The November ballot will be more important than ever for Maine. As if a presidential election isn’t enough, Maine will also be voting for U.S. Congress, U.S. Senate and local races. Regardless of how you’ll vote for other races or your political party, please vote to keep Susan Collins as our U.S. senator.

Susan Collins (R) is a real Mainer. She was born and raised in Caribou, Maine. When she’s not in Washington, D.C., she lives in Bangor. Her main opponent, Sara Gideon (D), is from Rhode Island. Gideon has spent most of her life outside of Maine. Gideon came to Maine only to run for State house. Such a relative newcomer doesn’t know about our culture and our ways, and should not be trying to govern over us and implement change. There’s a reason that Mainers infamously don’t like “people from away.”

Collins has represented Maine in the Senate for 23 years now. Some would argue that this makes her a “career politician.” However, this actually provides her valuable experience. Donald Trump was a political outsider, but it’s no secret that many disapprove of him now. 

Collins is on many committees, and also chairs many of them. She is a powerful senator. If a political outsider (like any of her three opponents) is elected, then Maine will lose substantial clout in Washington. A freshman senator won’t be listened to or respected like Susan Collins. Maine will be overlooked as another tiny, rural and unimportant state if Collins loses. 

Collins is one of the most bipartisan senators in office. She works across the aisle, instead of most senators voting for their party’s opinion every time. This May, Collins was ranked as the most bipartisan senator in office for the seventh consecutive year in a Georgetown study. Nothing can be accomplished with a “rubber stamp” senator.

Collins is the only candidate with any foreign policy experience. Her opponents include Max Linn (a financial planner), Lisa Savage (a schoolteacher) and Gideon. Gideon only has experience at the state level. The Senate debates have focused on Maine, but a U.S. senator makes decisions regarding the entire nation and its place in the world.

Gideon touts changing the seating arrangement in the Statehouse as her “big accomplishment”; this makes no difference in Mainers’ lives. Gideon has been pushed for by “big money” from out of state lobbyists. Gideon couldn’t even be bothered to attend the Democratic primary debates, and infamously shut down the Statehouse during the COVID-19 crisis.

NPR describes Collins’ brand as “the moderate Republican-independent, a workhorse… powerful within her own party, even as Democrats sought her out as a partner.” Collins is a highly experienced, respected, bipartisan and moderate senator. She works hard to actually get things done.

Regardless of your political party, please vote for Susan Collins for U.S. Senate. We need more senators like her who put progress in front of politics.

With graduation season upon us, we celebrate our seniors’ accomplishments. But as thousands of graduates will soon flood the job market and struggle to pay off astronomically high student loans, our state should promote other paths to success besides a college diploma.

High school seniors are constantly told to attend college. However, college is not the only path to success, and we actually need more people to explore alternative routes. Entering the workforce directly, joining the military and learning a trade are all excellent alternatives to attending college.

The astoundingly high rates of high school seniors who go to college creates degree inflation. The Department of Labor (DoL) notes how in 1960, only 46% of high school graduates enrolled in college; today, that number has increased to 70%. While not all college students actually graduate, and 20% drop out after their first year, the U.S. Census Bureau states that over one-third of American adults have a college degree. This will only continue to increase since more high school graduates than ever are going to college.

With so many people going to college, the once-prestigious college degree is becoming commonplace. A college diploma has become the new high school diploma. When everyone has a college degree, it will not be as valuable to employers. Instead of giving an advantage, it will be a requirement. Increasingly, we are seeing how having a college degree is a prerequisite to employment for even entry-level workers. Bank tellers, secretaries, and other entry-level positions should not have to have a college degree in order to be considered for employment.

Not everyone is cut out for college. Unlike in previous decades, universities are not being as selective as they should be. For example, the University of Maine has about an 80% admissions rate. Throughout college, I have personally been surprised by how many of my classmates have not known basic academic skills such as proper citations, paragraph structures or even proper sentence formation. This could be tied to grade inflation, which is when instructors give passing or honorable grades to a disproportionately high number of students.

