Snowe dumps on Maine

Published on thePhoenix.com; with research help from Deirdre Fulton

And you thought tomorrow's big news would be the threatening blizzard? Nope - Olympia Snowe is going to be the big headline. She's leaving the US Senate, in a move that apparently surprised even her own staff. It changes the political landscape in Maine and around the country.

She is a key Republican moderate whose vote was often coveted on both sides of the aisle (an influence she may have overhyped for electoral benefit).

Republicans were counting on her to hold her seat as part of their efforts to take the Senate. As an example of how this changes the political calculations around the nation, what was already going to be a hard-fought race for Ted Kennedy's old seat in Massachusetts (between Elizabeth Warren and Scott Brown) will now take on epic proportions.

Make no mistake: Maine is still essentially a Democratic state. (And to the extent that Governor Paul LePage's approval ratings are a barometer, more than half of Mainers aren't on board his train.) Snowe has won over and over partly based on her (apparent) moderation, and partly based on her ability to overwhelm opponents.

Democrats were ousted from control of Augusta in 2010 not because the Pine Tree State is dominated by Republicans, but because Maine's leading Democrats don't lead, and act like Republicans rather than providing alternatives. (Our Lance Tapley has written about this over and over and over, but still the Dems don't step up.)

Snowe's statement announcing her retirement says she does not expect the partisan gridlock to end in Washington anytime soon. And sure enough, a National Journal piece over the weekend suggested that now is, if not the most partisan time in congressional history, then perhaps the second-most partisan time.

Speculation has already begun about who might step up to replace her. Four Democrats ( state senator representative Jon Hinck, state senator Cynthia Dill, former Maine secretary of state Matt Dunlap, and political newcomer Ben Pollard) are already in.

Republican businessman Scott D'Amboise was planning to challenge Snowe in the primary; Tea Partier Andrew Ian Dodge left the GOP to run as an independent (he may rethink that decision now).

First District Congresswoman Chellie Pingree is clearly thinking about it - her statement on Snowe's announcement specifically said, "in the coming days I will carefully consider how I can best serve the people of Maine." Her counterpart in the 2nd District Mike Michaud has to be thinking about it too.

Former independent gubernatorial candidate (and Carter administration alumnus) Eliot Cutler is one of the few who could raise the needed money in the remaining time. And will former Congressman Tom Allen reappear? Other possibilities are being bruited about in the political echo-chamber, with new names being added to the chamber of bouncing balls almost by the minute.

It's also worth noting that two years ago there was big speculation about whether Snowe would leave the Republican Party. She didn't, but today's move essentially makes the same statement - that she does not believe participating in the Republican Party is useful for her.

Many questions are already being asked - and many more will arise over the next few days. Here, for those who like retrospectives, is our piece from the very first issue of the Portland Phoenix, looking at Snowe and Collins and their two-sided-ness.

Cash Injections: At union request, Sussman steps up for Press Herald

Published in the Portland Phoenix


It was not the owners of the Portland Press Herald who sought out Maine hedge-fund mogul S. Donald Sussman to proffer a cash infusion to save the ailing newspaper. Rather, it was the idea of the Press Herald's unionized employees.

Sussman, the paper announced late Friday, will lend the Press Herald and its sister papers between $3 million and $4 million in exchange for five percent of the company and a seat on its board of directors. Sussman is also a philanthropist and the husband of Maine Democratic Congresswoman Chellie Pingree.

Tom Bell, a Press Herald reporter and president of the local Newspaper Guild union representing many of the company's workers, confirms that neither the company's owners, Texas-based HM Capital Partners, nor Sussman himself who initiated the deal.

"We didn't speak to him directly," Bell says. "It was through a third-party intermediary," whom he declined to name. Another person (a fourth party?) had mentioned to union leaders that Sussman had some interest, so the union got in touch late last year.

"It was prior to our negotiations with Kushner and Harte," Bell says, referring to the bid by the 2100 Trust, owned by Massachusetts entrepreneur Aaron Kushner and former Press Herald president Chris Harte, to purchase a majority stake in the company and institute significant cuts and reforms. That effort, in which Harte and Kushner proposed significant cuts to union workers' pay and benefits packages, failed to get union support last month (see thePhoenix.com/AboutTown for details on that).

When that deal fell through, Bell says there had yet been "no sign" Sussman was interested. Rather, there were what Bell calls "two likely scenarios," one in which the company would go into bankruptcy protection, and the other in which Kushner and Harte would buy the company despite the union objections.

