Tradisionele resepte

Die koeldrankverbod: bewonderenswaardig of te opdringerig?

Die koeldrankverbod: bewonderenswaardig of te opdringerig?

Die burgemeester van New York, Michael Bloomberg, het nasionale kontroversie veroorsaak toe hy voorgestelde wetgewing aankondig wat die verkoop van suikerhoudende drankies in houers wat meer as 16 gram bevat, verbied in 'n poging om die vetsug -epidemie te vertraag.

As die voorstel slaag, sal restaurante, rolprentteaters, stadions, lekkernye en straatverkopers nie in staat wees om ekstra groot soet drank te verkoop nie-hetsy in fonteindrank of in bottels en blikkies-vanaf Maart 2013. Oortreding van die wet kan tot gevolg hê in 'n boete van tot $ 200. Kruideniersware en geriefswinkels sou vrygestel wees, sodat verbruikers steeds hul 2-liter-bottels in hul plaaslike supermark kan opgehoop het; en die verbod het geen invloed op die verkoop van koeldrank, vrugtesap, drankies op melk of alkoholiese drank nie.

Dit beteken nie dat New Yorkers meer as 16 gram koeldrank op 'n slag kan drink nie. As hulle dit verkies, kan hulle hervullings kry-selfs gratis hervullings as die restaurant dit aanbied-of twee kleiner drankies koop in plaas van die ekstra groot. Kritici van die verbod voer aan dat as mense 'n enorme hoeveelheid koeldrank wil drink, hulle in elk geval 'n manier sal vind; maar Bloomberg hoop dat die uitskakeling van die gemak van al die koeldrank in een groot houer mense sal ontmoedig om soveel te drink.

Tans is meer as die helfte van die volwassenes in New York vetsugtig of oorgewig, volgens The New York Times, en die burgemeester glo dat dit tyd is dat ons iets daaraan doen. 'New York gaan nie daaroor om u hande te draai nie,' het Bloomberg aangevoer. "Dit gaan oor iets doen."

Dit is nie die eerste omstrede stap wat Bloomberg geneem het om gesonde eetgewoontes aan te moedig nie. Die gesondheidsgraderings wat u op restaurantvensters sien? Bloomberg het daarop aangedring dat hulle daar geplaas word. Hy het ook kunsmatige transvet in restaurantvoedsel verbied. In 2010 het hy probeer om die gebruik van voedselstempels vir koeldrank te verbied, en verlede jaar het hy 'n hoër belasting op die suikerhoudende drankies gevra - geen van hierdie voorstelle is aanvaar nie.

Waarom koeldrank?
McDonald's het die verbod van Bloomberg verlede week uitgedaag toe die maatskappy getwiet het: "@MikeBloomberg Ons vertrou ons kliënte om die keuses te maak wat die beste vir hulle is." Die probleem is egter dat verbruikers nie die regte keuses gemaak het nie. Een uit elke agt sterftes in Amerika word veroorsaak deur 'n siekte wat direk verband hou met oorgewig en vetsug, volgens die kantoor van die chirurg -generaal. En die verbruik van soet drankies - wat verband hou met gewigstoename en diabetes - dra by tot hierdie statistiek.

Nancy Huehnergarth, medestigter en uitvoerende direkteur van die New York State Healthy Eating and Physical Activity Alliance, verduidelik waarom dit sinvol is om soet drankies in die Huffington Post te teiken: 'Hulle is nie-voedsaam, en skep nie 'n gevoel van volheid nie, en daarom kan hulle elke dag honderde ekstra kalorieë byvoeg. Amerikaners verbruik daagliks 200 tot 300 meer kalorieë as 30 jaar gelede, met die grootste enkele toename as gevolg van soet drankies, volgens 'n studie in 2005 in die jaarlikse oorsig van openbare gesondheid. "

Dit is geen verrassing dat ons te veel van die lekkergoed drink nie. Soos 'n onlangse infografika van die Centers for Disease Control and Prevention uitgebeeld het, was die grootte van die gemiddelde restaurantkoeldrank in die 1950's ongeveer 7 gram; vandag is dit 42 gram. Met die porsiegroottes van ons land, is dit moeilik om nee te sê.

Die reaksie van die publiek
Dit is nie verbasend dat die onlangse aankondiging van Bloomberg gelei het tot openbare woede oor die regering wat ons vryheid wegneem en 'n stap te ver in ons persoonlike lewens neem. Ander het hul steun uitgespreek oor die gewaagde stap van die burgemeester. Alec Baldwin het Vrydag in 'n artikel van Huffington Post die voorstel van Bloomberg geprys: "Ek dink burgemeester Michael Bloomberg het reg. Ten minste in gees. Die behoefte om die nuutste bevindings rakende suikerverbruik, diabetes, algemene voedingsriglyne en beleid daadwerklik te verstaan ​​en daadwerklik op te tree. , en die openbare gesondheidskrisis wat deur die Amerikaanse vetsugepidemie veroorsaak is, is dringend. "

Om die kwessie te ondersoek, laat ons die verskillende argumente ontleed, beide vir en teen die maatreël:

"As mense vet wil wees, moet hulle toegelaat word om vet te wees. Dit is Amurrica!"
'Ons is 'n land wat op vryheid gebaseer is', sê kritici van die voorgestelde koeldrankverbod. "Dit is 'n skending van ons regte." In die eerste plek was ons nog nooit 'vry' nie. As u hier wil woon, moet u sekere reëls volg. Ons mag nooit doen wat ons wil nie. U moet 'n veiligheidsgordel in die motor dra; anders kry u 'n kaartjie. U moet ook in baie lande 'n helm dra as u op 'n fiets ry - u kan nie net sê: "Dit is my kop nie. As ek dit wil oopbreek, moet ek toegelaat word om dit oop te maak." U mag nie te veel heroïne, kokaïen of crack kry nie. U mag dronk nie in die buurt ronddwaal met 'n oop Budweiser van 40 gram of in die moltreinstasie nie, hoewel nie een van hierdie dinge in New York as baie ongewoon beskou sou word nie.

Hierdie wette is ingestel om ander te bevoordeel, nie net die individue wat dit volg nie-en soms is die voordeel nie gesondheidsverwant nie, maar ekonomies verwant. Volgens die Washington Post is 36 persent van die Amerikaners buitensporig oorgewig, en behandeling vir toestande wat verband hou met oorgewig kos die Verenigde State $ 190 miljard per jaar. As u u versekering deur u werkgewer kry, verhoog vetsug u gesondheidsversekering met $ 150 per jaar in 1998 dollar, volgens 'n verslag van die Stan Dorn Urban Institute.

Terwyl sommige mense kan redeneer dat hul gesondheid hul eie besigheid is, dra diegene met 'n ongesonde leefstyl - nie net te veel eet nie - by tot die prys van gesondheidsorg wat uit ons beursies kom. Met ongeveer 36 persent van die Amerikaanse volwassenes en 17 persent van die Amerikaanse kinders wat vetsugtig is, is dit regverdig om te sê dat ons 'n duur krisis in die hande het.

As u nou argumenteer dat hierdie spesifieke strategie te opdringerig is, het u miskien 'n punt. As die regering die groottes van die koeldrank kan beperk, wie wil sê dat dit nie vir u sal begin vertel hoeveel alkohol u tydens aandete kan eet nie, of hoe groot u sny kaaskoek moet wees as u 'n nagereg in 'n restaurant geniet? Miskien wil ek daardie reuse sny kaaskoek vir my verjaardag hê, aangesien ek dit nie gewoonlik geniet nie. Ek gaan nie twee bestel nie; dis absurd. Maar moet ek nie toegelaat word om te veel te eet as ek wil vir hierdie spesiale geleentheid nie? Bloomberg se voorstel kan die grens tussen die beskerming van mense en die inmenging van hul vermoë om hul eie keuses te maak, oorskry.


Woensdag, 29 Junie 2016: Die staat moet vertroue in die stamme verdien, LePage se verbod op gemorskos, 'n oop wêreld skep

As 'n gemeenskap wat glo dat die lig wat in elke persoon is, verwelkom moet word, nie uitgedoof moet word nie, het Quakers of the Midcoast Friends Meeting 'n oproep tot aksie, wedersydse ondersteuning en opvoeding gerig om 'n meer regverdige en deernisvolle samelewing te skep.

