About Town

Susan Collins on Fort Hood

Deirdre Fulton — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 21:23:00 GMT

At a Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee hearing yesterday.

ZOMG NOMNOMNOM more free chocolate!

Jeff Inglis — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 15:16:00 GMT

Yes, we know. We're chocoholics and proud of it. And when you mix chocolate and alcohol, well, you are just about our favorite person on the planet.

And a steady (in fact, near-constant) competitor for the Our Favorite Person On The Planet award is Dean from Dean's Sweets. He and his wife Kristin are celebrating the one-year anniversary of their store (82 Middle Street, right between Rabelais and Pepperclub/Good Egg) by giving away truffles made with champagne fillings.

FREE. Through December 12.

We're on our way there later today. But our anticipation has prevented us from delaying this blog post until after. And anyway, if it's anything less than completely amazing, we'll be blogging back here in like two secs to tell you that aliens have possessed Dean and are messing with his recipes.

So stop by the store, have a free sample - and hey, moron, buy a few too! Support people who give out free chocolate to strangers. We do.

Portlander wins National Book Award!

Deirdre Fulton — Thu, 19 Nov 2009 16:31:00 GMT

Portland resident Phillip Hoose won the National Book Award for Young People's Literature last night, for Claudette Colvin: Twice Toward Justice (Farrar, Straus & Giroux). The book tells the story of Colvin, a near-forgotten civil-rights heroine; Colvin was in the audience with Hoose at the awards ceremony in NY, and was "shaken with emotion as she joined Hoose on the stage," according to an AP report.

From the NY Times article:

Perhaps the most moving moment of the night came with the presentation of the award for Young People’s Literature, which went to Phillip Hoose for “Claudette Colvin: Twice Toward Justice,” a biography of Ms. Colvin, who as an African-American teenager in 1950s Montgomery, Ala., refused to give up her seat on a bus nine months before Rosa Parks took the same stand.
Mr. Hoose brought Ms. Colvin onto the stage to accept the award. 'My job was to pull someone who was about to disappear under history’s rug,' he said.

From that same article, this priceless description of Gore Vidal's acceptance of the award for the Distinguished Contribution to American Letters:

In wandering remarks, Mr. Vidal cited anecdotes about President Franklin D. Roosevelt and the Chateau Marmont in Los Angeles. In his only comments about publishing, he puzzled the audience by noting, “Nowadays it seems the progress of literature is to first print the book and then pulp it,” adding: “It saves such a lot of time. It’s fun for everybody.”

Also, this picture:

(That's not Saruman, btw, that's the winner of the NBA for poetry, Keith Waldrop. Love him!)

4th Annual Film Fest tonight!

Jeff Inglis — Wed, 18 Nov 2009 14:02:00 GMT

4th Annual Short Film Festival tonight! 6:30 pm, One Longfellow Square. With special showing of Lone Wolf's newest feature, The Rivals. $5 at the door! Come see great local short films and a great local feature!

We're suckers for FREE CHOCOLATE

Jeff Inglis — Tue, 17 Nov 2009 20:04:00 GMT

This afternoon, from 4:30 to 7:30 pm, swing over to the Eastland Park Hotel, where Simply Divine Brownies are opening their new shop! Try free samples, and get a coupon - only valid on today, but it's better than nothing.

6gig archives trip: final show

Jeff Inglis — Tue, 17 Nov 2009 19:46:00 GMT

Robbie Kanner over at VisionForViewers has shared with us some photos of 6gig's final show, in October.

Go check 'em out!

How medical marijuana reform will work

Deirdre Fulton — Tue, 17 Nov 2009 18:09:00 GMT

Medical-marijuana advocates hope that the state's first marijuana dispensaries -- made legal by the passage of Question 5 on November 3 -- will open by May 2010.

Yesterday, the Maine Marijuana Policy Iniative released answers to logistical FAQs about the new law (parts of which will take effect in February; rules about the dispensaries will take longer to hammer out). Those answers aren't yet available on the MMPI Web site, so I'm copying and pasting them here:

FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS ABOUT MAINE'S NEW MEDICAL MARIJUANA LAW

What conditions can marijuana be used to treat?