Then Sussman stepped forward, and the union's outreach efforts bore fruit. Even as far back as early 2010, when the Blethens were seeking to sell the company, union representatives had "spent a lot of time calling around the state" seeking investors, Bell says. Those inquiries hadn't turned out, but the attempt to pique Sussman's interest did.

What happens now remains a bit unclear. While the company's announcement of the investment said "one of the first steps . . . would be to hire a top notch CEO with media experience," Bell indicated that the existing interim CEO, Neil Heyside of rescue firm CRG Partners, was likely to stay for at least several months to oversee some in-house technology transitions.

That includes a new computers and new software that on the editorial side integrates story publication online and in print, and on the advertising side makes everything much clearer and easier. "We have a very Byzantine system that makes it hard to know on a day-to-day basis how the company's performing," Bell says.

Bell says the company and the union hope those changes really boost the newspapers into a much stronger position; the size of the required investment remains unclear, and the dent Sussman's loan to the papers will make in its existing debt is also uncertain, leaving the full impact of the new deal fairly foggy.

The deal may take "a few weeks" to close, according to Guild vice-president Greg Kesich, an editorial writer at the paper who sits on the board as one of two Guild reps (a third seat is shared by two smaller unions representing company employees).

Kesich also says the company's board will be reconstituted to accommodate Sussman's new position. It will still have seven members, and the unions will not lose any seats, Kesich says.

With the cash infusion, other changes may occur, including changes to reporting duties. The paper is planning to begin employing local correspondents, Bell says, who will be union-member part-time staffers that cover their communities closely, at meetings and other events. "We've fallen behind on local coverage," Bell admits. Help with more routine duties could free up full-time reporters to do larger projects and more significant stories.

What many in the newsroom are talking about are the ethical quandaries posed by having such a prominent, powerful, politically active investor in the company. It's a fairly new conversation, despite major local players like local real-estate mogul Robert C.S. "Bobby" Monks and his cousin, financial-services player John P.M. Higgins having backed the paper since 2010. They are part of the extended Sprague family of Cape Elizabeth, and are both active in local business, charity, and other pursuits.

Their ownership has been disclosed sporadically, and infrequently, in Press Herald articles. With Sussman on board, Bell says, "We need to at a minimum be transparent and mention his role in the newspaper," suggesting that failures to do so with Monks and Higgins are the result of management intervention and not omission of facts by reporters or copy editors.

Sussman's prominence has raised the idea of the company hiring an ombudsman to critique and comment publicly on transparency issues, along the lines of similar positions at the New York Times and the Washington Post.

"We'd welcome an outside critic to evaluate us. We think that would help give the public some assurance that we're doing our jobs," Bell says. He says he sees no difference in ethical concerns stemming from the union's role in attracting Sussman's investment, as distinct from any that would arise from his involvement by other means.

"If we feel that we're being leaned on in any way, we're going to be vocal," Bell says, including bringing the issue to the company's board of directors, as well as taking other steps (which could include withholding their bylines). He looks at the alternative — which is indeed the future, since he admits HM Capital, as an equity firm seeking profits, will sell "someday." "We could be owned by a corporation from another state." Instead, "we're going to have owners that are really here in the community and are business leaders . . . I think Mainers would rather the papers be owned by Mainers," even if that means additional attention to disclosing interconnections between the paper and other parts of Maine's small community.

Occupy Watch: Camp closes; curfew passes; activism continues

Published in the Portland Phoenix


Let's just say it: The first phase of OccupyMaine ended with a fizzle, not a bang. The showing at Friday's 10 pm deadline for Occupiers to be out of Lincoln Park was poor. There were three Occupiers and two journalists, standing near the park's fountain. No police, no city workers — they'd come by earlier in the day and cleaned up what was left in the park, with help from several Occupiers.

Two of the three at the fountain that night had just come from a satirical "Billionaires for Romney" event outside Portland Yacht Services, where GOP presidential hopeful Mitt Romney was speaking, hoping to garner support in the state's Republican caucuses. (He won, according to state GOP officials, though there is apparently some question about whether more votes still need to come in and whether they should be counted when determining how to allocate Maine's delegates.)

After all the promises and threats, including some people publicly pledging to get arrested rather than leave the park voluntarily, the protesters ultimately seemed mollified by the city's go-slow approach to eviction.

