Defunding sanctuary cities not Executive Branch’s decision

A guest columnist has stereotyped so-called “sanctuary cities” as dangerous places, equating their resident aliens with rampant “criminality.” He alleged without any factual basis that such cities are harboring convicted murderers, rapists and kidnappers. He proposes that the federal government should “cripple” sanctuary cities by cutting money to them. What he does not state is that Trump already tried to do this by Executive Order 13768 in January 2017. The order attempted to disqualify “sanctuary jurisdictions” from federal grants. San Francisco and others immediately challenged it in Federal District Court. The court issued a permanent injunction against implementation. On Aug. 1, 2018, the Ninth Circuit upheld that decision.

The key point in these decisions was that the U.S. Constitution expressly grants spending powers only to Congress. The Executive may not refuse to spend funds appropriated by Congress. Moreover, as the Ninth Circuit noted, Congress had repeatedly considered and rejected defunding alleged sanctuary cities.

Even more ridiculous, the columnist asserts that defunding sanctuary cities would “avoid the dramatic arrest process” that creates negative press coverage for the administration. This point is laughable. The current administration basks in media coverage of its bullying tactics.

Repeating lies about rampant “criminality” does not make them true.

Lucinda E. White, attorney at law,
Freeport

Other side not represented in digester article

Last Friday’s article on last Monday’s council workshop about the sludge biosolids digester proposal at the Landing gives plenty of coverage to Viridi, the developer, but less to the many compelling comments and criticisms by citizens and councilors. The chambers were nearly full and included many residents from the Landing and nearby neighborhoods. No residents favored the proposal. The article introduces a complex project with many risks to the health and wellbeing of Brunswick. I’ll aim for simplicity in my overview of the issues that follows.

Advertisement

• Why add more PFAS to the Landing and surrounding area when we already are struggling to remove and remediate the existing PFAS? Sludge with PFAS would be trucked in from all of Maine and likely neighboring states.

• The digester technologies for PFAS are not yet scientifically proven, and this would be Viridi’s first anaerobic digester. Digester effluent with PFAS would go into the Brunswick sewer system and then the Androscoggin, Harpswell Cove and Casco Bay.

• Who would want one to two sludge tanker trucks per hour driving through Cook’s Corner neighborhoods and commercial districts? When pressed by Councilor Wilson, Viridi admitted they might be trucking in out-of-state sludge to meet their quotas. Casella is their trucking and business partner.

• Maine already has a state of the art biosolids processing facility fully permitted and under construction by Waste Management at their Crossroads Landfill in Norridgewock. It can handle all of the municipal sludge in Maine. Portland is planning a similar biosolids plant.

• Why site the Viridi digester plant so far away from where the processed digestate will be trucked to — Juniper Hill near Orono, which Casella owns?

• Why did MRRA sign an agreement with Viridi before consulting with or notifying the town?

Advertisement

Bruce Kantner,
Brunswick

Support Mills’ state tobacco taxes to lessen cancer deaths

This Tuesday, Feb. 4, marks World No Cancer Day, a day to raise awareness about the global burden of cancer. Here in Maine there is an action we can take that would have a substantial impact — an increase in the state tobacco tax.

In Maine, the American Cancer Society estimates that 11,000 people will be diagnosed with cancer in 2025, and about 3,500 will die of the disease. Over a third of cancer deaths in Maine are related to tobacco use, so if we can help Mainers quit these troublesome habits we can reduce the suffering and even death that might otherwise occur.

Over decades, surveys have shown that an increase in the cost of a tobacco product leads to more people trying to quit their nicotine addiction and a decrease in the number of teenagers picking up the habit. For this reason, I strongly support Gov. Mills’ proposal to increase the tobacco tax by $1 per cigarette pack. Taxes on other tobacco products would also be raised a proportional amount.

This increase might help as many as 3,200 Maine adults to quit smoking and also might result in a 7% decrease in youth smoking rates. It’s astounding to try and visualize the drop in suffering and death this change might cause.

Please, in honor of World No Cancer Day, support the Mills’ administration proposal to increase the state tobacco taxes. This might even save a life near you!

Peter Bridgman, MD,
volunteer, American Cancer Society Cancer Action Network,
Yarmouth

Join the Conversation

Please sign into your Press Herald account to participate in conversations below. If you do not have an account, you can register or subscribe. Questions? Please see our FAQs.

filed under: