountability, defense spending should prioritize taking care of those who have served and are serving today. I would advocate for veterans’ health care benefits, including adequate mental health services and modernizing and upgrading the care we give wounded soldiers at Walter Reed and other military hospitals. I would also push for prioritization of equipping and outfitting troops and not put Americans in the field without proper equipment like appropriate armored vehicles, which Iraqi soldiers have and American soldiers do not.
Transportation
    This list describes choices that are very important to the future of Portland and the First District. I appreciate the work that League and other community groups have done on this front but I’m concerned that these kinds of earmark decisions are the wrong way to approach this important set of issues.

    We need to be funding crumbling, unsafe bridges and public transportation and rails, but rather than choosing two priority projects on my own, I want to discuss the importance of a conversation with the voters that also examines the long term big picture. I think that this is particularly important at this moment in time, when we need to reevaluate our transportation improvement “desires” with the knowledge that we have to reduce our dependence on oil and our carbon use. I would like to see a national shift in transportation subsidies that currently focus on individual automobile transportation so that they also include a much higher commitment to public transportation – buses, trains and ferries – all of which are very under-supported in Maine.

    Part of making that shift requires an honest, long-term public conversation about what our priorities should be. The Congressional Representative from the First District could play a very important role in fostering this level of discussion and bring in a real diversity of viewpoints. This conversation should not be dominated only by those with something to gain from only one option or in maintaining the status quo. I don’t want to be the Congressperson credited with bringing home the money to fund this generation’s Franklin Street Arterial.

    One other important point – I believe that it is essential that the federal government make a serious national investment in our country’s damaged infrastructure. The fact is that our crumbling infrastructure needs investment – drive on any Maine road to see this – but we also need to rethink the current situation that is making rail service less accessible and more expensive and we need to increase funding for bike and walking trails. I don’t think that we should settle for “conventional wisdom” in this or any other area of federal spending. I don’t think Maine should ever settle for a member of Congress who thinks that procuring a few earmarks is adequate – I think that the role is both to have a powerful voice in setting national and state priorities and moving the debate in a more productive direction.

    When it comes to my qualifications to both comment on and work on this issue – for 37 years I have lived in a town whose survival is dependent on public transportation. The funding of ferries and the infrastructure was a big priority for me during my time in the legislature— I represented 4 offshore islands connected only by ferry and worked with many more, as well as several mainland communities where the ferry terminals were located. We worked hard to increase the federal involvement in funding the ferries and their associated infrastructure – and worked to shift the debate around public transportation funding being only a state responsibility to one shared with the federal government. Good transportation policy requires a combination of leadership and public involvement.

International Relations
    This question could be answered from a variety of perspectives – whether it’s the disastrous effect our trade policy has had on the loss of manufacturing jobs and the great harm to the Maine environment or our unwillingness to sign international treaties such as the Kyoto Accord and the resulting inactivity on the international polluters in the problems with global warming. However, if I were to start with the premise that the war of the last five years has been our biggest foreign policy mistake, with an impact on every aspect of all of our lives, I have to say that the major global issue that affects Mainers most is the combined problems of terrorism, Bush’s War in Iraq and our relationships with our allies and others.

    The Iraq War, started as a war of choice under false premises, has: degraded the moral authority that made the US the acknowledged leader of the Free World; it has strengthened al-Qaeda and other extremist groups; it has radicalized the Muslim World; and it has antagonized our allies. We must get out of Iraq, but we must do so through multi-lateral discussions involving our NATO allies and our moderate Arab friends. Serious diplomatic initiatives with Iran and Syria, both of which have an interest in a stable Iraq, are equally important components.

    The weakened US economy, best illustrated by the doubling of US debt under the Bush administration and the resulting collapse of the dollar, must also be dealt with if we are to retain the ability to meet our international obligations in the years ahead, not only in Afghanistan and other areas of instability which foster terrorism, but also in the provision of foreign aid to Africa to combat AIDS, a cause of increased instability there. Finally, we need a strong economy to deal with the increasingly serious problem of global warming and our over-reliance on carbon fuels, which we are forced to import at ever higher prices.
Mortgage crisis in ME/Banking and lending
    Given the situation we’re facing, President Bush’s plan is just too little too late. More than 1 out of every 14 home mortgages in the United States are delinquent as of the end of September—a 30-year high, and Maine has the highest cumulative foreclosure in New England, more than one in five (20.9 percent) . The mortgage and foreclosure crisis has a dramatic spillover effect on the rest of the economy, and we must demand bold solutions to stave off the worst of the fallout, which I am sure we have not yet even begun to see.

