Now more than ever we must seek out opportunities to help Maine residents, no matter their age, keep food on the table. If we work together, we can make a huge difference!

On May 11, 2013, for the 3rd year, AARP and AARP Foundation will be working with local chapters of The United Way and other groups on Stamp Out Hunger, the nation’s largest single-day food drive. This is the 21st year of this effort, which is hosted by the National Association of Letter Carriers and the U.S. Postal Service.

Taking part in this great initiative is easy! On May 11th, letter carriers across the country will collect non-perishable food donations from their postal customers at the same time as they deliver the mail. They – in some cases with the help of volunteers – will then deliver these donations to a local food bank or pantry. Households nationwide will be alerted to the opportunity to participate in this food drive through a postcard or bag delivered to their home. This is a terrific and easy way to help those in need in every community across the state.

If you are willing, ask your postal carrier how you can help on the actual pick-up day of May 11th. They will be happy to have an extra pair of hands to assist them with loading the food bags. Many Stamp Out Hunger volunteers take it a step further and use their own car to pick up the food donations and either deliver them to a drop-off point or to the local food pantry. However you can help, you’ll be making a huge difference and your efforts will be greatly appreciated.

It is worth noting that in a 2011 published report, AARP Foundation revealed that hunger among older Americans has jumped nearly 80 percent in just ten years. It’s a shocking fact that of the 50 million Americans presently at risk of hunger across the country, 9 million are age 50 and older.

Unfortunately, the statistics for Maine are also shocking. In each of the categories measured in the report, Maine fared very poorly when compared to other New England states. In some cases, Maine had the worst statistics for the entire Northeast region.

You can find more information about Stamp Out Hunger at http://www.nalc.org/commun/foodrive/. Please tell your friends and neighbors about Stamp Out Hunger day on May 11th and, on behalf of AARP Maine, thank you for taking the help others through this great initiative.

About the Author

Jane Margesson

Jane Margesson is the Communications Director for AARP in Maine. She can be reached at 1-866-554-5380 or aarpme@aarp.org.

The post AARP News You Can Use – Help AARP Stamp Out Hunger in Maine appeared first on Exploring Lincoln.

The Democrats, senators Seth Goodall (D-Richmond) and Emily Cain, (D-Orono), along with representatives Mark Dion, (D-Portland), Nate Libby, (D-Lewiston), and Sara Gideon, (D-Freeport), hope the act will produce the revenue needed to promote the growth of the state government.

These goals appear contradictory but there’s a clear logic on both sides. Republicans have long advocated reducing income and estate taxes in the hope of attracting and stimulating business enterprise. This bill would achieve both goals. Democrats know that the state can’t finance its programs and services without raising taxes. The bill will increase our sales taxes by one percent and broaden them by eliminating all exemptions, including those on food, but not on medical care and education.

The Republicans involved “pitched” their plan to Governor LePage a few days ago and found his reaction reserved. As of this writing he continues to suspend judgment until he has an opportunity to study the details in full. Republican Senate Leader Michael Thibodeau of Winterport spoke for many Republicans when he said reduction in state spending is the only feasible and appropriate response to the budget bloat.

Comments for leading Democrats do not suggest enthusiastic support. Most of them express warm approval of the show of bipartisan compromise from the eleven legislators who put the bill together. They understand that many voters just like the sound “bipartisan compromise.” It gives them a warm feeling and makes them feel as if something is being done.

I know the Republicans involved and can testify that they agree with Senator Thibodeau that a reduction in the size of our government is the optimum goal. They believe, however, that the Democratic legislative majority will not permit this and doubt the voters will support further reductions. In short, they believe the only way forward is a compromise that will allow measures designed to stimulate economic growth.

It’s impossible to say how many Democrats share belief in tax reductions and an expanded private economy as a source of increased revenues. Few of the are willing to endorse the concept or even argue against it. House Speaker Marks Eves tells us that the Democrats’ “litmus test is whether the bill will make the tax code more or less progressive,” i.e., their main concern is what they choose to call “fairness.”