Under the new law, a physician may recommend marijuana for the treatment of:

cancer, glaucoma, HIV, AIDS, hepatitis C, amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (Lou Gehrig's disease)
Crohn's disease, agitation of Alzheimer's disease, nail-patella syndrome

seizure disorders including epilepsy

conditions marked by severe and persistent muscle spasms such as multiple sclerosis

conditions marked by severe nausea or by a wasting syndrome

chronic conditions causing intractable pain that does not respond to other treatments after six months

The state will soon be establishing a process for evaluating and approving the use of marijuana for other conditions. This means we can add new conditions without having to re-write the law.

How do I become a qualifying medical marijuana patient?

In order to legally use marijuana for any of the above conditions you must have a written recommendation from a licensed physician or surgeon.

In the coming months, the state of Maine will develop a process for issuing identification cards to qualifying patients and their legally designated caregivers. Participation in this program will be completely voluntary. These cards will protect patients and caregivers from arrest, search, and seizure. They also will allow patients and caregivers to purchase marijuana at nonprofit marijuana dispensaries once those dispensaries are established. If you do not choose to get a identification law, you will still have what is called an "Affirmative Defense", but this means going to court to prove your innocence.

What kind of documentation will my physician have to provide to prove that I qualify as a medical marijuana patient?

A physician must supply a written document that certifies:

You are under the physician's continuing care

The physician has diagnosed you with one or more conditions specified under the new law;

The physician has discussed with you the possible health risks and therapeutic or palliative benefits of the medical use of marijuana based on information known to the physician, including, but not limited to, clinical studies or anecdotal evidence reported in medical literature or observations or information concerning the use of marijuana by other patients with the same or similar conditions;

The physician has provided you with a professional opinion concerning the possible balance of risks and benefits of the medical use of marijuana in the person's particular case; and

The physician has advised you, based on knowledge of your medical history and medical condition that you might benefit from the medicinal use of marijuana.

If your physician is recommending marijuana for intractable (chronic) pain, the physician must also certify that your pain has not responded to other medical and surgical treatments over the course of at least six months.

You can copy and download a form that meets these requirements here - www.mainepatientsrights.org

How can I find a physician who is open to the use of marijuana as part of a treatment plan?

We are in the process of creating a list of physicians in Maine who are familiar and comfortable with the medicinal uses of marijuana. If you are or know a physician who should be included on this list, please e-mail info@mainecommonsense.org.

This list will become available by December 1st, 2009 and will be updated as often as is warranted.

How much marijuana may a qualifying patient legally possess?

A qualifying patient may possess no more than 2.5 oz of usable marijuana at any given time. When dispensaries are established, patients will be allowed to purchase no more than 2.5 oz of marijuana in any two week period. Usable marijuana means flowers and leaves and does not include stems and seeds.

A qualifying patient may also possess no more than six mature marijuana plants at any given time.

A patient's primary caregiver is also permitted to possess up to six mature marijuana plants and/or up to 2.5 oz of marijuana for each patient in the caregiver's care.

I qualify as a medical marijuana patient in my home state and will be visiting Maine. Will I be able to use my medicine during my visit? Will I be able to purchase marijuana at a dispensary in Maine?

Yes. A registration card or other legal document issued by another state certifying that you are a qualifying medical marijuana patient will carry the same force as a registration card issued by the state of Maine.

I am a physician. Will recommending marijuana to patients put me in danger of prosecution or professional discipline?

No. Under the law a physician may not be subjected to any criminal or civil penalty or be disciplined by the Board of Licensure in Medicine or the Board of Osteopathic Licensure or by any other licensing body simply for recommending marijuana to a patient.

The U.S. Supreme Court has upheld the right of physicians to recommend marijuana to their patients.

How do I become a primary caregiver for a qualifying patient?

Under current law, a patient may legally designate you as a caregiver if you have consistently assumed responsibility for that patient's housing, health, or safety, or if you are named in a written individual instruction or power of attorney for health care. You also qualify if you are the parent or guardian of a minor who is using marijuana for medicinal purposes under a physician's guidance and with your permission. You can find the relevant forms here - www.mainepatientsrights.org

Under the new law each patient may designate two caregivers and a person may be a designated caregiver for up to five patients. The state is currently in the process of developing additional regulations governing caregivers and a process by which caregivers may register with the state and receive identification cards.

How can I go about setting up a medical marijuana dispensary?

The state of Maine is currently in the process of establishing rules governing the operation and regulation of medical marijuana dispensaries.