Alle identiteite en persoonlike uitdrukkings kan ons leer oor vriendskap, hoe om warm te wees en met mekaar te aanvaar en hoe om naby aan God te wees en liefdevol aan mekaar te bewys. Ons maak ons ​​deure vir almal oop, ongeag identiteit, uitdrukking of etnisiteit. Tog is die hele wêreld nie oop nie - dit is nie genoeg dat ons 'n geliefde gemeenskap binne die veiligheid van ons mure soek nie.

As jarelange bondgenote of lede van die queer- en transgemeenskappe van Maine, moet ons ons verantwoordelik hou vir erkenning en aftakeling van onderdrukkingstelsels wat haat, geweld en onderdrukking van individuele ligte moontlik maak deur 'n kultuur van selfvoldaanheid, onkunde en vrees. As u vreemd, trans of latinx is, weet dat u 'n plek in ons gemeenskap het. As u 'n bondgenoot is vir 'n risiko-groep, moet u weet dat u 'n aktiewe, deurlopende verantwoordelikheid het om uself en ander op te voed in openheid en bevestiging van verskillende identiteite. As u werk en bid vir 'n wêreld vry van geweld en diskriminasie, moet u onthou dat u bevryding ingebind is in die bevryding van almal.

In die lig van geweld en skielike dood, roep tragedie ons op om oortuigings in werking te stel - buite gebed, die etenstafel en die leunstoel. Wees 'n bondgenoot. Maak seker dat daar 'n geliefde gemeenskap is in die lewe wat u lei.

James Matlack

Alianne Harper

LePage se verbod op gemorskos

Goewerneur Paul LePage het gesê dat ondanks die verbod deur die federale regering, hy van plan is om eensydig te voorkom dat SNAP -deelnemers hul voordele gebruik om gemorskos en koeldrank te koop. Op die oog af is dit 'n bewondering om besorg te wees oor die gesondheid van mense, maar dit is duidelik nie die rede nie.

Ongeag, het iemand die volgende oorweeg? Hoe sal EBT -kaarte geprogrammeer word om gemorskos en koeldrank te herken? Hoe sal die duisende handelaars in die staat bepaal wat gemorskos is? Hoe sal nakoming gemonitor word?

Maar miskien is die belangrikste saak dat die goewerneur, deur die Amerikaanse Departement van Landbou te trotseer, 'n onwettige daad pleeg en die verlies van miljoene federale dollars vir die SNAP in gevaar stel. Deur die Maine -departement van gesondheid en menslike dienste opdrag te gee om sy agenda uit te voer, beveel hy staatsamptenare om die wet te oortree. Deur opdrag te gee dat handelaars nie gemorskos en koeldrank aan SNAP -ontvangers verkoop nie, sê die goewerneur en DHHS private burgers om die wet te oortree.

Wat sê ouers dan vir hul kinders? Dit is goed om die wet te oortree as die goewerneur die wet oortree. Dink aan die boodskap, ongeag die twyfelagtige meriete van die saak. Is dit wat ons ons kinders wil leer?

Mark D. Roth

Stemondersteuning met 'n ranglys

Veertig jaar gelede, met niks meer as papier en potlood nie, was ek deel van 'n span wat studente verkiesings by my kollege gehou het. Met ten minste ses kandidate vir elke pos, het ons 'n vorm van stemgeregtigde stem gebruik, bekend as die 'enkele oordraagbare stem', om te verseker dat die gewildste kandidate in elke pos verkies word.

Sedertdien het ek bevraagteken hoekom ons kiesers hulle in 'n spanjas van 'n enkele keuse kan hou. As ek die kandidate van die Groen of Libertarian Party wil ondersteun, waarom sou dit my dan ook diskwalifiseer om 'n voorkeur tussen die Demokratiese en Republikeinse kandidate uit te spreek?

Die meeste kiesers hou nie daarvan om in 'n tweerigting-keuse gedwing te word nie. Hulle wil hul voorkeure volledig uitdruk en 'n gelyke speelveld hê sodat alle kandidate billik geëvalueer kan word. As ons 'n keuse-keuse gehad het, sou dit alles geïnstitusionaliseer word.

In wedrenne met meer as twee kandidate, is die grootste voordeel van stemgeregtigde stemme die verkiesing van die mees aanvaarbare kandidaat, in plaas van die een wat die minste verkies. Maar daar is ook bewys dat hierdie stelsel 'n revolusie in kiesersbetrokkenheid veroorsaak deur kandidate aan te moedig om buite hul kernondersteuners te reik om die voorkeure van 'n breër basis aan te trek om 'n meerderheidstem te behaal.

Deur stemreg te kies, sou Maine nog 'n gepaste stap neem om ons verkiesingstelsel te moderniseer. Ons samelewing is te uiteenlopend en ingewikkeld om elke verkiesingsiklus tot twee realistiese keuses te beperk. Sluit by my aan vir die stemming in die 21ste eeu.

Brian Meadows

Die staat moet stamme se vertroue verdien

Ek lees die BDN -hoofartikel van 22 Junie met belangstelling oor die heronderhandeling van stamsoewereiniteit en stam- en staatsverhoudinge. Hierdie kwessie is gebaseer op 'vertroue'. In 1794 sluit die Gemenebest van Massachusetts 'n verdrag met die Passamaquoddy -stam, wat ongeveer 30 000 hektaar grond in Washington County opsy sit met die term "vir ewig". Wel, 'vir ewig' het ongeveer 26 jaar geduur toe Maine van Massachusetts geskei het. Dit het uiteindelik daartoe gelei dat die Maine Indian Lands Claim -saak in die 1980 -skikkingswet geëindig het.

Sedert die skikkingswet het die staat die beperkte soewereiniteit wat in die skikking aangebied word, aktief afgesny.

Meer onlangs, toe die stamme voorgestel het om speletjies in Maine te vestig om inkomste vir hul gemeenskappe te genereer, het die kandidaat vir Gov. By die verkiesing gebruik Baldacci egter belastingbetalers om die spelinisiatief van die stamme deur middel van televisie -advertensies teen te werk. Hy het gesê dobbel is nie vir Maine nie en dat dobbel nie ekonomiese ontwikkeling vir die stamme sal oplewer nie. Hy het gesê dat dit die kriminele element na die staat Maine sal bring.

Terselfdertyd het die stad Bangor beplan vir 'n 'racino'. Daar is nou twee casino's in die staat. En met al die stamme se daaropvolgende wetgewende inisiatiewe en pogings, het hulle nog nie daarin geslaag om 'n casino-onderneming te vestig nie.

Ek glo dat die kwessie van vertroue aangespreek moet word as daar 'n geleentheid is om stam- en staatsverhoudinge te verbeter.


Woensdag, 29 Junie 2016: Die staat moet vertroue in die stamme verdien, LePage se verbod op gemorskos, 'n oop wêreld skep

As 'n gemeenskap wat glo dat die lig wat in elke persoon is, verwelkom moet word, nie uitgedoof word nie, het Quakers of the Midcoast Friends Meeting 'n beroep op aksie, wedersydse ondersteuning en opvoeding gedoen om 'n meer regverdige en deernisvolle samelewing te skep.

Alle identiteite en persoonlike uitdrukkings kan ons leer oor vriendskap, hoe om warm te wees en met mekaar te aanvaar en hoe om naby aan God te wees en liefdevol aan mekaar te bewys. Ons maak ons ​​deure vir almal oop, ongeag identiteit, uitdrukking of etnisiteit. Tog is die hele wêreld nie oop nie - dit is nie genoeg dat ons 'n geliefde gemeenskap binne die veiligheid van ons mure soek nie.