Voters with some immunity to political sucker-bait will find this a little strange. If we take his words at face value Senator Eves either believes that the huge budget overhang is a matter of secondary concern, or that “fairness” can somehow pay the state’s bills.

Leaving aside the feel-good rhetoric, the plain fact is that the state government can’t pay its bills without either raising taxes or reducing its expenditures. Liberal Democrats like to create the impression that the problem will be solved by “taxing the rich.” Those few voters who pay close attention to their newspapers will have noticed the absence of any concrete figures on how much money they expect to raise by this means. That’s because they know the “ rich” willing to remain in the state to be fleeced are nowhere numerous enough.

They know they will need tax increases across the board to sustain the government they have created, but are unwilling to say as much.

About the Author

John Frary

Professor John Frary of Farmington, Maine, is a former US Congress candidate and retired history professor, a Board Member of Maine Taypayers United and an associate editor of the International Military Encyclopedia, and can be reached at jfrary8070@aol.com.

The post The Frary Home Companion – A Pro-Growth Alliance In Augusta appeared first on Exploring Lincoln.

His argument was that there is a national consensus in favor of gun control but none in Washington, partially owing to a few Democratic senators from red states, but mostly from the Republican senators. He supports his thesis by a Post-ABC News poll reporting that 60 percent of people in gun-owning households could support a politician with whom they disagreed on gun control if they agreed with that person on other issues.

He finds further evidence in an e-mail from Associate Professor Sean Therriault at the University of Texas in Austin, author of “The Gingrich Senators: The Roots of Partisan Warfare in Congress.” Liberal columnists always have addresses of liberal professors ready at hand to explain how “America” thinks. It usually turns out that American thinks they way liberals think, although they routinely forget to think at their polling places.

The journalist and professor agrees that the failure of bipartisan accord on the Manchin-Toomey compromise, the bipartisan budget commission, the Gang of Six’s deficit reduction plan and the budget Supercommittee expose “how dysfunctional Congress has become.”

They clearly assume that “America” outside of Washington yearns for bipartisan solutions which Congress declines to deliver. The president, by the way, is not part of Washington for purposes of their thesis. But is it true the America is a bipartisan country?

All their polling numbers seem to tell us is that sixty percent of those responding may be willing to agree to a gun control bill if they can get satisfaction on other issues. They give no grounds for believing these people are bipartisan on those other issues. For all we can say a majority of Americans understand bipartisan solutions to be in agreement with their side of one, two or all the important questions of the day.

The more important defect in their thinking is the apparent belief that a 60% majority is sufficiently bipartisan. It seems like it at first glance but the problem with the 40% of dissenting gun owners, is the intensity of their disagreement.

The Prohibition Amendment received support of over two-thirds of both houses of Congress and three quarters of the state legislature. That appeared to qualify as a national consensus on the booze issue, but it immediately became apparent that a substantial percentage of the population weren’t aboard the consensus bus. Many among those who went along for the ride were did not favor the measures necessary to force the will of the majority on the parched minority.

Are we to believe that the millions of people who regard gun ownership as a constitutional right are going to be less resistant than those citizens of an earlier time who were devoted to their bottles, kegs, and jars? Dan Balz and Sean Therriault don’t appear to understand that there’s a wider gulf between their gunless social circles and the rest of America then they realize.

About the Author

John Frary

Professor John Frary of Farmington, Maine, is a former US Congress candidate and retired history professor, a Board Member of Maine Taypayers United and an associate editor of the International Military Encyclopedia, and can be reached at jfrary8070@aol.com.

The post The Frary Home Companion – Guns, Washington, and America appeared first on Exploring Lincoln.

The week of April 22nd is National Volunteer Week and at AARP Maine, we are grateful and honored to work with hundreds of extraordinary volunteers every year.  The work of these dedicated individuals propels AARP’s mission “to serve, not to be served.”  This phrase was coined by our founder, Dr. Ethel Percy Andrus, more than 50 years ago and it is certainly still true today.

