Politics & Other Mistakes: Great northern stomp
Al Diamon
Democratic U.S. Rep. Michael Michaud of Maine’s 2nd District regularly shows up on lists of the least effective, least powerful, least respected and least intelligent members of Congress. So, how does Michaud keep getting re-elected by hefty margins?
It’s not as if the district – composed of the western, central and northern parts of the state – is overwhelmingly Democratic.
Republicans won this seat in every election between 1972 and 1992, usually by lopsided tallies. Even though the Dems have taken all the races since then, the GOP has won far more legislative contests in the area, and today controls nearly all its state Senate districts.
It’s true that the incumbent congressman has deep ties to the declining ranks of organized labor at the few remaining paper mills and the still-powerful bloc of Franco-American voters in the St. John Valley and Lewiston-Auburn area. But both groups have always been inherently conservative on social issues, thereby making them susceptible to appeals from Republicans.
Speaking of social issues, Michaud has a record that could charitably be characterized as squishy. He was ardently pro-life during the 10 terms he served in the Maine Legislature. But after his election to Congress a decade ago, he became considerably less predictable, to the point where the religious right now labels him as a supporter of legalized abortion, while liberals regard him as, at best, an unreliable ally in backing a woman’s right to choose. He’s also switched sides on gay rights issues, voting in favor in recent years.
For most of his constituents, though, the only crucial social issue is opposing any form of gun control, and there he’s solidly in line with his homies and the NRA.
Then, there’s the Michaud public-speaking style, which can best be described as taxidermed. While he can work a room, making small talk with the best of them, when the congressman gets near the podium or in front of a TV camera, he does a passable imitation of the undead. Only less animated and with worse makeup.
His public pronouncements contain lots of clichés (“It’s just a matter of setting priorities”), a few talking points prepared by his staff (“I believe in free trade. But it has to be fair trade”), no fresh ideas (“This is a call for us to work together”) and absolutely no original thinking (“We must ensure our businesses are not overtaxed; we must fund education to create a world-class work force; and we must create new jobs to keep our young people in Maine”).
One point in Michaud’s favor: Unlike most members of Congress, unless he’s pushed, he rarely says anything.
In spite of his handicaps, Michaud won his seat in 2002 by squeaking out a four-percentage-point victory over the GOP’s Kevin Raye, with much of that margin coming from mill towns that have since lost most of their jobs and their populations.
In 2004, he crushed Republican challenger Brian Hamel, a competent technocrat with no discernable skills in retail politics. Michaud grabbed 58 percent of the vote and won every town except the ones where Hamel and his relatives lived.
In 2006, the GOP tried a new strategy called Let’s Not Bother. The nominee was conservative kook Scott D’Amboise, who failed to attract even 30 percent of the vote. Two years later, the entertainingly unelectable John Frary did about as well. In 2010, Michaud sleepwalked through the campaign, but still beat Jason Levesque by 10 points, even in a year that saw Republicans win nearly everything else in the state.
Which brings us to 2012 and a rematch against Raye, who has spent much of the interim establishing himself as a voice for common sense in the state Senate, where he’s currently the chief presiding officer. Since 2002, Raye has worked hard at converting his image from that of a Washington insider (he had been U.S. Sen. Olympia Snowe’s chief of staff) to a Washington County insider (he and his wife run a mustard company in Eastport).
In ’02, Raye seemed stiff and uncomfortable on the campaign trail – and occasionally as incoherent as Michaud (he once said he’d be like a “dog on a pant leg” in trying to attract federal development money to northern Maine – I assume he meant biting, not humping). Today, he’s repressed his natural inclination to sound like an automaton (“We-must-be-vigilant-to-make-certain-Maine’s-needs-receive-the-attention-they-deserve”). And he’s raising sufficient money to be competitive.
Raye still has to overcome the LePage factor, the concern of some independents that Republican Gov. Paul LePage is a bumbling knot-head, and those who support the governor’s agenda, such as Raye, deserve to suffer for LePage’s bull-headedness. Given the likelihood this will be a close race, it could swing on how effectively Raye can balance himself between those who love the guv and those who hate him so much they’re willing to sacrifice Maine’s best interests for two more years of Michaud’s mediocrity.
Go all filibuster on me by emailing aldiamon@herniahill.net.
Entries(RSS)
No matter what the circumstances, it would be very hard for me to vote for Kevin Rey. Here's why: he proudly spoke at a gathering I attended and bragged about "knocking 39,000 people off of MaineCare." If taking health care away from folks is anything to brag about you are NOT my candidate of choice.
Amen. Who's paying for HIS health care?
The obvious question is why were these 39,000 people ever even allowed to become eligible for Mainecare in the first place.
The facts are that people move to Maine because our system is so generous.
I commend Kevin Raye and anyone else who has supported Legislation that reforms Maine's extremely generous welfare spending.
If those 39,000 lived in most other States they never would have received these benefits.
The answer to the question is....38 years of a philosophy of governing that has nearly bankrupted our state.
Go Kevin Raye ! Mike Michaud represents, stimulus spending, O'Bamacare, and the welfare state.
Horray for Raye. I know too many people gaming the system. We should toss everyone off Mainecare, revise the qualifications, and reenroll only those who need it. and every other public asssitance program.
Steve, if the 39,000 people are healthy and able to work, then they should go out and get a job or get training so they can find a job. I have seen more and more healthy individuals sitting at home collecting our heard eaned money becuase they are too lazy to work. Today, it is a choice once kids graduate high school to either go to work, go to college or stay at home and collect welfare! Since when was it a choice NOT to work?
If a person is too old or is disabled and can no longer support themselves, then yes, they should be allowed to collect welfare. That is what it was set up for, not as a lifestyle for the lazy. I'm sick of going to work every morning while others sit at home all day and have every little thing handed to them.
