Congress and the States Are Constitutionally Empowered to Crack Down on Trump and His Seditionists thenation.com - get the latest breaking news, showbiz & celebrity photos, sport news & rumours, viral videos and top stories from thenation.com Daily Mail and Mail on Sunday newspapers.
Read Article
John Brautigam’s and Ron Fein’s April 7 Sun Journal article, urging Maine to “ban political spending by foreign-influenced corporations,” is disappointing. These men know better; in their adult lives each has worked for free speech and fair elections. Free and open speech is both constitutionally protected, and the cornerstone of a free society.
Their distaste for Central Maine Power’s New England Clean Energy Connect project seems to have clouded their judgment; they assert “… foreign entities shouldn’t be able to influence our elections. It doesn’t matter whether it’s Russian military intelligence [or] a Canadian energy conglomerate ….”
AP file
A sign in protest of Central Maine Power s controversial hydropower transmission corridor is displayed along Rte. 201 near The Forks, Maine, Tuesday, Feb. 9, 2021.
Note: The Pulse newsletter will not be published next week reporter Steve Mistler will be on vacation.
The debate over Central Maine Power’s controversial transmission project has raged for more than three years, long enough to make the arguments for and against it seem repetitive and stale.
However, the battle remains eminently consequential and not just for the energy companies that stand to profit or lose money because of it.
Those companies, including CMP, have combined to spend more than $32 million attempting to shape Mainers’ views of the 145-mile corridor in advance of a November referendum. That includes $7 million in just the past three months, according to the latest campaign finance reports.
Wikimedia Commons The Daniel-Johnson Dam in Quebec, Canada, is the largest arch and buttress dam in the world.
For the past month Maine lawmakers have been considering a slate of bills that could sideline Hydro-Quebec from an upcoming referendum on Central Maine Power s highly controversial transmission project.
The legislation centers on whether a company wholly owned by the Quebec provincial government should be allowed to spend money to influence Maine voters in the campaign. But the debate is actually bigger than that, and it has drawn the attention of national groups seeking to beat back the tidal wave of corporate election spending that was unleashed by the U.S. Supreme Court s decade-old Citizens United decision.
John Brautigam and Ron Fein: Maine should ban political spending by foreign-influenced corporations
As the first state to pass ranked-choice voting and public funding of elections, Maine has led the nation before in the fight for democratic self-government. It’s time for Maine to lead again.
Read Article
Ron Fein
The Maine Legislature is considering a bill to ban political spending by corporations that are partly owned by foreign entities. Here’s why they should do that and why the arguments raised by the bill’s corporate opponents don’t hold water.
Most people agree that foreign entities shouldn’t be able to influence our elections. It doesn’t matter whether it’s Russian military intelligence, a Canadian energy conglomerate, or a collection of European financiers. In fact, the leading court decision, written by then-Judge (now Justice) Brett Kavanaugh and later upheld by the Supreme Court, involved a Canadian who wanted to print some election flyers and pass