    This means acknowledging that the market is not going to fix this problem and instituting time out for foreclosures, so lenders can actually address how to refinance mortgages for people who can and want to pay their mortgage under fair terms.

    Moving forward, regulation must keep pace with the lending and financing tools in use. The bundling and selling of mortgages has created an impossible situation where there is not mortgage to refinance and no bank to deal with, and this has been devastating entire neighborhoods, reducing home values and literally putting families on the street. The federal government has retreated from making housing affordable, and this is a sad fact I would work to reverse. We must first weather this crisis and then put in place sound regulatory structures to oversee the practices of lenders and the financial markets.

Gay Marriage
    Yes - Federal law should prohibit discrimination based on sexual orientation. I am proud to live in a state that prohibits discrimination based on sexual orientation and am proud of my record on these issues. The majority of my work in this area took place when I was a State Senator - I cosponsored and voted for legislation to prohibit discrimination based upon sexual orientation (LD 246, 4/13/93, 5/6/93; LD 1116, 5/7/97); I voted to allow same-sex marriage (LD 1017, 3/26/97), and; I voted to ensure civil rights of members of the LGBT community (LD 2239, 4/3/00). Of course, I still strongly hold all these beliefs today and Congress should pass legislation comparable to our laws in Maine, such as the Employment Non-Discrimination Act that includes gender identity within its protections. I also believe that the U.S. military's ban on gay and lesbian personnel, known as "Don't Ask, Don't Tell,” should be lifted and that those service members should be afforded the same honors and benefits for their service as every other member of the armed forces.

Living Wages/Jobs in ME/poverty/homelessness
    Maine, like the US, is a state of wealthy and poor families, with the gap in front of our eyes. Overall, we are 38th in the nation in per-capita income, which presents serious challenges for us. In recent years, the incomes of the richest families have climbed substantially, while the incomes of the lower-income families have seen only small increases. There are a number of policies that I support that can reduce poverty, but one of the most important on this list is universal health care. Health care costs among the insured and the uninsured are a leading cause of poverty, particularly among the working poor.

    Second, increasing the number of good paying jobs is an important way to close the gap between the rich and the poor. Union jobs increase the standard of living for those who have them, and they raise the floor of pay and benefits for others in the community–particularly so for women. I am staunchly pro-union and believe we should strengthen unions’ ability to organize. We can also increase the number of good-paying jobs through responsible economic development by truly tying incentives to the creation of jobs. This issue of “corporate accountability” and setting higher standards for what taxpayers get for their investment in business is one that I worked on extensively while I was a state legislator.

    Third, being able to access an education – particularly for single parents – is possibly the most critical component of lifting a family out of poverty. As Senate Majority Leader, I championed Maine’s “Parents As Scholars” program that allows Maine’s working poor to attend college, get better jobs and change their lives. “Parents of Scholars” participants are among our best success stories of government empowering women and families and making them a vital part of the economy.

    Beyond these top examples, there are a number of important policy initiatives that can help lift families out of poverty, including making secondary education more affordable for everyone--increasing the minimum wage, reducing the cost of energy and making us energy independent. A major component of all of this is the federal government meeting its obligations when it comes to Medicare, Medicaid and education, in particular. Our state and federal budgets are a reflection of our shared priorities and unfortunately, the last seven years of the Bush Administration have set a series of priorities that harm the poor, homeless and disadvantaged. We need to roll back the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy, end the war in Iraq and get our federal priorities straight. A state like Maine is in no position to provide a safely net and opportunities for the poor without a true state-federal partnership.

College Affordability
    Now more than ever, with all the uncertainty about the economy, people need the best education they can get. Mainers, in particular, want to succeed and given the opportunity for affordable education, they will only improve their situations. Secondary education that is accessible to all people who want to continue their training is vital to Maine’s economy and to the well-being of our state. I would work to ensure that education is affordable for all eligible students with legislation to lower interest rates on student loans, serious regulation of abusive lenders, expansion of non-predatory loans to working and middle-class families and a strengthening of Pell Grants so they more adequately meet the needs of students. Beyond these fixes, we also need to think big – as Maine has done - and consider some of the more innovative ideas to dramatically expand access to education (like the HOPE scholarship program, tax credits like Opportunity Maine and increased partnerships with community and technical colleges) to help connect and train willing students with good paying jobs.