These students may be better suited to pursuing other skills, such as entering the labor force or pursuing a trade. Academic skills are only one possible set of talents, and in order to maintain the prestige and employment potential of a college degree, we need the best candidates possible to actually pursue these degrees.

Additionally, the student debt crisis could easily become the next great bubble. The 2008 housing bubble arose from banks too liberally giving loans, but now we are seeing universities too liberally admitting and handing out diplomas to undeserving candidates.

CNBC identifies how currently, 44 million Americans have $1.6 trillion in student debt, over 50% of college students take on debt and student debt has more than doubled since 2010. The Washington Post identifies how around half of college students travel out of state, with rates especially high in New England. This creates greater student debt due to higher out of state tuition costs.

We also need more blue-collar workers and tradespeople. The Atlantic notes how college graduation can increase an individual’s lifetime earnings, but actually does not contribute to their community or national economy. NPR describes how, with more people attending college, there is a shocking shortage of tradespeople. The DoL also shows how the increase in high school graduates’ college attendance over the decades is correlated with declines in their labor force participation. We have enough people competing for white-collar jobs, but we need more blue-collar tradespeople. Carpenters, plumbers, electricians, truck drivers and other blue-collar workers are our economy’s backbone.

We have too many people going to college. This influx of college students diminishes the competitiveness of a college diploma, perpetuates massive student debt and severely deprives our country of quintessential tradespeople. Some individuals should pursue other opportunities like a trade, the military or some other necessary career. If not, one might need an accounting degree to apply to be a cashier.

In Maine and across the nation, policymakers have worked to create more affordable housing. This February, the Maine State Legislature enacted a bill which will create an $80 million affordable housing tax credit. The Maine State Housing Authority will now be able to issue as much as $25 million annually into creating and supporting affordable housing for seniors, individuals in rural areas, and low-income individuals. The Portland Press Herald states that last December, Maine’s Housing Department issued $6.8 million to create 275 new affordable-housing units in central and southern Maine. In Bangor, affordable housing apartments are being constructed near Essex Street and Grandview Avenue. 

With the housing shortage nationwide and in Maine, policymakers strive to lower housing costs by constructing more housing and subsidizing affordable housing and rents. In reality, these sweeping efforts to increase affordable housing will not economically or socially benefit Maine.

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) states that the U.S. has faster land development rates than population growth rates. While there is a housing shortage, it is unsustainable to develop land at a faster rate than the population is actually growing. This urban sprawl is abundantly clear in Maine. 

In the Bangor region, rural areas and other parts of the state, land areas that were once forested, fielded, agricultural or only partially-developed now have abundant housing. The EPA reports that this rapid urbanization increases per capita air pollution, total waste and sewage, chemical usage and land needed to create parking. Clearcutting areas for housing destroys ecosystems, encroaches upon wildlife habitats and results in more wild animals in residential neighborhoods.

The U.S. Census Bureau shows how population density has nearly doubled between 1950 and 2010. Maine’s efforts to increase affordable housing only contributes to an unsustainably high level of urban sprawl, which poses environmental and health hazards.

The Maine Housing Authority’s (MHA) new $80 million tax credit will devote between 30-50% of the credit to affordable housing for elderly and/or rural populations. This means that the MHA could spend as much as 50-70% of its funds to provide affordable housing for low-income, urban populations. Devoting such a copious amount of funds will not result in economic growth. 

Another problem in Maine is that young people often move to other states. The Maine Wire describes how Maine’s lack of quintessential employees is worsened by both a lack of economic stimulation and overly high or complex taxes in Maine. These tax credits to be issued to low-income individuals and landlords will only create a larger tax burden for Maine’s working-class people. Higher taxes for Maine’s workers will not encourage young people to stay in Maine.