So it was a token crew — two women and a man, all between their 20s and their late 30s — who returned to the park to observe the deadline for people to leave or be held in violation of the city's ordinance against loitering in public parks at night.

They sat on the fountain, held signs, chanted, stood around, and even watched police cars drive in and out of the city garage — nothing seemed to attract attention from the authorities. One cruiser did seem to slow down for its driver to take a closer look; with a total of five people in the park, the officer likely assumed the gathering would peter out on its own if left alone.

Sure enough, after some jokes suggesting that the trio were committing "attempted loitering," and even "conspiracy to attempt loitering," the bloom was off the rose and the protesters departed by about 10:15 pm.

Nevertheless, the movement continues, operating from its base at the Meg Perry Center. A "reoccupation" rally at Monument Square and a "rededication" of Lincoln Park happened over the weekend, and served to bring together many of the core group as well as additional supporters, to keep the activism alive.

There was also a brief memorial for John Mutero, known in camp as "Big John," who was found dead in a doorway on Allen Avenue last week, under unclear circumstances; Mutero had run afoul of authorities and received a police ban from being in Lincoln Park. Police said foul play and cold weather were not factors; the state medical examiner is investigating.

The group expects to continue occasional use of the State of Maine Room at Portland City Hall, where a Tuesday press conference called attention to the loss of home-heating subsidies for poor Mainers, while wealthy people here and around the country bask in the warmth of government handouts. Other events along that line are in the works — keep tabs on what's happening at facebook.com/OccupyMaine, and attend the General Assembly meetings at 5 pm on Wednesday and Friday, at the Meg Perry Center, 644 Congress Street, Portland. 

Occupy Transition: As encampment fades, protest shifts back to core issues

Published in the Portland Phoenix


Even as Portland city officials continue to pressure OccupyMaine to leave Lincoln Park, they have done the Occupation a great favor, perhaps unintentionally. By extending the deadline for the encampment to end until Friday from its previous Monday-night limit, they have given the Occupiers a chance to retake the media narrative of their departure.

Had Monday been the final day, the lasting image of the encampment would have been of one man's decision to burn an American flag. Unless he repeats the deed later in the week, that will no longer be the final scene, striking though it was.

As some Occupiers packed up their tents and other belongings, and others stood around in the morning chill talking about Citizens United, austerity measures, the poverty level, and other issues of economic injustice, Harry Brown — one of the four individual plaintiffs suing the city of Portland for the right to stay in Lincoln Park — drew the lens on himself, announcing that while "it might not catch like I'd like," he was going to try to "dispose of" an American flag.

He affixed the flag to the flagpole in the center of the encampment, and after several tries managed to ignite it with his cigarette lighter. The flames burned brightly as photographers converged on the scene, jockeying for position.

As it happened, and even afterward, other Occupiers present were careful in discussing the matter. The flag-burning was Brown's "autonomous act," came the common refrain, and while others said they might or might not have done the same thing or support his choice, they all defended his right to express himself in that way. (A discussion on the OccupyMaine Facebook page was less restrained, but included several impassioned defenses as well as some strident attacks on the action; a woman who stopped by Monday night's General Assembly was extremely upset by the action, but paused her tears long enough to hear Brown's defense, which amounted to him saying he thought he was doing the right thing by the flag.)

Respect for individual differences has been the hallmark of OccupyMaine — and the Occupy movement as a whole — since its inception. People of wildly divergent belief systems and political views have come together and engaged with each other, civilly, thoughtfully, and passionately. And they have often come to consensus on what to do in response to the economic, social, and political injustices that pervade American society today.

That has only happened when people of differing views have come together in good faith, though the Occupiers are resolved to give everyone a chance to truly engage — even detractors.

A passerby in Lincoln Park on Monday afternoon scolded the protesters for breaking laws and told them "the way to protest" is to walk around with signs, and then told them to "stop protesting; start doing something that makes sense." Occupier Evan McVeigh walked along with him, offering to involve him in the conversation the man had interrupted with his crankiness, and responding to his criticism with thoughtful — and passionate — rejoinders. The man wouldn't give his name, and only after several questions did it become clear that he disagreed with Superior Court Justice Thomas Warren's ruling last week that the encampment was in fact free expression.

Warren's ruling essentially declared the encampment was indeed free speech worthy of Constitutional protection, but said that the city's safety concerns about how the encampment was physically laid out were strong enough to override the protection given to free expression. Despite ending in an order to vacate the park, the ruling was a major win for the Occupiers. (Read more on the specifics of this at  thePhoenix.com/AboutTown.)