The law already puts in place the following requirements:

A dispensary must operate on a not-for-profit basis for the benefit of patients (can't pay out to shareholders)

A dispensary may not be located within 500 feet of a school

A dispensary must keep marijuana in a locked facility to prevent theft

The officers and board members of a dispensary must be residents of Maine and must not have been convicted of any felony drug offense within the past 10 years (unless the activities for which they were convicted would have been legal under this law.)
Dispensaries will be subject to all relevant municipal zoning ordinances.

How can I have input in the rule making process?

Maine Citizens for Patients' Rights will be sending out alerts about public hearings and other opportunities for public input. To receive these alerts go to http://www.mainecommonsense.org and sign up for our e-mail list.

Funky math: Latest anti-healthcare reform ad

Jeff Inglis — Mon, 16 Nov 2009 16:29:00 GMT

The latest ad opposing healthcare reform mimicks the Mac ads - "I'm healthcare reform...And I'm Jenny."

"Jenny" asks about Obama's plan "taxing" her $1000. No, the guy playing "reform" says, it's not a tax, but a fine.

And then we get to the heart of the argument: "12 percent of my income?!" exclaims Jenny.

But her figures - which she has volunteered - mean she makes only $8000 a year. And if that's true, then she would almost certainly qualify for subsidies to help her afford coverage.

And we must add that it is a horrible horrible day indeed when the government makes you get car insurance and home insurance (if you have a federally guaranteed mortgage), but has only now begun to suggest that maybe we should get health insurance...

Abortion and the health-care bill

Deirdre Fulton — Wed, 11 Nov 2009 15:03:00 GMT

US House Democrats made a huge concession on women's health the other day, in order to move forward the massive healthcare bill that passed 220-215 on Saturday night. Under pressure from (shocker!) the US Conference of Catholic Bishops, as well as conservative Dems who said they'd hold up passage of the whole shebang if certain abortion restrictions weren't in place (and despite the fact that there is already an existing ban on using federal funds to pay for abortion -- it's called the Hyde Amendment), Nancy Pelosi and other pragmatic politicians allowed the Stupak Amendment (so named for its legislative sponsor, Bart Stupak, a Democrat from Michigan) into the bill.

Basically, the amendment states not just that federal money can't be used to pay for abortions, but that "any plan purchased with any federal subsidy cannot cover abortion services -- even with private funds. Plus, the public plan won't cover abortion care. While plans participating in the health insurance exchange are legally permitted to offer a version of the plan that does cover abortion -- enrollment limited to those who pay for the entire plan without any subsidy--it's unlikely plans will go the extra mile to offer that coverage," according to Emily Douglas's analysis in The Nation.

Planned Parenthood of Northern New England issued the following statement about the amendment: "Make no mistake about it - the Stupak-Pitts amendment is the most extreme of any anti-women's health amendment considered (all of which have been rejected outright) by the five committees of jurisdiction. It is unquestionably a ban on abortion coverage under health care reform."

And the National Organization of Women had this to say: "The House of Representatives has dealt a devastating blow to women's fundamental right to self-determination in order to buy a few votes for health care reform."

But, as Maine Democratic Rep. Michael Michaud (who voted for the amendment, much to progressive's dismay) said on the 103.9 WVOM the other day, "if [the Stupak amendment] had not been adopted, the bill would definitely not have passed in the House."

Maine's other Democratic representative, Chellie Pingree, is staunchly opposed to the amendment; signed a letter with 40 other Dems vowing to vote against the (post-conference committee) health care legislation if the Stupak language stands.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) has said he wants to put the healthcare bill on the Senate floor by Thanksgiving, and to vote on a bill by Christmas. Earlier this week, several female Democratic senators met to discuss how they would address abortion restrictions in the Senate bill. (Even GOP represenatives are keeping their distance.) Of course, all eyes will be on Maine's Republican, "pro-choice" senators to see what steps they'll take w/r/t protecting abortion access or not.

***

In other health care news, Maine was described thusly in today's NYT: "Maine is the Charlie Brown of health care. The state’s legislators have tried for decades to fix its system, but their efforts have always fallen short: health insurance premiums are still among the least affordable in the nation, health care spending per person is among the highest and hospital emergency rooms are among the most crowded. Indeed, many overhauls to the system have done little more than squeeze a balloon — solving one problem while worsening another."

Is No On 1 loss due to Obama?

Jeff Inglis — Fri, 06 Nov 2009 20:58:00 GMT

John Aravosis at gay.americablog.com has an interesting account of the interplay between the DNC, the Obama administration, the New Jersey governor's race, and the No On 1 campaign here in Maine.