As State Director, I am privileged to work side-by-side with many of our volunteers in Maine.  Together, we give speeches, testify at the state house on issues of importance to our members, meet with members of Congress and the state legislature, engage with members of the media and community leaders, participate in planning activities at the AARP Maine State Office, train other volunteers and, along with the state office staff, help direct many of our campaigns. I know firsthand that it is the incredible hard work and dedication of every one of our volunteers that makes it possible for AARP to accomplish all that it does on behalf of the 230,000 members we serve in Maine.

I would like to point out a few highlights of achievement from the last few months.  First of all, you may have taken an AARP Driver Safety course which is administered through AARP Foundation.  You may not have known this, but the program is taught and managed entirely by volunteers here in Maine and across the nation!   Did you file your state and federal income taxes through the AARP Foundation Tax-Aide program in 2013?  Those returns, more than 22,000 each year in Maine, are filed by hundreds of IRS-trained volunteers for free.

Additionally, some of our volunteers are reaching out to AARP members throughout Maine urging them to call their legislators on issues that affect our most at-risk residents.  They are calling about extending affordable health care coverage to Mainers 50-64 who are struggling and may have lost their jobs.  Other volunteers around the state are helping us raise awareness about the short-sighted proposal being considered in Washington called the “chained CPI” which would adversely affect Social Security and Veterans Administration benefits now and in the future. Earlier this month, 125 AARP members and volunteers boarded buses and joined our staff at the State House to make their voices heard on proposed state budget cuts.  Some volunteers testified before the Appropriations Committee. Hundreds of volunteers will also join us next month as we work with the United Way and the United States Postal Service on the annual Stamp Out Hunger initiative, on May 11th.  We hope you will participate in this wonderful initiative which will help stock Maine’s food pantries for many months to come.

These are just some of the many ways our volunteers help us make a difference throughout Maine.  If you are looking for ways to volunteer in your own community, why not take a look at AARP’s Create the Good website?  Create the Good encourages people of all ages, not just older adults, to volunteer in their communities and shows you how to volunteer your time around your schedule, whether you have five minutes, five hours, or five days.  It’s a wonderful way to match your skills and energy with local opportunities.  You can also take a look at our website for more information about our work in Maine.

If you already volunteer with AARP, we thank you wholeheartedly for your hard work and commitment to the issues we address in the state and on the national level.  In whatever way you choose to help others, you are making a difference and we applaud your passion.

AARP helps people fulfill their goals and dreams.  We were founded in 1958 because one person, Dr. Ethel Percy Andrus, believed she could help others.  Today, AARP has nearly 37 million members nationwide. One person really can make a difference.

I look forward to our continued work together.

Lori Parham
AARP Maine State Director

About the Author

Jane Margesson

Jane Margesson is the Communications Director for AARP in Maine. She can be reached at 1-866-554-5380 or aarpme@aarp.org.

The post AARP’s News You Can Use – Your Time Makes a World of Difference appeared first on Exploring Lincoln.

This is a statement we hear a lot in politics. We want politicians to talk to one another in Washington, DC, and in Augusta.

We talk to find solutions. We have conversations to better understand someone’s position on a topic, or to articulate how we feel about something.

But one thing we do not talk about enough is sexual violence in Maine.

April is Sexual Assault Awareness Month (SAAM), and the 2013 SAAM national campaign slogan is: “It’s time … to talk about it. Talk early, talk often. Prevent sexual violence.”

Sexual assault is not an easy thing to talk about. Many victims are afraid to discuss their experiences, or don’t know where to turn. When they do speak up, the people they tell don’t know how to respond. Too often, victims are ignored or blamed for the violence.

It’s time to talk about sexual violence.

