Maine lawmakers move forward with changes to 2021 transmission line referendum
Though initially divided, lawmakers decided to move forward with a proposal to modify the law born out of a 2021 referendum question requiring the Maine Legislature to approve any new high-impact transmission lines.
Although some legislators who worked on the campaign argued the proposal would clarify the law, LD 810 initially fell short of passage in the House of Representatives. After the Senate voted to pass the bill last Wednesday, the House ultimately decided to change course and passed the bill Monday by a one-vote margin.
'I'm shocked that we are being faced with this bill so soon after the historic and controversial battle,' said Rep. Elizabeth Caruso (R-Caratunk) during the House discussion last week.
Caruso recounted the efforts by volunteers to gather signatures for the referendum question and the overwhelming support from roughly 60% of voters. The ballot question drew passionate grassroots support and overcame over $60 million in opposition spending fueled mostly by international energy companies.
Therefore, the proposal before the Legislature to reform the law 'opposes the will of the people and the vote,' Caruso said. Approving it would send a message to voters that citizens' initiatives 'are a joke,' she added.
Rep. Melanie Sachs (D-Freeport) said she was one of those Mainers who stood outside L.L. Bean to collect signatures for the campaign and was proud to vote 'Yes.' Though she still supports that referendum, Sachs also backed LD 810 because it 'is clarifying, not repealing.'
Rep. Chris Kessler (D-South Portland), who sponsored LD 810, said he was also among the voters who supported the referendum, but argued his bill is meant to clean up the unintended consequences of the new law.
Sen. Nicole Grohoski (D-Hancock), who worked on the referendum campaign, said while it is important to offer constituents legislative approval as a backstop on transmission lines proposed by private corporations, the current statute creates higher scrutiny for lines proposed by the Legislature than those from the private corporations.
More specifically, the bill seeks to clarify that when the Legislature is seeking to develop a new transmission line, that project should not need to come back to the Legislature for approval after the Public Utilities Commission's review process.
During committee hearings, the Office of Public Advocate, Maine State Chamber of Commerce and multiple environmental organizations agreed the duplicative process can deter developers, drive up costs for ratepayers and stand in the way of meeting climate goals.
However, Sen. Matt Harrington (R-York) argued in favor of the current model because it gives the Legislature another opportunity to weigh in on a line after a route has been determined. This could be important because constituents could have issues with a line's route that wouldn't be known at the time of initial approval.
SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hill
an hour ago
- The Hill
Freedom will keep the city lights shining
The other side of the pond dropped into a brief but sobering relapse into the dark ages. Spain and Portugal suffered a massive electricity shortage in April, plunging them into darkness. It is no coincidence that this occurred only days after the country announced that so-called renewable energy (solar, wind, hydro) had supplied all the country's electricity for an entire day. Before the total blackout, one of Spain's utility companies also boasted that solar and wind supplied 40 percent of the nation's electricity last year. The government's obsession with phasing out fossil fuels in favor of renewables is squarely to blame. We can only avoid Europe's energy fumble by allowing property owners and businesses the freedom to exercise their ingenuity to tap our vast natural resources, fossil fuels included, to keep the lights on. If the market demands fossil fuels to meet our energy needs, we should give businesses the freedom to meet that demand. As we develop, our energy needs will only increase. This means we cannot afford to keep energy resources locked in the ground. As Alex Epstein explains in ' Fossil Future, ' the physics of fossil fuels are especially cost-effective because they have high 'energy density' compared to renewables. Higher productivity ultimately leads to increased income, life expectancy, and higher population growth. In short, freedom to develop resources brings prosperity. Our recent history underscores the importance of giving people the freedom to unleash our natural resources. In the early 2000s, California suffered recurring power blackouts partly because it failed to build enough new power plants. In August 2020, California experienced mass blackouts, this time due to insufficient fossil fuel sources when renewable energy sources went offline. Our energy needs will only grow as we fuel the AI technology revolution, which requires massive amounts of electricity. But despite our growing energy needs, calls for stricter regulations on natural resource development and use have continued to increase. In 2009, the U.S. House passed a cap-and-trade carbon emissions bill that would have limited companies' carbon emissions. (The Senate never voted on the bill.) New York has passed a ban on fossil fuel cooling and heating systems in new buildings, effective 2029. And California seeks to ban the sale of gas-powered vehicles starting in 2035. And it's not just fossil fuels the government is going after; it's virtually all natural resource development. Take the federal government's 2012 decision to restrict timber harvesting in parts of Louisiana, purportedly to protect a frog that had not lived in the area for 50 years. Or consider the federal government's 2021 decision to abruptly limit the amount and types of trees in Alaska that timber companies can harvest after those companies had already invested significant time and money into developing their timber operations. The prescription to fix energy shortages is more freedom to develop natural resources, not more restrictions. Property rights create the necessary incentives for developers to invest in energy projects by providing them with certainty that the government won't shut down their project after they have spent time and money on it. For example, the Biden administration halted the Keystone Pipeline Project by denying the necessary permits. Although President Trump announced that he would reverse the decision and make obtaining permits 'easy,' the private developers who were once interested in the project have reportedly ' moved on.' President Ronald Reagan once called America a ' shining city on a hill.' We are a 'beacon,' he said, 'for all the pilgrims from all the lost places who are hurtling through the darkness, toward home.' The shining light we have long offered the world is freedom, including the freedom to use our bounteous natural resources. We will keep the city light shining as we embrace that freedom, even if the rest of the world goes dark.
