U.S. House Democrats recently defied their sitting president by refusing to give him so-called “fast tracking” of his international trade deal, the Trans-Pacific Partnership. This was accomplished by voting against a worker protection provision, normally a Democratic assured yes vote. As the provision was tied to passage of fast tracking, voting against one stalled the other.

The admitted need for legislating financial offsets for workers whose jobs would be lost by implementing the trade deal highlights the absurd claims that such draconian trade “development” will benefit everyone.

Fast tracking wasn’t stopped in its tracks, but slowed, so the American people might consider why Obama’s normal adversaries are his TPP allies in this latest “don’t worry about the details” misdirection of our increasingly non-upwardly mobile, but uppermost serving, economy.

Meanwhile, here in Maine, our own chief executive is experiencing similar frustration in attempting to bamboozle the people.

Land for Maine’s Future voterapproved bonds remain in limbo because the governor seeks to “leverage” agreement from lawmakers to allow increased timber harvesting on state owned land, purportedly to aid heating assistance programs for low income Mainers.

Somehow, that altruistic political motivation, from a governor singularly opposed to seemingly all other assistance to Maine’s needy, has escaped public questioning. So much for LePage’s obsession that the press is relentlessly out to get him. Such private extraction of public resources would provide cash to the state, but it would generate far greater income to private interests often at odds with Maine’s land conservation efforts.

Defying America’s normally prevailing gridlock, Maine’s legislature has now passed a notably Republican sponsored bill to force LePage to unblock $11.5 million from those approved bonds, leveraging 30 million in private investment in Maine. The business of Maine, supposedly the governor’s avowed reason for holding office, might actually move forward as determined by its voters. Until LePage’s leadership, a twothirds majority of the legislature and statewide referendum approval was enough “will of the people” to be recognized as a directive to execute the law. Our Governor’s obstructionist understanding of the word “execute” speaks volumes as to his resistance to democratic rule whether or not that adjective is capitalized.

Some say such a bill is too drastic an overhaul of the current system of bond issuance just because LePage is playing a particularly frustrating version of gamesmanship. Others suggest that our legislature, while on a roll, should implement another previously unnecessary legislative tool, putting in place some mechanism for legally re-calling a sitting governor.

There is a very vague constitutional provision for impeachment, but a clearly stated: “The veto power of the Governor shall not extend to any measure approved by vote of the people.” The question is whether that is an impeachable offense, or tolerable unlawfulness.

LePage’s gameplan to eliminate Maine’s income tax was voted down 82-64. LePage swiftly retaliated by vetoing 10 Democratic bills having overwhelming bipartisan support, enough to override most of his political posturing. Bipartisan overturning of his ongoing vetoes continues.

A bigger defeat for the governor is the last minute passage of a compromised emergency budget deal which arrives virtually veto-proof in requiring two-thirds support in both chambers to achieve a state spending plan.

It supports broad income tax cuts and increased sales taxes, though not anywhere near what LePage insists upon. Mainers will get to keep more of their earned income while paying increased taxes on goods and services, though recreation and amusements will, in the final compromise, now remain largely untouched. Taxing ventriloquism, just one of the new revenue avenues proposed to offset a decrease in taxing income outright, is likely spared. “Read my lips,” once a no-new-taxes mantra, might humorously come to mind by anyone who can recognize such income tax vs sales tax trade-offs as just more taxation sleight of hand.

The artful illusion of shifting revenue’s heavy lifting to increased sales taxation, even if its regressive nature is offset by a “fairness credit,” is taxation hidden within a deceptive transaction rather than a transparent means of equitably sharing the costs of citizenship. Like “fast tracking,” tax shifting is all about redirecting the audiences’ attention.

The good news, whether the TPP is fast tracked or not, or how Maine’s budget deal is finally worked out, is that representative governance seems to have come alive again, with evidence that the will of the people can actually influence our political process.

Many believe that individual participation is pointless, though nonparticipation is assuredly unproductive. I routinely sign onto one petition or another daily. One might think such electronically bundled activism would be summarily dismissed, but, more and more, it seems to exert positive influence on the intermediate powers that be.

The power of the people, focused even slightly, can have a surprising effect.

Therefore, a bill has now been initially approved by Maine’s legislature to make referendums more difficult to enact. Thank you bear-baiting, which many credit for a successful coat-tailing effect on LePage’s strong re-election turnout.

The irony is that LePage has promised that if income tax abolition isn’t enacted by the legislature he’ll spearhead a citizen petition to force the issue.

———

Gary Anderson lives in Bath.