    There are also several steps that the federal government must take to strengthen early childhood and K-12 education. These include helping to pay for school repair and modernization, more qualified teachers in the classroom and fully funding its Special Education obligation in order to ensure that children with special needs receive equal educational opportunity (today states struggle to meet the mandate without adequate federal funding).
AIDS Awareness
    The most important steps are funding and education. Fighting the HIV/AIDS epidemic requires more resources and more effective use of resources devoted to research, prevention as well as the ongoing care and treatment for those infected with and affected by the disease.

    Estimates are that the U.S. Federal funding for HIV/AIDS is $23.4 billion but only 4% of that total goes toward prevention . Clearly caring for current patients and research is crucial, but increased funding for prevention and education here and abroad is how to reverse the current trends – most important on this front is routine HIV testing. 25% of the 1.2 million people infected with HIV don’t know it, and as many as 59% of people with HIV/AIDS are not in regular care . These figures make it impossible to believe that we are moving in the right direction in terms of public awareness and prevention. Moving forward we should review the effectiveness of the CDC’s Advancing HIV Prevention (AHP) initiative, which aims to reduce barriers to early diagnosis of HIV infection and increase access to treatment, improve the program as necessary and increase the overall funding, devoted to education and prevention.

    Finally, the Bush Administration’s efforts to reduce funding for family planning (including condemn distribution) has had a negative impact on the fight against HIV. Reduced access to family planning services, condoms and education will only increase the likelihood of infection among the most vulnerable populations.

Fair Trade/Unions Rights
    We have all witnessed the devastating effects that years of unfair trade and deficits have had on Maine and the nation as a whole. It has been heartbreaking to see one Maine industry after another – particularly in the manufacturing sector but also in areas such as fishing and agriculture – disappearing, and along with it the jobs.

    I believe we can and must find a way to protect the jobs of working Americans while promoting equal labor and environmental standards abroad. We must immediately address and reduce our trade deficit and end tax subsidies for outsourcing jobs. At the same time, pending and future trade agreements must include guarantees of stronger worker and environmental protections. Equally or more importantly, we need an administration that is willing to enforce those standards. The lack of enforcement of current agreements was one of the reasons for the recent, contentious debate on the Peru and Panama FTA. I would have opposed those were I a voting member of congress.

    I believe that trade proposals should be subject to Congressional approval and several considerations should be addressed before there are any other agreements approved – including food safety provisions, agricultural provisions and access to medicine -- along with enforcement. I also support federal tax incentives and education subsidies for US high-tech industries, a balanced federal budget and closing corporate tax loopholes.
Iraq War/Torture
    We must end the war now. Congress must stop funding the war and rescind its authorization if the administration refuses to make plans for immediate withdrawal. We can’t continue to squander our resources on the worst foreign policy mistake in our country’s history. Leaving will be complicated, but staying only continues the tragic loss of our soldiers, Iraqi citizens and almost unthinkable amounts of money.

    I also believe that while Congress and the President debate whether we can “win” the war instead of how best to withdraw our forces from Iraq with the least amount of damage, they are irresponsibly prolonging this disaster. Instead, they should be tackling the hard debate of what needs to be done next. I would favor a plan that ends our military obligations, creates an energy policy that frees us from our dependence on foreign oil, ends the use and protection of independent contractors and instills oversight of the contracts and the operators.

    Instead, our focus on should be on using our non-military resources including increasing our diplomatic efforts, engaging our allies in the economic reconstruction of the country, advancing the cause of human rights and addressing the refugee crisis which is growing within the region.

Iraq War/Torture
    It is essential to strengthen the laws prohibiting torture, and I would support H.R. 1352 -- The Torture Outsource Prevention Act. I believe it is also essential to force the executive branch to comply with the laws and treaties that already exist and currently prohibit torture. This Administration has ignored existing law in its eagerness to utilize torture in its interrogations. Torture, including the practice of waterboarding, is already prohibited by a number of statutes and treaties that the United States is a party to. The Geneva Conventions have a broad based protection from “cruel, inhuman and degrading” treatment. That sort of broad language is better than trying to list specific prohibited behaviors, as once you start listing specific procedures there is too much wiggle room to torture in ways not listed. The McCain amendment to the Detainee Treatment Act specifically prohibited the use of torture, but this administration, in a signing statement, essentially nullified the law

    As for the practice of extraordinary rendition, I am opposed to it and find it offensive to American values. Having other nations “do our dirty work” by outsourcing torture to them is as immoral as doing it with our own personnel.