One very interesting point he makes is that the 2008 presidential race had far more people cast ballots than the 2009 No On 1 race. That's not that much of a surprise - it was an off-year election, after all - but it does raise the question of whether Obama's machine could have made a difference.

By Aravosis's calculation, 122,000 Obama voters didn't cast ballots at all this year. (I'm not certain about his math, but it seems clear that around 150,000 people who voted for either Obama or McCain didn't cast ballots in the No On 1 election. The split is where I lose his chain of logic.)

Anyway, given that 31,000 more No On 1 voters would have turned the tide, and that number is just 1 in 5 of the people who didn't vote at all, it does make some sense that if Obama and the DNC had stepped up and used their voter lists, more people might have shown up at the polls. Maybe not, and it's certainly not a given, but an interesting concept to explore, as the gay community in America wrestles with its opinion of Obama.

More on Tuesday's election

Deirdre Fulton — Thu, 05 Nov 2009 17:14:00 GMT

A pretty comprehensive round-up of some of the political philosophies around same-sex marriage votes.

Post-election: the view from the wilderness

Jeff Inglis — Wed, 04 Nov 2009 20:22:00 GMT

Deirdre's morning-after-the-election blog post had a line early on that really struck me: she mentions the "sheer disbelief that so many people have a worldview that is so radically different from my own."

I don't think Deirdre is ignorant, or stupid, or insular - quite the opposite of any of that. But her perspective is enlightening. She grew up largely in the Clinton era. The first presidential election she voted in was Bush-Kerry in 2004. America was deeply polarized already, and the poles weren't speaking to each other. Occasionally, they shouted across the canyon at each other, but nobody was listening on the other side. Over the early 2000s and into Bush 43's second term, the polarization got worse.

After spending years in an environment where no one with a differing viewpoint was ready to hand, and where whatever disagreements did occur were little more than garbled gobbledygook being shouted across a canyon, little wonder that Deirdre and others - of all ages - came to believe the country they lived in was quite homogeneous, at least in terms of political and social viewpoints.

I contrast this with my own experience, not because it is so unique or interesting but because I know it best. I grew up in the Reagan era - my second-grade class sent get-well cards to the president after the 1981 attempt on his life. The first presidential election I voted in was Bush-Clinton in 1992. I was long used to disagreeing with those in power, and frankly had few expectations that they would ever represent my wishes, hopes, and desires.

I expected to live in the wilderness - I knew nothing else. I would submit that Deirdre, through no fault of her own, knew plenty else than the wilderness, and found the exile during Bush 43's first term quite painful. I found it no less painful, but was more easily resigned to my fate.

Kerry came along, and the divide was deepened, and I didn't much care. Bush 43 continued along, just like I always assumed. My interests, my values, my wishes were not part of the national dialogue - I had to come to terms with being a philosophical/political minority.

Obama appeared, and for the first time I saw a way out of the wilderness, a light through the trees suggesting to me there might be something more than just the wilderness. But to Deirdre, I think, that light through the trees represented not an arrival of something new, but an opportunity to return from exile, to regain lost territory.

While I reveled in the wonder of Obama's win, I found Deirdre and others like her to be truly overjoyed in a way I was not. I now recognize their emotion as the joy of homecoming, while my feeling was the amazement of a new discovery.

And today we both find ourselves back in the wilderness - with a lot of company, as we have always had. (I never felt alone in the wilderness; neglected, ignored, cast aside yes - alone, never.) And I find that the shock and pain of a renewed feeling of exile for Deirdre is again deeper, more powerful, more profound than my feelings at being back on what is after all for me familiar ground. Much as I enjoyed my time away from the wilderness, I find that I never actually thought I was out for good. And we are not. But Deirdre is again deprived of a home, and I have merely returned to a familiar unpleasantness.

Our hearts break, but in very different ways.

Morning-after thoughts

Deirdre Fulton — Wed, 04 Nov 2009 15:39:00 GMT

Well, it's over. I feel today -- and I heard several people echo this sentiment last night and this morning -- similar to how I felt on November 3, 2004, when John Kerry lost the presidential election. In addition to a sense of sadness and frustration, there's also sheer disbelief that so many people have a worldview that is so radically different from my own.