As jarelange bondgenote of lede van die queer- en transgemeenskappe van Maine, moet ons ons verantwoordelik hou vir erkenning en aftakeling van onderdrukkingstelsels wat haat, geweld en onderdrukking van individuele ligte moontlik maak deur 'n kultuur van selfvoldaanheid, onkunde en vrees. As u vreemd, trans of latinx is, weet dat u 'n plek in ons gemeenskap het. As u 'n bondgenoot is vir 'n risiko-groep, moet u weet dat u 'n aktiewe, deurlopende verantwoordelikheid het om uself en ander op te voed in openheid en bevestiging van verskillende identiteite. As u werk en bid vir 'n wêreld vry van geweld en diskriminasie, moet u onthou dat u bevryding ingebind is in die bevryding van almal.

In die lig van geweld en skielike dood, roep tragedie ons op om oortuigings in werking te stel - buite gebed, die etenstafel en die leunstoel. Wees 'n bondgenoot. Maak seker dat daar 'n geliefde gemeenskap is in die lewe wat u lei.

James Matlack

Alianne Harper

LePage se gemorskosverbod

Gouvernement Paul LePage het gesê dat ondanks die verbod deur die federale regering, hy van plan is om eensydig te voorkom dat SNAP -deelnemers hul voordele gebruik om gemorskos en koeldrank te koop. Op die oog af is dit bewonderenswaardig om bekommerd te wees oor die gesondheid van mense, maar dit is duidelik nie die rede nie.

Ongeag, het iemand die volgende oorweeg? Hoe word EBT -kaarte geprogrammeer om gemorskos en koeldrank te herken? Hoe sal die duisende handelaars in die staat bepaal wat gemorskos is? Hoe sal nakoming gemonitor word?

Maar miskien is die belangrikste saak dat die goewerneur, deur die Amerikaanse Departement van Landbou te trotseer, 'n onwettige daad pleeg en die verlies van miljoene federale dollars vir die SNAP in gevaar stel. Deur die Maine -departement van gesondheid en menslike dienste opdrag te gee om sy agenda uit te voer, beveel hy staatsamptenare om die wet te oortree. Deur opdrag te gee dat handelaars nie gemorskos en koeldrank aan SNAP -ontvangers verkoop nie, sê die goewerneur en DHHS private burgers om die wet te oortree.

Wat sê ouers dan vir hul kinders? Dit is reg om die wet te oortree as die goewerneur die wet oortree. Dink aan die boodskap, ongeag die twyfelagtige meriete van die saak. Is dit wat ons ons kinders wil leer?

Mark D. Roth

Stemondersteuning met 'n ranglys

Veertig jaar gelede, met niks meer as papier en potlood nie, was ek deel van 'n span wat studente verkiesings by my kollege gehou het. Met ten minste ses kandidate vir elke pos, het ons 'n vorm van stemgeregtigde stem gebruik, bekend as die 'enkele oordraagbare stem', om te verseker dat die gewildste kandidate in elke pos verkies word.

Sedertdien het ek bevraagteken hoekom ons kiesers in 'n spanjas van 'n enkele keuse kan bly. As ek die kandidate van die Groen of Libertarian Party wil ondersteun, waarom sou dit my dan ook diskwalifiseer om 'n voorkeur tussen die Demokratiese en Republikeinse kandidate uit te spreek?

Die meeste kiesers hou nie daarvan om in 'n tweerigting-keuse gedwing te word nie. Hulle wil hul voorkeure volledig uitdruk en 'n gelyke speelveld hê sodat alle kandidate billik geëvalueer kan word. As ons 'n keuse-keuse gehad het, sou dit alles geïnstitusionaliseer word.

In wedrenne met meer as twee kandidate, is die grootste voordeel van stemgeregtigde stemme die verkiesing van die mees aanvaarbare kandidaat, in plaas van die een wat die minste verkies. Maar daar is ook bewys dat hierdie stelsel 'n omwenteling in kiesersbetrokkenheid veroorsaak deur kandidate aan te moedig om buite hul kernondersteuners te reik om die voorkeure van 'n breër basis aan te trek om 'n meerderheidstem te behaal.

Deur stemreg te kies, sou Maine nog 'n gepaste stap neem om ons verkiesingstelsel te moderniseer. Ons samelewing is te uiteenlopend en ingewikkeld om elke verkiesingsiklus tot twee realistiese keuses te beperk. Sluit by my aan vir die stemming in die 21ste eeu.

Brian Meadows

Die staat moet stamme se vertroue verdien

Ek lees die BDN -hoofartikel van 22 Junie met belangstelling oor die heronderhandeling van stamsoewereiniteit en stam- en staatsverhoudinge. Hierdie kwessie is gewortel in 'n kwessie van 'vertroue'. In 1794 sluit die Gemenebest van Massachusetts 'n verdrag met die Passamaquoddy -stam, wat ongeveer 30 000 hektaar grond in Washington County opsy sit met die term "vir ewig". Wel, 'vir ewig' het ongeveer 26 jaar geduur toe Maine van Massachusetts geskei het. Dit het uiteindelik daartoe gelei dat die Maine Indian Lands Claim -saak in die 1980 -skikkingswet geëindig het.

Sedert die skikkingswet het die staat die beperkte soewereiniteit wat in die skikking aangebied word, aktief afgesny.

Meer onlangs, toe die stamme voorgestel het om dobbel in Maine te vestig om inkomste vir hul gemeenskappe te genereer, het die kandidaat vir Gov. By die verkiesing gebruik Baldacci egter belastingbetalers om die spelinisiatief van die stamme deur middel van televisie -advertensies teen te werk. Hy het gesê dobbel is nie vir Maine nie en dat dobbel nie ekonomiese ontwikkeling vir die stamme sal oplewer nie. Hy het gesê dat dit die kriminele element na die staat Maine sal bring.

Terselfdertyd het die stad Bangor beplan vir 'n 'racino'. Daar is nou twee casino's in die staat. En met al die stamme se daaropvolgende wetgewende inisiatiewe en pogings, het hulle nog nie daarin geslaag om 'n casino-onderneming te vestig nie.

Ek glo dat die kwessie van vertroue aangespreek moet word as daar 'n geleentheid is om stam- en staatsverhoudinge te verbeter.


Woensdag, 29 Junie 2016: Die staat moet vertroue in die stamme verdien, LePage se verbod op gemorskos, 'n oop wêreld skep

As 'n gemeenskap wat glo dat die lig wat in elke persoon is, verwelkom moet word, nie uitgedoof moet word nie, het Quakers of the Midcoast Friends Meeting 'n oproep tot aksie, wedersydse ondersteuning en opvoeding gerig om 'n meer regverdige en deernisvolle samelewing te skep.

Alle identiteite en persoonlike uitdrukkings kan ons leer oor vriendskap, hoe om warm te wees en met mekaar te aanvaar en hoe om naby aan God te wees en liefdevol aan mekaar te bewys. Ons maak ons ​​deure vir almal oop, ongeag identiteit, uitdrukking of etnisiteit. Tog is die hele wêreld nie oop nie - dit is nie genoeg dat ons 'n geliefde gemeenskap binne die veiligheid van ons mure soek nie.

As jarelange bondgenote of lede van die queer- en transgemeenskappe van Maine, moet ons ons verantwoordelik hou vir erkenning en aftakeling van onderdrukkingstelsels wat haat, geweld en onderdrukking van individuele ligte moontlik maak deur 'n kultuur van selfvoldaanheid, onkunde en vrees. As u vreemd, trans of latinx is, weet dat u 'n plek in ons gemeenskap het. As u 'n bondgenoot is vir 'n risiko-groep, weet dat u 'n aktiewe, deurlopende verantwoordelikheid het om uself en ander op te voed in openheid en bevestiging van verskillende identiteite. As u werk en bid vir 'n wêreld vry van geweld en diskriminasie, moet u onthou dat u bevryding ingebind is in die bevryding van almal.

In die lig van geweld en skielike dood, roep tragedie ons op om oortuigings in werking te stel - buite gebed, die etenstafel en die leunstoel. Wees 'n bondgenoot. Maak seker dat daar 'n geliefde gemeenskap is in die lewe wat u lei.

James Matlack

Alianne Harper

LePage se gemorskosverbod

Gouvernement Paul LePage het gesê dat ondanks die verbod deur die federale regering, hy van plan is om eensydig te voorkom dat SNAP -deelnemers hul voordele gebruik om gemorskos en koeldrank te koop. Op die oog af is dit bewonderenswaardig om bekommerd te wees oor die gesondheid van mense, maar dit is duidelik nie die rede nie.