    (By the way, John McCain certainly could be considered an expert on this topic and, at one time, was considered one of the outspoken voices arguing that what was happening in the name of America was so wrong – and why it had to stop. He has since changed his stand – in what appears to be a political calculation aimed at getting him to the White House. I think that serves as a reminder that one can be an expert on a topic, but if you don’t have the courage of your convictions when it comes to defending the principles of the constitution and the importance of defending right from wrong -- when it is politically challenging – then it doesn’t really matter how much knowledge or experience you hold.)

Presidential Power
    The Bush Administration has made astonishing claims of executive power, and the Congress has acceded to them without regard for the Constitution. The Constitution has a very proscribed listing of the powers of the executive, including being commander-in-chief, the right to issue pardons and the authority to make judicial and other appointments. This Administration has claimed the right, via signing statements , to ignore laws when it sees fit. It has even claimed the authority to ignore the Constitution, setting aside the writ of Habeas Corpus with its practice of indefinite detention without charge. It has claimed the right to operate in secrecy, trying to be unaccountable to the people. Unfortunately, for six years a complacent and complicit Congress validated these abuses of power. While there has been improved oversight since 2007, there is still too often a willingness to give in to and codify the administration’s overreaching claims and past lawbreaking, seen most recently in the passage of the telecomm immunity bill , covering up a long running illegal act by the Bush Justice Department.

    In Congress, I would be a strong voice for effective Congressional oversight of the Executive branch, working diligently to restore much needed checks and balances to our Government. I would support H.R. 3045, the Presidential Signing Statements Act of 2007, as well as H.R. 1416 Habeas Corpus Restoration Act of 2007. I also agree with the principles of S. 139, The Foreign Surveillance Expedited Review Act which is designed to end the warrantless wiretapping of American Citizens.
Experience that relates to youth
    One of the most exciting features of this election cycle is the increased number of young people who are getting involved in the political process — and already it feels like young people will be having a very powerful impact this year — from local races all the way to choosing our next president. I have three children who’s ages range from 26 to 31 and our lifestyles have been such that we have often lived together over the past 15 years — and many of their friends have been residents of my house as well. Ours is always the home of constant in-and-out and constant conversation and debate. I spend a lot of time with young people — and have always worked with several — in my campaign, during my time at Common Cause and in the business on the island. I'm qualified to represent young people in that I know I can successfully maintain communicative relationships that work for young people - it's a big part of my life. I have a great amount of respect for the perspective and ideas that come from those who are young — and would never want to miss the opportunity to hear from them and engage them in the work I would be doing if I am chosen as the Congressperson from Maine. After all, we are crafting the policies that will effect future decisions.

    On the Friday before the caucuses, I spent the lunch period at Freeport High School discussing the upcoming weekend with any students who wanted to attend. There was a great crowd and we had a wonderful discussion — about how I got involved in politics, about my daughter’s involvement as the majority leader of the house at 31 and about how important it was for them to attend the caucus in their community on Sunday, and why it was a good way for them to start changing the things that frustrated them about our country.

    One young man told me that he wasn’t sure if he should go — that he hadn’t done enough “research” on the candidates and he wasn’t sure he knew what was best to do. I told him and the rest of the newbie voters they were absolutely qualified to be there and vote. I also described the caucus and their role, to listen to the speeches made in favor of the candidates at the caucuses and filter it through the experiences they had had in the years they had been alive then make a decision based on what they believe is important to create a country that they would like to be apart of. We all know this will be the beginning of the critical role they will pay in the democracy for the rest of their lives.

    Just as I expect my daughter, at 31 and Majority Leader of the House, to see her role as representing people of all ages and backgrounds — and she does this very well — I would expect my job — if I am elected to congress at 52 — to do the same and give the same weight to the opinions and involvement of those who are 15 as those who are 95.

    I have made representing the whole community an important part of my previous work — whether it was sponsoring the Maine Rx legislation battling the pharmaceutical companies to lower the cost of prescription drugs to sponsoring the bill to require contraceptive equity when it comes to pricing of birth control, an issue that effects many young people. I was also the sponsor of the bill that created “Parent’s as Scholars” the bill that created an opportunity for single mothers to receive a college education. I believed then, and continue to believe today, that increasing your level of education (or joining a union) are the most substantial ways to improve your opportunity to become economically successful — and this bill has been very important to many young single mothers in Maine.