Just got back from the No On 1 morning-after press conference. A morose scene, despite the let's-persevere messaging. Faces were long, eyes were damp, and many of the 100 or so attendees were wearing black. EqualityMaine's Betsy Smith's voice cracked with emotion when she pointed to the people around her and said: "Mainers are not ready to treat these people fairly." But she, GLAD's Mary Bonauto, the MCLU's Shenna Bellows, and other speakers were clear about their intent to build on the 47 percent of Mainers who are ready to do so. This community is used to setbacks, said Bonauto, a longtime veteran of same-sex marriage battles in New England and beyond. And how do they respond? "We pick ourselves up and stay the course." To that end, Bellows pointed out two specific strategies that worked, this time around -- the Family Ambassador Project, which had same-sex parents talk in their communities about how gay marriage affects children; and the Religious Coalition for the Freedom to Marry, which addressed how gay marriage fits in the spiritual life. In the background, one supporter held a sign that read: "Love the Sinner; Hate the Sin; Forgive the Catholic Church."

Here are two fucking outrageous things I've read today.

From Time Magazine: " 'What's the hurry [for gay marriage]?' asked [Scott] Fish, whose group began seeking a so-called 'people's veto' almost immediately after Maine's Democratic (and Catholic) Gov. John Baldacci signed the gay marriage bill in May."

He can't be serious with this. What's the hurry, dude? Oh, I don't know -- generations of second-class citizenship, decades of discrimination, 20 or more years of committment, in some cases? It's not like you're talking to hundreds of same-sex couples who want to run off and elope in Vegas. "What's the hurry." Unbelievable.

From the Portland Press Herald: “It’s been the little guy against the big guy in terms of resources, financial resources,” said [Marc] Mutty.

You know, he's so right. I've often thought of the Roman Catholic Church and the conservative political machine that passed Prop 8 as "the little guys."

What a couple others are saying:

Nate Silver dissects what happened, with this sad bit of analysis: "But this may not be an issue where the campaign itself matters very much; people have pretty strong feelings about the gay marriage issue and are not typically open to persuasion."
AsMaineGoes gloating, morning-after fear-mongering, etc.
A really smart friend of mine: who cares if i get married?
jesus
why does it bug so many people

Also, there's this:

County breakdown - Question 1 #marryME

Jeff Inglis — Wed, 04 Nov 2009 15:00:00 GMT

According to the Bangor Daily News numbers as of 9:25 am, here is the breakdown by county, and a handy map (made with the help of Microsoft MapPoint) showing exactly how little of Maine voted for marriage equality (remember, Yes is to repeal equality and No is to protect it):

County	% Yes	% No
Androscoggin	60.13%	39.87%	Very Strong Yes
Aroostook	73.22%	26.78%	Very Strong Yes
Cumberland	39.67%	60.33%	Very Strong No
Franklin	59.53%	40.47%	Very Strong Yes
Hancock	46.81%	53.19%	Solid No
Kennebec	56.56%	43.44%	Solid Yes
Knox	49.16%	50.84%	Weak No
Lincoln	50.62%	49.38%	Weak Yes
Oxford	59.13%	40.87%	Very Strong Yes
Penobscot	58.79%	41.21%	Very Strong Yes
Piscataquis	66.81%	33.19%	Very Strong Yes
Sagadahoc	49.32%	50.68%	Weak No
Somerset	65.41%	34.59%	Very Strong Yes
Waldo	53.38%	46.62%	Solid Yes
Washington	64.79%	35.21%	Very Strong Yes
York	50.22%	49.78%	Weak Yes

Same-sex marriage repealed

Jeff Inglis — Wed, 04 Nov 2009 05:36:00 GMT

I'm very sorry. Personally, professionally, everything. This is terrible. But it has to be said. Jesse Connolly just gave what can only be described as a concession speech at the Holiday Inn by the Bay in Portland. Sure, he said they'd keep fighting, and make sure every vote was counted. But nobody talks that way if they're winning.

The Bangor Daily News results at this hour - 12:50 am - show have 86 percent of precincts reporting, and 53 percent of registered voters in Maine having participated.

The tally is sobering:

Repeal equality - 265,189 - 52.74 percent

Preserve equality - 237,648 - 47.26 percent

This is an awful, horrible sentence to type: Based on the estimated total voter turnout, if every single person who voted in this election, but whose vote has not yet been counted, voted to preserve equality, it would still be repealed.

To all my gay, lesbian, transgender, questioning, etc friends, I can only offer my heartfelt sympathies.

Bigotry has won again. But I, like many, take heart in the teachings of the Buddha: Nothing is forever. Everything is impermanent.

There will be recounts, there will be recriminations. But tonight, there are only tears.