Ongeag, het iemand die volgende oorweeg? Hoe word EBT -kaarte geprogrammeer om gemorskos en koeldrank te herken? Hoe sal die duisende handelaars in die staat bepaal wat gemorskos is? Hoe sal nakoming gemonitor word?

Maar miskien is die belangrikste saak dat die goewerneur, deur die Amerikaanse departement van landbou te trotseer, 'n onwettige daad pleeg en die verlies van miljoene federale dollars vir die SNAP in gevaar stel. Deur die Maine -departement van gesondheid en menslike dienste opdrag te gee om sy agenda uit te voer, beveel hy staatsamptenare om die wet te oortree. Deur opdrag te gee dat handelaars nie gemorskos en koeldrank aan SNAP -ontvangers verkoop nie, sê die goewerneur en DHHS private burgers om die wet te oortree.

Wat sê ouers dan vir hul kinders? Dit is goed om die wet te oortree as die goewerneur die wet oortree. Dink aan die boodskap, ongeag die twyfelagtige meriete van die saak. Is dit wat ons ons kinders wil leer?

Mark D. Roth

Stemondersteuning met 'n ranglys

Veertig jaar gelede, met niks meer as papier en potlood nie, was ek deel van 'n span wat studente verkiesings by my kollege gehou het. Met ten minste ses kandidate vir elke pos, het ons 'n vorm van stemgeregtigde stem gebruik, bekend as die 'enkele oordraagbare stem', om te verseker dat die gewildste kandidate in elke pos verkies word.

Sedertdien het ek bevraagteken hoekom ons kiesers hulle in 'n spanjas van 'n enkele keuse kan hou. As ek die kandidate van die Groen of Libertarian Party wil ondersteun, waarom sou dit my dan ook diskwalifiseer om 'n voorkeur tussen die Demokratiese en Republikeinse kandidate uit te spreek?

Die meeste kiesers hou nie daarvan om in 'n tweerigting-keuse gedwing te word nie. Hulle wil hul voorkeure volledig uitdruk en 'n gelyke speelveld hê sodat alle kandidate billik geëvalueer kan word. As ons 'n keuse-keuse gehad het, sou dit alles geïnstitusionaliseer word.

In wedrenne met meer as twee kandidate, is die grootste voordeel van stemgeregtigde stemme die verkiesing van die mees aanvaarbare kandidaat, in plaas van die kandidaat wat die minste verkies word. Maar daar is ook bewys dat hierdie stelsel 'n revolusie in kiesersbetrokkenheid veroorsaak deur kandidate aan te moedig om buite hul kernondersteuners te reik om die voorkeure van 'n breër basis aan te trek om 'n meerderheidstem te behaal.

Deur stemreg te kies, sou Maine nog 'n gepaste stap neem om ons verkiesingstelsel te moderniseer. Ons samelewing is te uiteenlopend en ingewikkeld om elke verkiesingsiklus tot twee realistiese keuses te beperk. Sluit by my aan vir die stemming in die 21ste eeu.

Brian Meadows

Die staat moet stamme se vertroue verdien

Ek lees die BDN -hoofartikel van 22 Junie met belangstelling oor die heronderhandeling van stamsoewereiniteit en stam- en staatsverhoudinge. Hierdie kwessie is gebaseer op 'vertroue'. In 1794 sluit die Gemenebest van Massachusetts 'n verdrag met die Passamaquoddy -stam, wat ongeveer 30 000 hektaar grond in Washington County opsy sit met die term "vir ewig". Wel, 'vir ewig' het ongeveer 26 jaar geduur toe Maine van Massachusetts geskei het. Dit het uiteindelik daartoe gelei dat die Maine Indian Lands Claim -saak in die 1980 -skikkingswet geëindig het.

Sedert die skikkingswet het die staat die beperkte soewereiniteit wat in die skikking aangebied word, aktief afgesny.

Meer onlangs, toe die stamme voorgestel het om speletjies in Maine te vestig om inkomste vir hul gemeenskappe te genereer, het die kandidaat vir Gov. By die verkiesing gebruik Baldacci egter belastingbetalers om die spelinisiatief van die stamme deur middel van televisie -advertensies teen te werk. Hy het gesê dobbel is nie vir Maine nie en dat dobbel nie ekonomiese ontwikkeling vir die stamme sal oplewer nie. Hy het gesê dat dit die kriminele element na die staat Maine sal bring.

Terselfdertyd het die stad Bangor beplan vir 'n 'racino'. Daar is nou twee casino's in die staat. En met al die stamme se daaropvolgende wetgewende inisiatiewe en pogings, het hulle nog nie daarin geslaag om 'n casino-onderneming te vestig nie.

Ek glo dat die vertrouenskwessie aangespreek moet word as daar 'n geleentheid is om die stam- en staatsverhoudinge te verbeter.


Woensdag, 29 Junie 2016: Die staat moet vertroue in die stamme verdien, LePage se verbod op gemorskos, 'n oop wêreld skep

As 'n gemeenskap wat glo dat die lig wat in elke persoon is, verwelkom moet word, nie uitgedoof moet word nie, het Quakers of the Midcoast Friends Meeting 'n oproep tot aksie, wedersydse ondersteuning en opvoeding gerig om 'n meer regverdige en deernisvolle samelewing te skep.

Alle identiteite en persoonlike uitdrukkings kan ons leer oor vriendskap, hoe om warm te wees en met mekaar te aanvaar en hoe om naby aan God te wees en liefdevol aan mekaar te bewys. Ons maak ons ​​deure vir almal oop, ongeag identiteit, uitdrukking of etnisiteit. Tog is die hele wêreld nie oop nie - dit is nie genoeg dat ons 'n geliefde gemeenskap binne die veiligheid van ons mure soek nie.

As jarelange bondgenote of lede van die queer- en transgemeenskappe van Maine, moet ons ons verantwoordelik hou vir erkenning en aftakeling van onderdrukkingstelsels wat haat, geweld en onderdrukking van individuele ligte moontlik maak deur 'n kultuur van selfvoldaanheid, onkunde en vrees. As u vreemd, trans of latinx is, weet dat u 'n plek in ons gemeenskap het. As u 'n bondgenoot is vir enige risiko-groep, moet u weet dat u 'n aktiewe, deurlopende verantwoordelikheid het om uself en ander op te voed in openheid en bevestiging van verskillende identiteite. As u werk en bid vir 'n wêreld vry van geweld en diskriminasie, moet u onthou dat u bevryding ingebind is in die bevryding van almal.

In die lig van geweld en skielike dood, roep tragedie ons op om oortuigings in werking te stel - buite gebed, die etenstafel en die leunstoel. Wees 'n bondgenoot. Maak seker dat daar 'n geliefde gemeenskap is in die lewe wat u lei.

James Matlack

Alianne Harper

LePage se verbod op gemorskos

Goewerneur Paul LePage het gesê dat hy, ondanks die verbod deur die federale regering, van plan is om eensydig te keer dat SNAP -deelnemers hul voordele gebruik om gemorskos en koeldrank te koop. Op die oog af is dit bewonderenswaardig om bekommerd te wees oor die gesondheid van mense, maar dit is duidelik nie die rede nie.

Ongeag, het iemand die volgende oorweeg? Hoe sal EBT -kaarte geprogrammeer word om gemorskos en koeldrank te herken? Hoe sal die duisende handelaars in die staat bepaal wat gemorskos is? Hoe sal nakoming gemonitor word?

Maar miskien is die belangrikste kwessie dat die goewerneur, deur die Amerikaanse departement van landbou te trotseer, 'n onwettige daad pleeg en die verlies van miljoene federale dollars vir die SNAP in gevaar stel. Deur die Maine -departement van gesondheid en menslike dienste opdrag te gee om sy agenda uit te voer, beveel hy staatsamptenare om die wet te oortree. Deur opdrag te gee dat handelaars nie gemorskos en koeldrank aan SNAP -ontvangers verkoop nie, sê die goewerneur en DHHS private burgers om die wet te oortree.