    As chair of my local school board, I fought for increasing our investment in education — and as president of Common Cause I fought against the consolidation of ownership in radio stations that has increased the amount of banned music and conversations – they were essential to me growing up and forming my earliest opinions and I know they are still today. Most importantly though, I have always spent time actively getting to know the young people around me — to hear their views and to remind and encourage them that the democracy belongs to them. I want to know that they will always speak up, participate and, hopefully run for office themselves. I will always consider it part of my responsibility to listen to young people, integrate our work and encourage young people's substantive participation in our community.

Top 3 priorities
    More than anything else over the past year, the conversation in Maine has been about ending the war, expanding access to health care as well as and our increasingly troubled economy and the challenges we face with global warming and our environment

    For me, this dialogue has been a constant reminder of how much our lives in Maine are connected to the priorities that are set at a federal level and how much we need to have a say over what those are. Stopping the war is essential – for the future security of all of us, because of the toll it takes on a state that is home to so many of our soldiers -- many of whom struggle to get the care they need when they return home. And, by spending
    $275 million of our tax dollars each day on a war that most American’s no longer support, we struggle to fund many of the things that could make a significant difference in the priorities that could make an enormous difference in Maine.

    As we discussed in an earlier answer, I think that providing universal access to health care needs to be a top priority for the new president and congress and this would make an enormous difference in Maine. For Maine businesses – small and large, for those who are currently without insurance and for those who have insurance but it is not there when they need it –affordable health care is a huge priority. I know a lot of people who have
    found a way to make a living in Maine – working two jobs, running a small business, using their Maine creativity and entrepreneurial skills to make ends meet. But when it comes to find a way to cover health care insurance –they are stumped and often can’t make ends meet. A federal solution to this problem would go a long way to improving our quality of life and our economy.

    Turning around the economic priorities of this country – and using some of our resources to invest in infrastructure could make an enormous difference for Maine. A significant federal investment on everything from transportation (from roads to working waterfronts and trains), to expanding broadband access to our rural communities would be an enormous change. At the same time, a significant investment in energy conservation and developing alternative sources of energy could make a big difference in
    Maine –we have the oldest housing stock in the nation and we could have a significant impact on developing energy alternatives from wind power to tidal to all of the many uses of biofuels.

    Green jobs and producing renewable energy in a state like Maine could be an enormous boost to our economy. As a member of Congress, I would work to roll-back the enormous giveaways we have given to the gas and oil industry in exchange for significant increases in research and development in tidal power, conservation programs, initiatives like that at the university of Maine to make wood waste into ethanol, as well as increased federal renewable energy tax credits. For much of our country, investment in renewable energy is the right thing to do for our country and planet, as well a positive way to drive our economy.

Maine’s commercial fishing industry
    You are probably referring to federal estimates for groundfish management – the management of cod, haddock and flounder in federal waters. Federal managers have repeatedly cut fishing effort by half – in fishery management actions taken periodically through the 1990s and in this decade. Unfortunately, this has not stopped the depletion of groundfish stocks. And, for Maine, it has virtually resulted in the total loss of our fishermen and the on-shore groundfish industry infrastructure: buyers, ice plants, etc. Federal actions have taken away the permits from fishermen who stopped fishing groundfish when the stocks declined – something that happened earlier and more persistently throughout mid-coast and Downeast Maine. East of Port Clyde we now have only one or two people who even hold federal permits with permission to fish. (Days at Sea) The larger boats in Portland have left the state, choosing instead to do business out of Gloucester and New Bedford, closer to where the fish have recovered.

    Cutting fishing effort is not the only thing that results in fish recovery. We need better habitat protection. In New England, there is protection for spawning and nursery grounds everywhere in New England except off the Maine coast. Where there are groundfish habitat closures, groundfish stocks are showing signs of recovery: on Georges Bank, where we have a huge year-class of haddock, and in the western Gulf of Maine, where we have a recovering cod stock. Where we have none, east of Boothbay, the groundfish stocks of all species remain persistently terribly depleted. Clearly, we need to be managing at a different scale to respond to the fact that fish stocks are more local than the scale of the federal management areas – this is something called “area management.”

    Maine has been blessed by abundance in the lobster fishery for the last 20 years. These healthy stocks have produced huge wealth for the coast and the lobster fisheries in towns like mine they support many people. Lobster management, which is based on ecological principles such as protecting habitat, reproduction, juveniles and limiting technology should provide a guide to how we approach some of the other fisheries. Lobstering has always been territorial – this means what is called “area management.” Lobstering also has a history of local responsibility in the zone council system and the support for voluntary measures such as v-notching lobsters.