CNBC
an hour ago
- CNBC
Democrats slam GOP redistricting fight as 'cheating' as Texas Gov. Abbott threatens arrests
Democratic lawmakers on Sunday defended their colleagues' efforts in Texas to counter a GOP-led redistricting push, and chided President Donald Trump and Gov. Greg Abbott over what they argue is "cheating" and "outrageous." "[Abbott's] the one who is attempting, mid-decade here, at a time when, frankly, all of us are concerned about the future of democracy, he's literally helping whittle it away and licking the boots of his leader, Donald Trump," Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker told NBC News. Pritzker — whose state has become a haven for Texas Democrats protesting the GOP-led effort — rejected the idea that congressional maps in Illinois are politically gerrymandered, arguing that the maps were redrawn after the census, which, he said, is "how it's done in this country." "This is ... it's cheating," he said of the proposed Texas redistricting. "Donald Trump is a cheater. He cheats on his wives, he cheats at golf, and now he's trying to cheat the American people out of their votes." The White House did not immediately respond to CNBC's request for comment on Pritzker's remarks. The feud over the redrawn congressional maps in Texas has escalated in recent days, as Democratic lawmakers left the state to prevent Republicans from having a quorum in the state House. In Texas, a quorum is the number of members that need to be present in order to conduct business, according to the Texas House's website. Two-thirds of the elected members constitute a quorum in each house. The new maps could boost Republicans' chances of picking up five House seats in the state, giving the GOP an edge in what will likely be a razor-thin battle for control of the lower chamber next year. While Republicans in Texas press forward with their bid for new maps, Democratic lawmakers also said Sunday that the party has "got to fight back" against the redistricting plan. "Trump is the one who came up with the idea," Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., who caucuses with Democrats, said on CNN of redistricting. "It is undemocratic, it is outrageous," he said, while adding that Democrats "have no choice" but to fight back against the effort. "If Republicans are doing it, you have to respond, it's pathetic, but I think you have to respond," said Sanders, who has opposed gerrymandering in the past. New York Gov. Kathy Hochul said on Fox News that "these times call for fighting fire with fire," and suggested that the redistricting fight is taking place because Trump is concerned about next year's midterm elections. "Why are we here today? Because Donald Trump looked at the polls for next year," she said. Abbott, meanwhile, slammed the Democratic lawmakers who fled his state and again claimed that they will be arrested upon return. "If they show back up in the state of Texas, they will be arrested and taken to the Capitol," he said on Fox News. "If they want to evade that arrest, they're going to stay outside of the state of Texas for literally years." Abbott also threatened to keep the Texas legislature in a special session indefinitely until the matter is resolved. "I'm authorized to call a special session every 30 days. It lasts 30 days. And as soon as this one is over, I'm gonna call another one, then another one, then another, then another one," the governor said.
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
Longtime Biden aide testifies in GOP probe that former president aged on job but remained ‘fully engaged'
One of Joe Biden's former top communications advisers told the House Oversight Committee that she watched the former president age on the job but that he was always in command. Anita Dunn, the former senior adviser to the president for communications, is the latest former Biden aide to voluntarily testify before the Republican-led panel in its probe of the former president's cognitive decline and possible efforts to conceal it from the public. 'While I observed that President Biden aged physically during his time in office, which is something that happens to every president, he remained throughout my interactions with him fully engaged and clear in his directions and supervision,' Dunn said in her opening statement, obtained by CNN. To address an ongoing allegation that Biden did not make his own decisions, Dunn added: 'I did not observe White House staff making key decisions or exercising the powers of the presidency without President Biden's knowledge or consent.' In the closed-door interview, Dunn discussed the decision to not give the former president a cognitive test, two sources familiar with the testimony told CNN. One source familiar with the interview said Dunn testified that Biden's inner circle came to a consensus he should not take a cognitive test, concluding it would offer no political benefit. A source close to Dunn added that even though the group came to that conclusion, Dunn stated in the interview that they all felt he would pass one. Dunn also discussed the decision to not have Biden participate in an interview around the Super Bowl last year because of the focus at the time around the former president's handling of classified records, the sources added. The source familiar with the interview said Dunn claimed the decision was made because of information in former special counsel Robert Hur's report, which led to no charges against Biden but described him as 'well-meaning, elderly man with a poor memory.' The source close to Dunn pushed back on that characterization and said Dunn articulated the decision was made for Biden to not participate in a Super Bowl interview before the Hur report was released, and said the decision to not do so was because the then-president's inner circle thought the main media coverage would be about what Biden did with classified records and not about his policy decisions. Dunn had departed the administration in the wake of Biden's decision to step down from the 2024 Democratic ticket. Her testimony to the committee comes as the panel has interviewed top Biden White House aides in recent weeks as part of its intensifying investigation. A number of the former aides have sat for voluntary interviews. On Tuesday, the panel met with former deputy chief of staff for policy Bruce Reed, and former Biden counselor Steve Ricchetti and onetime senior adviser Mike Donilon sat for transcribed interviews last week. Several other Biden aides, however, have declined to cooperate with the committee's investigation and, after being subpoenaed to appear, invoked their Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination. White House physician Dr. Kevin O'Connor, former assistant to the president and senior adviser to the first lady Anthony Bernal and former assistant to the president and deputy chief of staff Annie Tomasini have all pleaded the Fifth. This story and headline have been updated with additional developments.