Wat sê ouers dan vir hul kinders? Dit is goed om die wet te oortree as die goewerneur die wet oortree. Dink aan die boodskap, ongeag die twyfelagtige meriete van die saak. Is dit wat ons ons kinders wil leer?

Mark D. Roth

Stemondersteuning met 'n ranglys

Veertig jaar gelede, met niks meer as papier en potlood nie, was ek deel van 'n span wat studente verkiesings by my kollege gehou het. Met ten minste ses kandidate vir elke pos, het ons 'n vorm van stemgeregtigde stem gebruik, bekend as die 'enkele oordraagbare stem', om te verseker dat die gewildste kandidate in elke pos verkies word.

Sedertdien het ek bevraagteken hoekom ons kiesers hulle in 'n spanjas van 'n enkele keuse kan hou. As ek die kandidate van die Groen of Libertarian Party wil ondersteun, waarom sou dit my dan ook diskwalifiseer om 'n voorkeur tussen die Demokratiese en Republikeinse kandidate uit te spreek?

Die meeste kiesers hou nie daarvan om in 'n tweerigting-keuse gedwing te word nie. Hulle wil hul voorkeure volledig uitdruk en 'n gelyke speelveld hê sodat alle kandidate billik geëvalueer kan word. As ons 'n keuse-keuse gehad het, sou dit alles geïnstitusionaliseer word.

In wedrenne met meer as twee kandidate, is die grootste voordeel van stemgeregtigde stemme die verkiesing van die mees aanvaarbare kandidaat, in plaas van die een wat die minste verkies. Maar daar is ook bewys dat hierdie stelsel 'n omwenteling in kiesersbetrokkenheid veroorsaak deur kandidate aan te moedig om buite hul kernondersteuners te reik om die voorkeure van 'n breër basis aan te trek om 'n meerderheidstem te behaal.

Deur stemreg te kies, sou Maine nog 'n gepaste stap neem om ons verkiesingstelsel te moderniseer. Ons samelewing is te uiteenlopend en ingewikkeld om elke verkiesingsiklus tot twee realistiese keuses te beperk. Sluit by my aan vir die stemming in die 21ste eeu.

Brian Meadows

Die staat moet stamme se vertroue verdien

Ek lees die BDN -hoofartikel van 22 Junie met belangstelling oor die heronderhandeling van stamsoewereiniteit en stam- en staatsverhoudinge. Hierdie kwessie is gebaseer op 'vertroue'. In 1794 sluit die Gemenebest van Massachusetts 'n verdrag met die Passamaquoddy -stam, wat ongeveer 30 000 hektaar grond in Washington County opsy sit met die term "vir ewig". Wel, 'vir ewig' het ongeveer 26 jaar geduur toe Maine van Massachusetts geskei het. Dit het uiteindelik daartoe gelei dat die Maine Indian Lands Claim -saak in die 1980 -skikkingswet geëindig het.

Sedert die skikkingswet het die staat die beperkte soewereiniteit wat in die skikking aangebied word, aktief afgesny.

Meer onlangs, toe die stamme voorgestel het om dobbel in Maine te vestig om inkomste vir hul gemeenskappe te genereer, het die kandidaat vir Gov. By die verkiesing het Baldacci egter belastingbetalersgeld gebruik om die spelinisiatief van die stamme deur middel van televisie -advertensies teen te werk. Hy het gesê dobbel is nie vir Maine nie en dat dobbel nie ekonomiese ontwikkeling vir die stamme sal oplewer nie. He said it would bring the criminal element to the state of Maine.

At the same time, the city of Bangor was planning for a “racino.” There are now two casinos in the state. And, with all the tribes’ subsequent legislative initiatives and efforts, they have yet to succeed in establishing a casino-style gaming enterprise.

It is my belief that if there is to be an opportunity to improve tribal and state relations, the issue of trust has to be addressed.


Wednesday, June 29, 2016: State must earn tribes’ trust, LePage’s junk food ban, create an open world

As a community that believes the light that lies within every person should be welcomed, not snuffed out, Quakers of the Midcoast Friends Meeting have issued a call to action, mutual support and education to create a more just and compassionate society.

All identities and personal expressions can teach us about friendship, how to be warm and accepting with each other and how to share closeness with God and give loving-kindness to each other. We open our meeting house doors to all regardless of identity, expression or ethnicity. Yet, the world at large is not open — it is not enough for us to seek beloved community inside the safety of our walls.

As longstanding allies or members of Maine’s queer and trans communities, we must hold ourselves accountable to acknowledging and dismantling systems of oppression that enable hate, violence and suppression of individual lights through a culture of complacency, ignorance and fear. If you are queer, trans or latinx, know that you have a place in our community. If you are an ally to any at-risk group, know that you have an active, ongoing responsibility to educate yourself and others in openness and affirmation of diverse identities. If you work and pray for a world free from violence and discrimination, remember that your liberation is bound up in the liberation of all.

In the face of violence and sudden death, tragedy calls us to put beliefs into action — beyond prayer, the dinner table and the armchair. Be an ally. Make sure there is a beloved community in the life you lead.

James Matlack

Alianne Harper

LePage’s junk food ban

Gov. Paul LePage has said that in spite of the prohibition by the federal government, he intends to unilaterally prevent SNAP participants from using their benefits to purchase junk food and soda. On the face of it, it is an admirable to be concerned about people’s health, but clearly that is not the reason.

Regardless, has anyone considered the following? How will EBT cards be programmed to recognize junk food and soda? How will the thousands of merchants in the state determine what is junk food? How will compliance be monitored?

But perhaps the most important issue is that the governor, by defying the U.S. Department of Agriculture, is committing an illegal act and risking the loss of millions of federal dollars for the SNAP. By directing the Maine Department of Health and Human Services to carry out his agenda, he is telling state employees to break the law. Then, by mandating that merchants not sell junk food and soda to SNAP recipients, the governor and DHHS are telling private citizens to break the law.

So, what do parents tell their children? It’s OK to break the law if the governor breaks the law. Think about that message, regardless of the questionable merits of the case. Is that what we want to teach our children?

Mark D. Roth

Ranked-choice voting support

Forty years ago, with nothing more than paper and pencil, I was part of a team running student elections at my college. With at least six candidates for each post, we used a form of ranked-choice voting, known as the “single transferable vote,” to ensure the most popular candidates were elected to each position.

Since then, I have questioned why our electorate allows itself to be kept in the straitjacket of a single choice. If I wish to support the Green or Libertarian Party candidates, why should that also disqualify me from expressing a preference between the Democratic and Republican candidates?

Most voters don’t like being forced into a two-way choice. They want to fully express their preferences and have a level playing field that allows all candidates to be fairly evaluated. If we had ranked-choice voting, this would all be institutionalized.

In races with more than two candidates, the major benefit of ranked-choice voting is the election of the most acceptable candidate, instead of the least preferable one. But this system has also been shown to revolutionize voter engagement by encouraging candidates to reach beyond their core supporters to attract the preferences of a broader base in order to earn a majority vote.

By adopting ranked-choice voting, Maine would be taking another appropriate step towards modernizing our election system. Our society is too diverse and complex to be confined to two realistic choices each election cycle. Join me in the movement for 21st-century voting.

Brian Meadows

State must earn tribes’ trust

I read with interest the June 22 BDN editorial about renegotiating tribal sovereignty and tribal and state relations. This issue is rooted in a matter of “trust.” In 1794, the Commonwealth of Massachusetts made a treaty with the Passamaquoddy Tribe, setting aside some 30,000 acres of land in Washington County using the term “forever.” Well, “forever” lasted about 26 years for when Maine separated from Massachusetts. It is this that eventually resulted in the Maine Indian Lands Claim case ending in the 1980 Settlement Act.

Since the Settlement Act, the state has been actively chipping away at the limited sovereignty offered in the settlement.