Maine’s recent attempts to increase affordable housing only contribute to urban sprawl, a greater tax burden on our working class and a lesser incentive for young workers to stay in Maine. This affordable housing will also provide greater incentives for unemployed individuals to move to Maine or come to our service centers. Maine’s greater affordable housing will not en

Before adjourning three weeks early, the Maine state legislature was considering a new bill entitled “LD 1492: An Act to Reform Drug Sentencing Laws.” With the bill’s passage, Maine would see drastically relaxed regulations regarding drug possession and trafficking. This bill would punish society instead of drug dealers and users and thus is not the legislature Maine needs.

The bill would greatly loosen Maine’s drug conviction standards. Under this bill, possession of heroin or fentanyl powder would no longer be classified as either “trafficking” or “furnishing.” Additionally, an individual could possess 17.5 times as much heroin, oxycodone, methamphetamine or fentanyl powder in order to be a “schedule W” offender which is the most serious drug offense. Representative Charlotte Warren, the bill’s sponsor, argues that Maine has overly harsh and punitive drug laws compared to other states. Warren claims that women, minorities and families are unfairly impacted by severe drug restrictions and that a more rehabilitative approach would be more effective. Though well intentioned, this legislature is encouraging the toleration of drug abuse, which it should not.

This bill is part of a broader state effort to relax penalties for drug usage and selling, like when Maine voters legalized recreational marijuana in 2016. According to the Bangor Daily News, certain candidates for the 2019 Bangor city council election argued that Bangor’s police department should act more leniently towards drugs, and construct “supervised injection sites” where the city would legally provide drug users with clean needles. The state has also pushed for Narcolexone to be available in schools and community hubs to reverse overdose symptoms. Now, we are seeing the legislature propose this bill, LD 1492, which would largely decriminalize drug usage and trafficking of heroin, cocaine, oxycodone, and others.

These efforts to decriminalize and normalize drug usage are unacceptable. It is understood that the logic behind this bill is to “give a second chance,” or to rehabilitate instead of convict. Instead, our state is increasingly accommodating drug users and dealers. Drugs do not exist in a vacuum and society bears the burden of reckless individuals who decide to use drugs. The National Center for Biotechnology Information (NCBI) reports that as high as 70% of male prisoners are drug abusers. The U.S. Department of Justice reports that upwards of 25% of any violent or property crimes pertain to drug usage, over 60% of burglaries or robberies are done by drug users and over 12% of all violent offenses are to obtain drug money. According to the Bureau of Justice Statistics, 30-60% of prison populations regularly use drugs, and 70% of local jail inmates had committed a drug offense. Without fear of punishment, criminals will have greater incentives to purchase, sell and use drugs.

The Federal Bureau of Prisons (BOP) even states that: “Substance abuse affects … society as a whole through increases in crime, domestic violence, highway fatalities, incarceration, and healthcare costs.” Contrary to certain contemporary ideologies, drug addiction is not a disease. It is a choice. People who choose to ingest toxic substances, knowing that they are illegal, addictive and correlated with violence, should be held accountable for their actions. Legalizing drugs would punish society with higher costs and crime rates, instead of punishing drug dealers.

The BOP recommends that state and local prisons should “wean” inmates off of drugs through administering smaller doses of less severe versions of the addictive substances. These practices have been implemented in prisons nationwide. However, unless the withdrawal symptoms would be lethal or otherwise severely damaging, there is no need to spend taxpayer dollars on accommodating drug abusers with synthetic drugs to reduce withdrawal symptoms. With or without access to drugs, prisoners will “dry out” in prison. Our nation and state must stop accommodating criminals who engage in destructive behaviors that have proven correlations to adverse effects in society. Every drug user’s addiction begins with their first decision to ingest drugs.

It is ridiculous that our legislature is even considering decriminalizing dangerous drugs. By passing this bill into law, our state would not be rehabilitating drug users; it would instead be enabling them. Considering how the National Institute on Drug Abuse states that Maine had 360 deaths from opioid overdoses in 2017, we should not be legalizing the use or sale of such drugs. This statistic does not even include all of the other crimes surrounding drug addictions, such as burglaries, theft, assaults and others. Drugs destroy lives, families and communities, but enabling drug dealers and criminals is not the answer.