    It is this voice of conservation and responsibility that State of Maine needs to pro-actively insert into the federal management process through their actions and the nominations the State makes for federal and interstate councils. We will resolve the conflict between fishermen and scientists when federal scientists find a way to honor local ecology and conditions, and when fishermen have management bodies that listen to their suggestions about restrictions. The federal management process to this point has been so focused on removing fishermen from the process that it has led to consolidation into a large-scale fleet that is not compatible with Maine communities and the ecology of the Gulf of Maine. All those fishermen who got out of groundfishing and lost their federal groundfish permits are still fishermen, they just have fewer options.

    Maine’s fishing industry is now 78% (2006 figures) dependent on lobster. This is a highly precarious situation with profound implications for our coastal communities. So when we look at federally managed species, we need to look at new approaches to restoring the stocks – here off Maine as well as everywhere else and at the same time figure out how to restore the right to fish to coastal fishermen in this state.

    I have lived in a fishing community for most of my life, I wake up to the sounds of my neighbor’s engines starting before dawn and even spent a few days filling bait bags and banding claws myself. As a State Senator, I also served on the Marine Resources Committee during some of the most contentious lobster management debate (along with fights over urchins, elvers and just about everything else). Working on fisheries policy requires as thick of a skin as anything I have ever tackled. It is an area where the challenges will continue to be huge and I would like to be involved were I to represent the first Congressional District.

Reproductive Rights
    No, the federal government does not have the moral authority to place such conditions on funding. The so-called “global gag rule” has widespread and devastating effect and it follows that similar restrictions on funding will have similarly damaging results. According to a Congressional testimony by Matilda Owusu-Ansah of the Planned Parenthood Association of Ghana, “the impact [of the Global Gag Rule in Ghana] was immediate, deep and damaging. ” Ms. Owus-Ansah went on to describe what has happened. Her organization lost all USAID family planning funding and with diminished access to reproductive health supplies and services, the number of unintended pregnancies increased dramatically, as well as the number of new sexually transmitted infections.

    The intent of the global gag rule and other such initiatives like the “anti-prostitution loyalty oath” (as it’s called by advocates) are designed to stifle funding, education and services to the populations that need it most. Maine took a principled stand in refusing federal funds for abstinence-only education with guidelines prohibiting the funds be used to teach safe-sex practices, but it’s a stand our state can ill-afford. Entire countries, such as Ethiopia, have also been forced to refuse federal funding in the interest of maintaining ongoing, and necessary, programs, even at the risk of drastically reducing those programs.

    If elected to Congress, I will be an active supporter of lifting this Administration’s prohibitions on even counseling women about abortions or advocating for legal abortion for those organizations receiving funding from the federal government. Unless we really work on this whole issue of people having good reproductive health and being able to make choices about when and under what circumstances to have children, we will continue to see children around the world in some of the most impoverished and troubled place, born into families that cannot care for them. Finally, when making these funding restrictions, the Administration would be well served to study the data that reflects that counties where there has been the most unrest are often the places that are most overpopulated and least served by family planning programs.

Tax and Budget
    I absolutely do not support extending these tax cuts.

    The very idea that the President promoted these tax cuts for those who did not need them, the wealthiest 1% of Americans, during a time of war and great fiscal challenge for our country is unthinkable and very, very bad economic policy. The health and strength of the American economic system has been undone, and it will take a long time and a lot of difficult choices before we can feel that we are passing a healthy future along to our children and grandchildren.
Comments
    I’m running for Congress because there is so much that we need to change in our country and too few people really willing to fight for it. This is a time when we need big ideas and bold action and I know that’s what I can bring to Congress.

    I know the League shares this “get things done” attitude and I’ve admired the work the work the Maine League has done to engage young people, alter the discourse and really influence the process, particularly here in Portland. I would be proud to earn the support of the League of Young Voters.

    I’ve worked to reform government and use government to improve the lives of everyday people…in Augusta, in North Haven and in Washington. I know it is my responsibility as an American to do all that I can to right the wrongs of these last seven years and running for this Congressional seat is a unique opportunity to do my part to start our country in a better direction. I know that those of us who really want to do good are very effective on the “inside” and I believe that I have the skills, the experience and the ability to take on the tough issues for the people of Maine and win. I’m not afraid to stand up and tell the truth about the challenges we’re facing and the decisions before us and that’s just what Washington needs right now.

    Thank you for this opportunity – I look forward to continuing this discussion!