More recently, when the tribes proposed establishing gaming in Maine to generate revenue for their communities, candidate for Maine Gov. John Baldacci met with an inter-tribal group and pledged to support their effort if elected. When elected, however, Baldacci used taxpayer dollars to counter the tribes’ gaming initiative through televised ads. He said gambling was not for Maine and that gaming would not produce economic development for the tribes. He said it would bring the criminal element to the state of Maine.

At the same time, the city of Bangor was planning for a “racino.” There are now two casinos in the state. And, with all the tribes’ subsequent legislative initiatives and efforts, they have yet to succeed in establishing a casino-style gaming enterprise.

It is my belief that if there is to be an opportunity to improve tribal and state relations, the issue of trust has to be addressed.


Wednesday, June 29, 2016: State must earn tribes’ trust, LePage’s junk food ban, create an open world

As a community that believes the light that lies within every person should be welcomed, not snuffed out, Quakers of the Midcoast Friends Meeting have issued a call to action, mutual support and education to create a more just and compassionate society.

All identities and personal expressions can teach us about friendship, how to be warm and accepting with each other and how to share closeness with God and give loving-kindness to each other. We open our meeting house doors to all regardless of identity, expression or ethnicity. Yet, the world at large is not open — it is not enough for us to seek beloved community inside the safety of our walls.

As longstanding allies or members of Maine’s queer and trans communities, we must hold ourselves accountable to acknowledging and dismantling systems of oppression that enable hate, violence and suppression of individual lights through a culture of complacency, ignorance and fear. If you are queer, trans or latinx, know that you have a place in our community. If you are an ally to any at-risk group, know that you have an active, ongoing responsibility to educate yourself and others in openness and affirmation of diverse identities. If you work and pray for a world free from violence and discrimination, remember that your liberation is bound up in the liberation of all.

In the face of violence and sudden death, tragedy calls us to put beliefs into action — beyond prayer, the dinner table and the armchair. Be an ally. Make sure there is a beloved community in the life you lead.

James Matlack

Alianne Harper

LePage’s junk food ban

Gov. Paul LePage has said that in spite of the prohibition by the federal government, he intends to unilaterally prevent SNAP participants from using their benefits to purchase junk food and soda. On the face of it, it is an admirable to be concerned about people’s health, but clearly that is not the reason.

Regardless, has anyone considered the following? How will EBT cards be programmed to recognize junk food and soda? How will the thousands of merchants in the state determine what is junk food? How will compliance be monitored?

But perhaps the most important issue is that the governor, by defying the U.S. Department of Agriculture, is committing an illegal act and risking the loss of millions of federal dollars for the SNAP. By directing the Maine Department of Health and Human Services to carry out his agenda, he is telling state employees to break the law. Then, by mandating that merchants not sell junk food and soda to SNAP recipients, the governor and DHHS are telling private citizens to break the law.

So, what do parents tell their children? It’s OK to break the law if the governor breaks the law. Think about that message, regardless of the questionable merits of the case. Is that what we want to teach our children?

Mark D. Roth

Ranked-choice voting support

Forty years ago, with nothing more than paper and pencil, I was part of a team running student elections at my college. With at least six candidates for each post, we used a form of ranked-choice voting, known as the “single transferable vote,” to ensure the most popular candidates were elected to each position.

Since then, I have questioned why our electorate allows itself to be kept in the straitjacket of a single choice. If I wish to support the Green or Libertarian Party candidates, why should that also disqualify me from expressing a preference between the Democratic and Republican candidates?

Most voters don’t like being forced into a two-way choice. They want to fully express their preferences and have a level playing field that allows all candidates to be fairly evaluated. If we had ranked-choice voting, this would all be institutionalized.

In races with more than two candidates, the major benefit of ranked-choice voting is the election of the most acceptable candidate, instead of the least preferable one. But this system has also been shown to revolutionize voter engagement by encouraging candidates to reach beyond their core supporters to attract the preferences of a broader base in order to earn a majority vote.

By adopting ranked-choice voting, Maine would be taking another appropriate step towards modernizing our election system. Our society is too diverse and complex to be confined to two realistic choices each election cycle. Join me in the movement for 21st-century voting.

Brian Meadows

State must earn tribes’ trust

I read with interest the June 22 BDN editorial about renegotiating tribal sovereignty and tribal and state relations. This issue is rooted in a matter of “trust.” In 1794, the Commonwealth of Massachusetts made a treaty with the Passamaquoddy Tribe, setting aside some 30,000 acres of land in Washington County using the term “forever.” Well, “forever” lasted about 26 years for when Maine separated from Massachusetts. It is this that eventually resulted in the Maine Indian Lands Claim case ending in the 1980 Settlement Act.

Since the Settlement Act, the state has been actively chipping away at the limited sovereignty offered in the settlement.

More recently, when the tribes proposed establishing gaming in Maine to generate revenue for their communities, candidate for Maine Gov. John Baldacci met with an inter-tribal group and pledged to support their effort if elected. When elected, however, Baldacci used taxpayer dollars to counter the tribes’ gaming initiative through televised ads. He said gambling was not for Maine and that gaming would not produce economic development for the tribes. He said it would bring the criminal element to the state of Maine.

At the same time, the city of Bangor was planning for a “racino.” There are now two casinos in the state. And, with all the tribes’ subsequent legislative initiatives and efforts, they have yet to succeed in establishing a casino-style gaming enterprise.

It is my belief that if there is to be an opportunity to improve tribal and state relations, the issue of trust has to be addressed.


Wednesday, June 29, 2016: State must earn tribes’ trust, LePage’s junk food ban, create an open world

As a community that believes the light that lies within every person should be welcomed, not snuffed out, Quakers of the Midcoast Friends Meeting have issued a call to action, mutual support and education to create a more just and compassionate society.

All identities and personal expressions can teach us about friendship, how to be warm and accepting with each other and how to share closeness with God and give loving-kindness to each other. We open our meeting house doors to all regardless of identity, expression or ethnicity. Yet, the world at large is not open — it is not enough for us to seek beloved community inside the safety of our walls.

As longstanding allies or members of Maine’s queer and trans communities, we must hold ourselves accountable to acknowledging and dismantling systems of oppression that enable hate, violence and suppression of individual lights through a culture of complacency, ignorance and fear. If you are queer, trans or latinx, know that you have a place in our community. If you are an ally to any at-risk group, know that you have an active, ongoing responsibility to educate yourself and others in openness and affirmation of diverse identities. If you work and pray for a world free from violence and discrimination, remember that your liberation is bound up in the liberation of all.

In the face of violence and sudden death, tragedy calls us to put beliefs into action — beyond prayer, the dinner table and the armchair. Be an ally. Make sure there is a beloved community in the life you lead.

James Matlack

Alianne Harper

LePage’s junk food ban

Gov. Paul LePage has said that in spite of the prohibition by the federal government, he intends to unilaterally prevent SNAP participants from using their benefits to purchase junk food and soda. On the face of it, it is an admirable to be concerned about people’s health, but clearly that is not the reason.

Regardless, has anyone considered the following? How will EBT cards be programmed to recognize junk food and soda? How will the thousands of merchants in the state determine what is junk food? How will compliance be monitored?

But perhaps the most important issue is that the governor, by defying the U.S. Department of Agriculture, is committing an illegal act and risking the loss of millions of federal dollars for the SNAP. By directing the Maine Department of Health and Human Services to carry out his agenda, he is telling state employees to break the law. Then, by mandating that merchants not sell junk food and soda to SNAP recipients, the governor and DHHS are telling private citizens to break the law.

So, what do parents tell their children? It’s OK to break the law if the governor breaks the law. Think about that message, regardless of the questionable merits of the case. Is that what we want to teach our children?

Mark D. Roth

Ranked-choice voting support

Forty years ago, with nothing more than paper and pencil, I was part of a team running student elections at my college. With at least six candidates for each post, we used a form of ranked-choice voting, known as the “single transferable vote,” to ensure the most popular candidates were elected to each position.

Since then, I have questioned why our electorate allows itself to be kept in the straitjacket of a single choice. If I wish to support the Green or Libertarian Party candidates, why should that also disqualify me from expressing a preference between the Democratic and Republican candidates?

Most voters don’t like being forced into a two-way choice. They want to fully express their preferences and have a level playing field that allows all candidates to be fairly evaluated. If we had ranked-choice voting, this would all be institutionalized.