Instead of legalizing drugs, our state should focus more on: educating our youth about the dangers of drugs; more closely monitoring “big pharma” for pushing doctors to sell addictive painkillers; cracking down on drug dealers with trained law enforcement; penalizing drug selling and abuse with the “teeth” needed to discourage abuse; and not accommodating citizens or inmates by giving them access to drugs. 

On March 3, Mainers will vote on a contentious referendum question deciding whether we should repeal Legislative Document 798. This is a state law signed into effect by Gov. Janet Mills that enforces mandatory vaccinations for public school students. While vaccinations are life-saving, quintessential and should be voluntarily given to students, this law is a gross overreach of governmental authority.

The religious rights of Mainers should be respected. Some citizens have a legitimate religious aversion, such as the Church of Christ, and some branches of the Catholic Church, to placing certain substances inside of their bodies. Other comparable religious belief-based traditions include how some practicing Jews do not eat certain meats, certain religions disagree with tattoos or body piercings, some Christians disagree with premarital sex, devout Muslim women wear hijabs and others. It would be unthinkable to force these religious individuals to perform acts contrary to their beliefs. Considering how the 14th Amendment interprets the Bill of Rights to also apply to the states, the religious free exercise clause of the First Amendment also applies. This is reflected in the Maine State Constitution. Our state has no authority to infringe on our citizens’ free exercise of religion.

Forcing religious practitioners, principally certain devout Christians, to take action that directly violates their religion is unconstitutional. Just as students are rightfully not required to pray in schools under the First Amendment’s religious establishment clause, religious students should not be required to mandatorily get vaccinated under the First Amendment’s religious free exercise clause.

There have been some grievances about the Yes-on-1 campaign’s tactics, but this does not detract from this law impeding religious liberty and personal autonomy. For example, one recent OpEd in “The Maine Campus” argues that the groups opposing this law have a deliberately vague campaign. As opposed to focusing their campaign on the heart of the referendum, allowing religious and philosophical vaccination exemptions, these groups have argued that citizens should vote yes on question one in order to “reject big pharma.” These groups are working to garner more support by framing the referendum on rejecting large pharmaceutical companies that allegedly push for their medicines, including vaccinations, to be sold. This previous OpEd rightly notes how advocacy groups should not confuse voters by framing issues in ways that would gain more support. Mainers should educate themselves to know the actual repercussions of ballot questions. However, just because the groups that advocate for repealing mandatory vaccines have used some questionable tactics does not mean that Mainers should ignore the benefits of repealing mandatory vaccines.

As a counterpoint, “The Bangor Daily News” even states that pharmaceutical companies have contributed over $1.4 million in campaign contributions since 2008. Additionally, Yes-on-1 leader Cara Sacks argues how these same companies that have helped create the opioid epidemic could have dubious motives in requiring vaccines, such as a vested financial stake. On countless issues, advocacy groups on both sides of the political spectrum use misleading tactics. Despite some lobbyists’ questionable campaign, Maine parents should still be able to choose whether or not to vaccinate their own children. 

Gov. Mills’ law, which removes these religious or personal exemptions from receiving vaccinations, sharply contrasts the rest of the nation. The National Conference of State Legislatures notes how Maine is only one of five states that does not permit religious or personal exemptions from vaccinations. Maine legislators should have seen how extreme this law is in comparison to other states before passing it. Parents and children should have autonomy over their own bodies. If vaccinations are contrary to one’s religious beliefs, one should not be forced to inject a substance into one’s body. Maine should allow parents to make these deeply personal choices about their children for themselves.

This law also does not consider extenuating circumstances. For example, certain online academies have their students classified as public school students. This law makes it so that even these online public school students must mandatorily be vaccinated, despite their risk of contagion being greatly reduced due to their drastically limited interaction with other students. While most students probably should be vaccinated, it is frightening that our state government is forcing us to vaccinate our children. Personal autonomy and liberty with one’s own body are not light matters.