And I'd like to ask Al where I can find these "lists" he refers to. I surely think they would make good reading. I would be interested in who compiles these lists and who pays for them, so I can feel that they have no partisan bias, either way. Please Al, publish the names of these "lists" so we all can read them.
Obama just made it easier, too, by basically removing all previous BIPARTISAN requirements in order to receive welfare. Those requirements were put in place back in the Clinton days and were written in a bipartisan fashion. Who actually thinks people shouldn't have to work and still get paid? (as Lee said, there are circumstances where people do deserve welfare, but I would go as far as saying that 75% of the recipients are on it for the wrong reasons and could work if they WANTED to) Just remember, we are in the entitlement age and that won't change unless WE change it. Washington DC is broken.
Nonetheless, I'll be voting for Raye. Michaud is a socialist, just like Obama.
It should useful, to the people who care, to note here that Medicaid or MaineCare is not "welfare" it is healthccare. When businesspersons claim they can't find people to work it is often because those people are not healthy enough to go to work. Many of the 39,000 people Kevin Rey was talking about were working participants in Maine's tax system. They were paying income tax and especially sales tax, gasoline tax and contributing, either in rent or ownership to property tax. If we want and expect people to work (as I believe we should) we should help them get and stay healthy. I don't want to wrk next to people who can't accomplish much because they are sick, and I'll bet you don't either.
Each of us know how expensive health insurance is, and recently it has been shown, through research, that expansion of Medicaid decreased the death rate of those between 21 and 64 by 6%. That's a pretty major decrease; should Kevin Rey be proud that his ideas will increase that death rate by 6%?
Steve,,,If you dont like Kevin Raye,,fine. You have one vote to spend,go for it.
But what you seem to be skirting around is, People here are not complaining about ANYONE who legitimately qualifies for ANY service,welfare,healthcare.
People are complaining about the FRAUD that is rampant in our state.
Very simple. That's IT.
I think that point is pretty plain in the comments,,,"if you care" to actually read them.
The cheaters (that could work to contribute like the rest of us),,take resources away from all of us.
Why is THAT something to defend?
People here are not complaining about ANYONE who legitimately qualifies for ANY service,welfare,healthcare.
AskMeEyeNO
We should toss everyone off Mainecare
FTown Bryan
I believe the spike in pharmaceutical thefts is directly related to the increase in welfare dependency. It has been so easy to obtain a prescription for pain pills and have the State pay for it, now the State has begun the process of preventing abuse of the system. What happens to the undeserving recipient and their customers?
I knew a woman who moved to Maine because her State wouldn't pay for a home health nurse. I felt sorry for her until I realized that she only needed assistance because she was so grossly overweight that she couldn't get out of her recliner to use the bathroom, but she could drag herself to the vehicle and drive to BK, McD's or KFC every night for dinner.
Entitlement is a major problem with the would-be workforce. The biggest problem is how do we correct this issue without jeopardizing those who honestly need/deserve help?
As far as Michaud switching sides on gay rights (I'm not pledging support just raising the idea), perhaps he sees the money wasted by this bill repeatedly being brought to legislation. Think of the hundreds of thousands of dollars that have been wasted repeating the same arguments year after year. I'm not saying roll over on your beliefs, but sometimes it's wise to throw in the towel.
OK CGeorge,,,I dont think Steve will vote for you either.
What we have in Maine REALLY is a tangled web,,,,isn't it.
"What a Tangled Web they Weave,,,,
When they set out to Deceive".
It's so bungled up,,,maybe CitizenGeorge is right??
Start from square one,,,couldn't be much worse.
cgeorge
thanks for misquoting me. I said kick them all off AND rewrite the rules so only those that truly need it can reenroll.
typical liberal
Hi Ft your welcome. Actually I didn't misquote I took the statement out of context (probably just as wrong). But tell me how long do you think it would be between the time you "kick them all off" and when you "rewrite the rules so only those that truly need it can reenroll"
Despite the second clause of your quote many truly needy would be without benefits long enough to die from their medical conditions. You may not have thought it through and may not have been advocating for that outcome but that is in fact what would happen under your suggestion.
As for the typical liberal shot. In fact I am a registered republican and have been a conservative since I got out of adolescence. I just don't believe in irresponsible knee jerk reactions that kill people. I frankly agree that only the truly needy should be served and that the rules should be rewritten. However given the risk to those being served as a person who has seen how long such rule writing can take I would say the only responsible course of action would be to rewrite the rules first then remove those who do not meet the new responsible rules. That would be legislative and gubernatorial leadership.
Ask me,
I think you misunderstood my post. My fault for being to brief and vague.
Charlie Webster has all these conspiracy theories floating around in his head about thousands of people voting illegally and equally people with no money moving to Maine to take advantage of our social services.
Of course with the voter problem he couldn't find any town clerks to say it was a proble. I suspect the facts do not back up his claim about the immigrants moving in because of social services
The facts may or may not back up Mr Websters claim that people immigrate to Maine because of social services,,,,but the immigrants themselves say that is why they chose to come here. (Lewiston,,,).
"Facts" are kinda "Funny" like that,,,
Dontchaknow?
Look,,a noble and good thing to help out those less fortunate by taking them in.
And we should do that as a society.
The voices in my head say if we only have one dollar,,,,we cant give out 10 like we've done for decades.
If we do,,,it'll be us immigrating somewhere else eventually.
Hows that for a conspiracy theory?
Touchy subject but at least some people are brave enough to try and deal with it in a realistic way.
(knowing they'll be called greedy racists by a certain crowd).
Charlie might be crazy but,,,,,,,kudos.