In races with more than two candidates, the major benefit of ranked-choice voting is the election of the most acceptable candidate, instead of the least preferable one. But this system has also been shown to revolutionize voter engagement by encouraging candidates to reach beyond their core supporters to attract the preferences of a broader base in order to earn a majority vote.

By adopting ranked-choice voting, Maine would be taking another appropriate step towards modernizing our election system. Our society is too diverse and complex to be confined to two realistic choices each election cycle. Join me in the movement for 21st-century voting.

Brian Meadows

State must earn tribes’ trust

I read with interest the June 22 BDN editorial about renegotiating tribal sovereignty and tribal and state relations. This issue is rooted in a matter of “trust.” In 1794, the Commonwealth of Massachusetts made a treaty with the Passamaquoddy Tribe, setting aside some 30,000 acres of land in Washington County using the term “forever.” Well, “forever” lasted about 26 years for when Maine separated from Massachusetts. It is this that eventually resulted in the Maine Indian Lands Claim case ending in the 1980 Settlement Act.

Since the Settlement Act, the state has been actively chipping away at the limited sovereignty offered in the settlement.

More recently, when the tribes proposed establishing gaming in Maine to generate revenue for their communities, candidate for Maine Gov. John Baldacci met with an inter-tribal group and pledged to support their effort if elected. When elected, however, Baldacci used taxpayer dollars to counter the tribes’ gaming initiative through televised ads. He said gambling was not for Maine and that gaming would not produce economic development for the tribes. He said it would bring the criminal element to the state of Maine.

At the same time, the city of Bangor was planning for a “racino.” There are now two casinos in the state. And, with all the tribes’ subsequent legislative initiatives and efforts, they have yet to succeed in establishing a casino-style gaming enterprise.

It is my belief that if there is to be an opportunity to improve tribal and state relations, the issue of trust has to be addressed.


Wednesday, June 29, 2016: State must earn tribes’ trust, LePage’s junk food ban, create an open world

As a community that believes the light that lies within every person should be welcomed, not snuffed out, Quakers of the Midcoast Friends Meeting have issued a call to action, mutual support and education to create a more just and compassionate society.

All identities and personal expressions can teach us about friendship, how to be warm and accepting with each other and how to share closeness with God and give loving-kindness to each other. We open our meeting house doors to all regardless of identity, expression or ethnicity. Yet, the world at large is not open — it is not enough for us to seek beloved community inside the safety of our walls.

As longstanding allies or members of Maine’s queer and trans communities, we must hold ourselves accountable to acknowledging and dismantling systems of oppression that enable hate, violence and suppression of individual lights through a culture of complacency, ignorance and fear. If you are queer, trans or latinx, know that you have a place in our community. If you are an ally to any at-risk group, know that you have an active, ongoing responsibility to educate yourself and others in openness and affirmation of diverse identities. If you work and pray for a world free from violence and discrimination, remember that your liberation is bound up in the liberation of all.

In the face of violence and sudden death, tragedy calls us to put beliefs into action — beyond prayer, the dinner table and the armchair. Be an ally. Make sure there is a beloved community in the life you lead.

James Matlack

Alianne Harper

LePage’s junk food ban

Gov. Paul LePage has said that in spite of the prohibition by the federal government, he intends to unilaterally prevent SNAP participants from using their benefits to purchase junk food and soda. On the face of it, it is an admirable to be concerned about people’s health, but clearly that is not the reason.

Regardless, has anyone considered the following? How will EBT cards be programmed to recognize junk food and soda? How will the thousands of merchants in the state determine what is junk food? How will compliance be monitored?

But perhaps the most important issue is that the governor, by defying the U.S. Department of Agriculture, is committing an illegal act and risking the loss of millions of federal dollars for the SNAP. By directing the Maine Department of Health and Human Services to carry out his agenda, he is telling state employees to break the law. Then, by mandating that merchants not sell junk food and soda to SNAP recipients, the governor and DHHS are telling private citizens to break the law.

So, what do parents tell their children? It’s OK to break the law if the governor breaks the law. Think about that message, regardless of the questionable merits of the case. Is that what we want to teach our children?

Mark D. Roth

Ranked-choice voting support

Forty years ago, with nothing more than paper and pencil, I was part of a team running student elections at my college. With at least six candidates for each post, we used a form of ranked-choice voting, known as the “single transferable vote,” to ensure the most popular candidates were elected to each position.

Since then, I have questioned why our electorate allows itself to be kept in the straitjacket of a single choice. If I wish to support the Green or Libertarian Party candidates, why should that also disqualify me from expressing a preference between the Democratic and Republican candidates?

Most voters don’t like being forced into a two-way choice. They want to fully express their preferences and have a level playing field that allows all candidates to be fairly evaluated. If we had ranked-choice voting, this would all be institutionalized.

In races with more than two candidates, the major benefit of ranked-choice voting is the election of the most acceptable candidate, instead of the least preferable one. But this system has also been shown to revolutionize voter engagement by encouraging candidates to reach beyond their core supporters to attract the preferences of a broader base in order to earn a majority vote.

By adopting ranked-choice voting, Maine would be taking another appropriate step towards modernizing our election system. Our society is too diverse and complex to be confined to two realistic choices each election cycle. Join me in the movement for 21st-century voting.

Brian Meadows

State must earn tribes’ trust

I read with interest the June 22 BDN editorial about renegotiating tribal sovereignty and tribal and state relations. This issue is rooted in a matter of “trust.” In 1794, the Commonwealth of Massachusetts made a treaty with the Passamaquoddy Tribe, setting aside some 30,000 acres of land in Washington County using the term “forever.” Well, “forever” lasted about 26 years for when Maine separated from Massachusetts. It is this that eventually resulted in the Maine Indian Lands Claim case ending in the 1980 Settlement Act.

Since the Settlement Act, the state has been actively chipping away at the limited sovereignty offered in the settlement.

More recently, when the tribes proposed establishing gaming in Maine to generate revenue for their communities, candidate for Maine Gov. John Baldacci met with an inter-tribal group and pledged to support their effort if elected. When elected, however, Baldacci used taxpayer dollars to counter the tribes’ gaming initiative through televised ads. He said gambling was not for Maine and that gaming would not produce economic development for the tribes. He said it would bring the criminal element to the state of Maine.

At the same time, the city of Bangor was planning for a “racino.” There are now two casinos in the state. And, with all the tribes’ subsequent legislative initiatives and efforts, they have yet to succeed in establishing a casino-style gaming enterprise.

It is my belief that if there is to be an opportunity to improve tribal and state relations, the issue of trust has to be addressed.


Wednesday, June 29, 2016: State must earn tribes’ trust, LePage’s junk food ban, create an open world

As a community that believes the light that lies within every person should be welcomed, not snuffed out, Quakers of the Midcoast Friends Meeting have issued a call to action, mutual support and education to create a more just and compassionate society.

All identities and personal expressions can teach us about friendship, how to be warm and accepting with each other and how to share closeness with God and give loving-kindness to each other. We open our meeting house doors to all regardless of identity, expression or ethnicity. Yet, the world at large is not open — it is not enough for us to seek beloved community inside the safety of our walls.

As longstanding allies or members of Maine’s queer and trans communities, we must hold ourselves accountable to acknowledging and dismantling systems of oppression that enable hate, violence and suppression of individual lights through a culture of complacency, ignorance and fear. If you are queer, trans or latinx, know that you have a place in our community. If you are an ally to any at-risk group, know that you have an active, ongoing responsibility to educate yourself and others in openness and affirmation of diverse identities. If you work and pray for a world free from violence and discrimination, remember that your liberation is bound up in the liberation of all.

In the face of violence and sudden death, tragedy calls us to put beliefs into action — beyond prayer, the dinner table and the armchair. Be an ally. Make sure there is a beloved community in the life you lead.

James Matlack

Alianne Harper

LePage’s junk food ban

Gov. Paul LePage has said that in spite of the prohibition by the federal government, he intends to unilaterally prevent SNAP participants from using their benefits to purchase junk food and soda. On the face of it, it is an admirable to be concerned about people’s health, but clearly that is not the reason.