Vote yes on question one. This Maine law must be overturned. This law is an appalling overstep of our state government, as it violates the religious freedom of Maine parents and children. This law also contrasts most other states in the nation and does not consider special circumstances. Instead of forcing public school students to get vaccinated, communities should have stronger discussion and education about the benefits, or disadvantages, of getting vaccinated. This law seems positive, but it is a slippery slope to voluntarily surrender any right to a government. Like getting vaccinated, giving to charity is also a good thing; however, the government should not impose a law that mandates it.

Mainers are polarized over whether or not to allow Central Maine Power (CMP) to build its 145-mile long corridor through western Maine. CMP wishes to deliver hydroelectric energy from Canada to Massachusetts through this corridor. Advocates of the corridor allege that allowing the corridor to be built will create Maine jobs, will cost Maine nothing since Massachusetts is paying for it, will promote clean hydroelectric energy instead of fossil fuels and will largely be built alongside existing power lines so as to not be more destructive of Maine’s wilderness than necessary. However, this argument is flawed as this corridor offers more problems than gains for Maine.

Creating the corridor would not economically benefit Maine. Advocates claim that creating this corridor would create 1,600 Maine jobs. However, these jobs would only be temporary. Maine needs long term economic development based on sustainable careers, not temporary jobs that expire in a few years. CentralMaine.com even states that CMP has not confirmed if all 1,600 of these temporary jobs will be fulfilled by Mainers. The $10 million penalty that CMP recently paid to the Maine Public Utilities Commission for wrongful billing, customer complaints and price hikes only attests to the power giant’s financial greed. 

The National Resources Council of Maine (NRCM) states that the corridor will not create any new net power. Instead, it will only direct hydroelectric power originally created for New York or Ontario to Massachusetts instead. The corridor also serves the Canadian company Hydro-Electric, instead of allowing a Maine company to possibly fill this need. CMP, Hydro-Quebec and Massachusetts will see benefits, but Maine will only see temporary jobs and a disruption of our western woods, all for Massachusetts to derive energy which would have been used elsewhere.

The CMP corridor will immensely disrupt our natural resources. Advocates argue that it will mostly be built alongside existing power lines and that part of it will go beneath the Kennebec River. However, CMP will still need to cut an additional 53 miles through the Maine woods, and there will be some widening of paths. The Portland Press Herald describes how some areas may be wider than 250 feet. Additionally, the Land Use Planning Commission (LUPC) argues that drilling to place power lines beneath the Kennebec River, while preserving the scenery, would still be tremendously expensive and ecologically disruptive. Bill Gilmore of the LUPC argues that allowing this corridor to be built could establish a dangerous precedent since it will intersect the largest section of wilderness east of the Mississippi. These environmental decisions should not be made based on short term economic gains and temporary jobs. Considering how over 20 towns have rescinded support for the corridor, and CMP still needs permission from the Maine Department of Environmental Protection, many Mainers see how disruptive the power corridor will be to our quintessential forests.

Despite what CMP and its advocates proclaim, the corridor will not actually promote clean energy. Even Massachusetts’ own attorney general argues that this corridor will likely not reduce toxic carbon emissions. Despite the proposed corridor linking hydroelectric power from Canada to Massachusetts, Hydro-Quebec will still need to provide power to the customers it is bypassing in order to serve Massachusetts. This power to Hydro-Quebec’s original customers will likely be produced by burning fossil fuels. The NRCM argues that this corridor is only using existing hydroelectric power instead of generating new sources of clean energy, so it will not reduce CO2 emissions at all. Instead, deforesting over 50 miles of the Maine woods will harm the environment. While hydroelectric power has environmental potential, the construction of dams and turbines also poses environmental risks. Opponents of the corridor also claim that the corridor would impact deer, trout, and other animals, due to blocking or removing parts of their habitats.

The CMP corridor is an atrocious deal for Maine. Maine would not economically benefit, the corridor would be detrimental to our western forests, and the corridor does not promote clean energy. If this issue comes on the ballot this November, consider voting against the reckless CMP corridor.