Gov. Mills could hardly have envisioned a more ill-timed presentation of her totally timely State of the State message. Earlier that day Washington’s impeachment fervor finally spilled over into the Senate. The spectacle of Donald Trump’s possible removal from office was now in the long-awaited center ring of the Swamp’s take-no-prisoners political circus. Despite that overwhelming national high drama and media feeding frenzy, Augusta’s own dog and pony show nevertheless commanded a compelling measure of inspiring leadership and institutional sanity, if only by comparison.

One year after her historic inauguration, Janet Mills’ address again championed a turning away from the polarizing legacy of her predecessor toward a more inclusive and constructive governance. Again, that predecessor was never made reference. Again, it was a feel-good hands-across-the-isle unifying oration. The thematic catchphrase of her speech was all about moving forward by overcoming partisan differences. After each of her proposals for bettering the lot of all Mainers, Mills would cajolingly reemphasize that “We can do this because we are not Washington, we are Maine.” “We” became the mantra within the mantra.

With true Dirigo spirit and Bicentennial pride, Maine’s first woman governor outlined her administration’s objectives to improve the welfare of every citizen, especially children. Her forward-looking centrist agenda of the past year would be built upon, part of a far-reaching 10-year economic development plan that would serve well for the next two hundred years.

Unfortunately, despite its immediate positive appeal and heartfelt optimism, that long-range objective remains bedeviled by the no small detail that a now 17-year-old Swedish environmental prodigy insists that the prospect of another two hundred years of planetary life is crucially dependent on carbon neutrality being realized in just 8 years, and economic development be damned. Janet Mills instead aligns herself with a far more economically palatable timetable of reaching that goal by 2045. Her fundamental commitment to mitigating the looming “existential threat” of global warming should certainly be applauded, but it remains to be seen if its touted boldness will be bold enough to leave Maine’s children an actually sustainable future, environmentally, ethically, or even economically.

Reversing her predecessor’s climate denial policies has garnered much deserved praise. So much so that she was honored last September by being the first sitting governor ever invited to speak before the U.N.’s Climate Action Summit, along with the likes of Greta Thunberg. No wonder she’s held as an exemplary practitioner of environmental political leadership. Sadly, she merits that distinction mostly because the majority of politicians are even less committed to any significant doomsday intervention. Maine leads in statehood environmental responsibility, even though largely myopically and incrementally. Connecting one dot at a time is seriously better than no activism at all, but engaging in an environmental version of wack-a-mole must be most soberly avoided if real planetary health is really one’s goal.

Mills’ vision of our environmental future remains blindly devoted to the believed absolute necessity of Maine’s broadband prowess and increased energy consumption. “5G” is another major mantra in her attempt towards a progressive environmental strategy that still ultimately gives way to the primary directive of economic development. 5G’s contribution to accelerating a “6^th species mass extinction” isn’t apparently an acknowledged concern, just as solar power’s mounting environmental toxicity will eventually be an elephant no room can ignore forever. Fossil fuel will remain the lifeblood of Maine’s traditional reliance on tourism for way, way too long. A systemic transfusion of electric vehicles isn’t likely to occur anytime soon enough for Thunberg’s calculus. Likely, that will take place about the same time Red’s Eats resorts to selling Canadian lobster rolls.

More and more, we are living a ones and zeros existence. Soon, few will recall a time when electricity wasn’t needed for virtually all aspects of everyday life. Tragically, the planet’s survival remains at direct odds with our runaway e-economic addiction’s exponential demand for energy. A truly visionary governance would stop being an enabler of that destructive dependency. Regrettably, in our new coronavirus driven tele-survivalism such governance is even less likely to be heeded.

The panic of a pandemic understandably focuses all attention on that existential threat’s terrifying immediacy. Try as it might, governance can’t seek refuge in its customary subterfuge. Like it or not, partisan differences and economic self-interests need take a back seat to a we’re-all-in-this-together solidarity. All to the good. Better still if such motivation can somehow be deemed applicable to saving the planet itself. Overcoming this crisis just to return to an environmentally catastrophic business as usual would be a tragedy of even greater preventable consequence.

Gary Anderson lives in Bath.

Copy the Story Link

Comments are not available on this story.