Regardless, has anyone considered the following? How will EBT cards be programmed to recognize junk food and soda? How will the thousands of merchants in the state determine what is junk food? How will compliance be monitored?

But perhaps the most important issue is that the governor, by defying the U.S. Department of Agriculture, is committing an illegal act and risking the loss of millions of federal dollars for the SNAP. By directing the Maine Department of Health and Human Services to carry out his agenda, he is telling state employees to break the law. Then, by mandating that merchants not sell junk food and soda to SNAP recipients, the governor and DHHS are telling private citizens to break the law.

So, what do parents tell their children? It’s OK to break the law if the governor breaks the law. Think about that message, regardless of the questionable merits of the case. Is that what we want to teach our children?

Mark D. Roth

Ranked-choice voting support

Forty years ago, with nothing more than paper and pencil, I was part of a team running student elections at my college. With at least six candidates for each post, we used a form of ranked-choice voting, known as the “single transferable vote,” to ensure the most popular candidates were elected to each position.

Since then, I have questioned why our electorate allows itself to be kept in the straitjacket of a single choice. If I wish to support the Green or Libertarian Party candidates, why should that also disqualify me from expressing a preference between the Democratic and Republican candidates?

Most voters don’t like being forced into a two-way choice. They want to fully express their preferences and have a level playing field that allows all candidates to be fairly evaluated. If we had ranked-choice voting, this would all be institutionalized.

In races with more than two candidates, the major benefit of ranked-choice voting is the election of the most acceptable candidate, instead of the least preferable one. But this system has also been shown to revolutionize voter engagement by encouraging candidates to reach beyond their core supporters to attract the preferences of a broader base in order to earn a majority vote.

By adopting ranked-choice voting, Maine would be taking another appropriate step towards modernizing our election system. Our society is too diverse and complex to be confined to two realistic choices each election cycle. Join me in the movement for 21st-century voting.

Brian Meadows

State must earn tribes’ trust

I read with interest the June 22 BDN editorial about renegotiating tribal sovereignty and tribal and state relations. This issue is rooted in a matter of “trust.” In 1794, the Commonwealth of Massachusetts made a treaty with the Passamaquoddy Tribe, setting aside some 30,000 acres of land in Washington County using the term “forever.” Well, “forever” lasted about 26 years for when Maine separated from Massachusetts. It is this that eventually resulted in the Maine Indian Lands Claim case ending in the 1980 Settlement Act.

Since the Settlement Act, the state has been actively chipping away at the limited sovereignty offered in the settlement.

More recently, when the tribes proposed establishing gaming in Maine to generate revenue for their communities, candidate for Maine Gov. John Baldacci met with an inter-tribal group and pledged to support their effort if elected. When elected, however, Baldacci used taxpayer dollars to counter the tribes’ gaming initiative through televised ads. He said gambling was not for Maine and that gaming would not produce economic development for the tribes. He said it would bring the criminal element to the state of Maine.

At the same time, the city of Bangor was planning for a “racino.” There are now two casinos in the state. And, with all the tribes’ subsequent legislative initiatives and efforts, they have yet to succeed in establishing a casino-style gaming enterprise.

It is my belief that if there is to be an opportunity to improve tribal and state relations, the issue of trust has to be addressed.


Wednesday, June 29, 2016: State must earn tribes’ trust, LePage’s junk food ban, create an open world

As a community that believes the light that lies within every person should be welcomed, not snuffed out, Quakers of the Midcoast Friends Meeting have issued a call to action, mutual support and education to create a more just and compassionate society.

All identities and personal expressions can teach us about friendship, how to be warm and accepting with each other and how to share closeness with God and give loving-kindness to each other. We open our meeting house doors to all regardless of identity, expression or ethnicity. Yet, the world at large is not open — it is not enough for us to seek beloved community inside the safety of our walls.

As longstanding allies or members of Maine’s queer and trans communities, we must hold ourselves accountable to acknowledging and dismantling systems of oppression that enable hate, violence and suppression of individual lights through a culture of complacency, ignorance and fear. If you are queer, trans or latinx, know that you have a place in our community. If you are an ally to any at-risk group, know that you have an active, ongoing responsibility to educate yourself and others in openness and affirmation of diverse identities. If you work and pray for a world free from violence and discrimination, remember that your liberation is bound up in the liberation of all.

In the face of violence and sudden death, tragedy calls us to put beliefs into action — beyond prayer, the dinner table and the armchair. Be an ally. Make sure there is a beloved community in the life you lead.

James Matlack

Alianne Harper

LePage’s junk food ban

Gov. Paul LePage has said that in spite of the prohibition by the federal government, he intends to unilaterally prevent SNAP participants from using their benefits to purchase junk food and soda. On the face of it, it is an admirable to be concerned about people’s health, but clearly that is not the reason.

Regardless, has anyone considered the following? How will EBT cards be programmed to recognize junk food and soda? How will the thousands of merchants in the state determine what is junk food? How will compliance be monitored?

But perhaps the most important issue is that the governor, by defying the U.S. Department of Agriculture, is committing an illegal act and risking the loss of millions of federal dollars for the SNAP. By directing the Maine Department of Health and Human Services to carry out his agenda, he is telling state employees to break the law. Then, by mandating that merchants not sell junk food and soda to SNAP recipients, the governor and DHHS are telling private citizens to break the law.

So, what do parents tell their children? It’s OK to break the law if the governor breaks the law. Think about that message, regardless of the questionable merits of the case. Is that what we want to teach our children?

Mark D. Roth

Ranked-choice voting support

Forty years ago, with nothing more than paper and pencil, I was part of a team running student elections at my college. With at least six candidates for each post, we used a form of ranked-choice voting, known as the “single transferable vote,” to ensure the most popular candidates were elected to each position.

Since then, I have questioned why our electorate allows itself to be kept in the straitjacket of a single choice. If I wish to support the Green or Libertarian Party candidates, why should that also disqualify me from expressing a preference between the Democratic and Republican candidates?

Most voters don’t like being forced into a two-way choice. They want to fully express their preferences and have a level playing field that allows all candidates to be fairly evaluated. If we had ranked-choice voting, this would all be institutionalized.

In races with more than two candidates, the major benefit of ranked-choice voting is the election of the most acceptable candidate, instead of the least preferable one. But this system has also been shown to revolutionize voter engagement by encouraging candidates to reach beyond their core supporters to attract the preferences of a broader base in order to earn a majority vote.

By adopting ranked-choice voting, Maine would be taking another appropriate step towards modernizing our election system. Our society is too diverse and complex to be confined to two realistic choices each election cycle. Join me in the movement for 21st-century voting.

Brian Meadows

State must earn tribes’ trust

I read with interest the June 22 BDN editorial about renegotiating tribal sovereignty and tribal and state relations. This issue is rooted in a matter of “trust.” In 1794, the Commonwealth of Massachusetts made a treaty with the Passamaquoddy Tribe, setting aside some 30,000 acres of land in Washington County using the term “forever.” Well, “forever” lasted about 26 years for when Maine separated from Massachusetts. It is this that eventually resulted in the Maine Indian Lands Claim case ending in the 1980 Settlement Act.

Since the Settlement Act, the state has been actively chipping away at the limited sovereignty offered in the settlement.

More recently, when the tribes proposed establishing gaming in Maine to generate revenue for their communities, candidate for Maine Gov. John Baldacci met with an inter-tribal group and pledged to support their effort if elected. When elected, however, Baldacci used taxpayer dollars to counter the tribes’ gaming initiative through televised ads. He said gambling was not for Maine and that gaming would not produce economic development for the tribes. He said it would bring the criminal element to the state of Maine.

At the same time, the city of Bangor was planning for a “racino.” There are now two casinos in the state. And, with all the tribes’ subsequent legislative initiatives and efforts, they have yet to succeed in establishing a casino-style gaming enterprise.

It is my belief that if there is to be an opportunity to improve tribal and state relations, the issue of trust has to be addressed.


Kyk die video: La Calavera - First Aid Kit. Beergeekholland. #185 (November 2021).