The support found in Warren's ruling, as well as renewed public support — and discovery that despite councilors' claims to the contrary, the overwhelming majority of Portlanders who contacted the council to express an opinion about OccupyMaine were supportive of the encampment — appears to have breathed new life into the Occupy flame here.

The activism is continuing — two video series (including an ongoing program on Portland's Community Television Network), rallies, marches, and other gatherings are scheduled for the next couple of weeks already, with more in the pipeline. A "Tiny Tent Task Force" is also forming, to continue the tent-based nature of the Occupation, albeit on a smaller scale. Other projects in the discussion phase include Occupying foreclosed properties, turning Lincoln Park into an urban garden, and expanding visible protest throughout the city in various ways.

The efforts to house the needy are also carrying on; some members are forming a commune they hope will be self-supporting, while some will take advantage of the city's extended deadline to further their search for more permanent shelter.

With a base at the Meg Perry Center, the OccupyMaine group is expecting to expand and reinvigorate its activities. More than one long-term Occupier said energy that had gone into maintaining the encampment can now be used for things that are even more productive. What form those take remains to be seen, but the commitment seems solid.

Press Releases: Question authority

Published in the Portland Phoenix


Maine journalists appear to disbelieve their own eyes, decline to do their own research, and prefer to quote officials instead of relying on independent knowledge and experience. Heck, the public editor of the New York Times recently asked readers if reporters should verify public officials' claims — and seemed surprised and defensive when the overwhelming response was "Yes, you dummy. And what kind of idiot would even ask this question?"

A recent local example of this was the ridiculous hysteria around gang violence and membership in Maine. The subject arose because of a legislative proposal that would have allowed a court to extend someone's jail term if they were convicted of a crime that was somehow believed to be connected with a gang.

Gangs are indeed a problem around the country. And an FBI report (which was recently removed from the agency's website) claims our state has as many as 4000 gang members. So the Maine Gang Task Force asked Scarborough Republican Representative Amy Volk to propose the bill.

But the MGTF's leader, Eric Berry, has questionable credibility. He may head a task force involving federal, state, and local law-enforcement officials, but he declines to name the other members of his task force, citing unspecified "security reasons." He also refused to say which gangs are active in Maine — though that would seem a crucial piece of evidence to support his claim that gang activity is here at all.

Then, in a legislative hearing, Berry told lawmakers gangs account for "over 30 percent of crime in the state."

Sure enough, when faced with an official claiming that there is an unseen, unheard epidemic that has become the state's second-leading cause of crime (after domestic violence), reporters leapt to publish the material without really checking it out. That quote itself was carried on MPBN, and multiple similarly credulous, long, high-profile pieces were published in the Bangor Daily News, the Lewiston Sun Journal, and the Portland Press Herald. (MPBN later reported the FBI stats might be flawed, but didn't change its first story.)

But verification wasn't that hard. The Portland Phoenix's Lance Tapley asked Berry for evidence behind his claim, at which point he changed his tune entirely, insisting he meant to say instead that gangs account for more than 40 percent of "violent criminal charges" in Portland and Lewiston-Auburn. A quick call to the Portland police revealed that they had no data available to confirm or refute that claim.

But every beginning journalist should have known the answer already, from reading local police logs, where gang activity is almost never mentioned. It's also really easy to check public statements by prosecutors and police, who so rarely talk about gangs that it makes statewide headlines when a biker gang (which we do have in Maine) runs afoul of the law.

In truth, Maine probably does have some small level of gang activity. And indeed, anti-gang bill supporters in the House Republican Office issued a statement that 24 people arrested around Maine in 2010 had been accused of membership in various gangs.

That number appears in an August 2010 federal announcement touting the results of a New England-wide roundup of people with alleged gang connections, led by immigration officers. Which leads to the apparent conclusion that the only gang-related arrests in Maine in 2010 were those 24.

That gangs are barely here is bolstered by the fact that in May 2011, when the Maine Department of Public Safety issued its "2010 Maine Crime Stats Report," gang activity didn't merit even a passing mention. The report did say that 47,820 adults and 6492 juveniles had been arrested statewide — which means that 0.04 percent of the state's arrests that year were related to gang activity. Hardly a problem, and almost impossible to determine whether it's "rising."

Perhaps it's time to form a gang. We can call it "Actual Maine Journalists." That should really strike fear into the hearts of government officials — and give hope to regular Mainers.