Sexual assault affects both men and women, and can occur both inside and outside of a relationship. It is a broad term, which can refer to subtle and persistent unwanted attention, threats or aggression, and rape.

According to the Maine Coalition Against Sexual Assault (wwww.mecasa.org), there were 391 rapes or attempted rapes reported to police in Maine in 2011. This number only includes rape, and not the many other kinds of sexual violence that happen under the radar and go unreported. And a recent study found by the Muskie School found that nearly one in five adult Maine residents reports that they have been the victim of rape or attempted rape during their lifetime; 32.1% of female respondents and 5.3% of male respondents have experienced this devastating crime at some point in their lives.

We cannot stay silent about sexual violence in Maine.

I first began to understand the importance of not staying silent about sexual assault when I was in college at the University of Maine. I attended an event called Take Back the Night that was focused on helping victims of sexual assault and sexual violence speak up and be heard. As a resident assistant in college at UMaine, I participated in trainings around preventing sexual violence and how to support victims.

Since I was first elected to the legislature, I have been committed to the task of raising awareness about sexual violence, especially as it relates to advocating for education, prevention, and working to break the cycle of domestic violence that impacts too many families in Maine.

We need to protect victims of sexual violence – to help them regain their footing, share their stories and lessons, and help them feel safe again. But these laws can only go so far. We need to do more in our families, social networks, workplaces, schools, and communities to support victims and prevent sexual violence in the first place.

Where do we start? We can talk– in our families, with our kids, with colleagues, and friends—about the importance of healthy relationships, and teach them where to turn when help is needed.

We can be aware of what we see and hear, and be vigilant and persistent about ending the sexual violence we witness in our surroundings.

And — we can talk about it.

If you, or someone you know, needs help or support because of sexual violence, there are resources available. The Statewide Sexual Assault Crisis and Support Line is 1-800-871-7741. This is a confidential 24-hour toll-free hotline accessible from anywhere in Maine. Calls are automatically routed to the closest sexual assault support center. In Penobscot County, call Spruce Run 24-hours a day at 1-800-863-9909, or visit them online at www.sprucerun.net to learn more.

About the Author

Emily Cain

Emily Cain is the State Senator for District 30, representing twenty-one communities in Penobscot County. You can reach Emily by email at emily.cain@gmail.com, or by phone at 207-866-3753.

The post From The State House – Sexual Assault Awareness Month appeared first on Exploring Lincoln.

The unthinking habit of treating anything that induces fear as a form of terrorism negates serious discussion of the phenomenon. War in all its forms produces fear but terrorism is not a synonym for war. It’s a strategic option, in cold-blooded terms. Terror in all its forms implies slaughter and destruction. TerrorISM, if we are to use that word analytically, requires pairing the barbarism of war with a strategic logic. This is not to say that vengeance and hatred don’t give terrorism its energy. It’s just that you can think clearly about it without considering the rationale that guides it.

Ancient and medieval history provide innumerable examples of terrifying violence but it’s not easy to determine whether this came from barbaric blood lust or deliberate design. We know that Alexander the Great was educated by the greatest philosopher of his time and we know that he adopted a carefully reasoned policy of reconciliation with the conquered Persians. So it’s reasonable to assume that when he leveled the rebellious Greek city state of Thebes and sold its surviving population into slavery his purpose was to leave a peaceful, intimidated Greece behind when the marched far to the East on his campaign of conquest.

We know that when the Mongol conqueror Timur the Lame massacred the population of Baghdad and destroyed the city, he intimidated the region’s population; but we don’t know whether he acted from calculated terrorism or he just enjoyed piling severed heads in neat little pyramids.

In modern times the Italian air power theorist Guilio Douhet (died 1930) gave the world the clearest rationale for what we may call strategic terrorism. He reasoned as follows: 1) Modern warfare allows no distinction between civilians and soldiers; 2) a repetition of World War I’s years of bloodletting was unacceptable; 3) a nation must therefore attack the enemy population centers with explosive, incendiary and poison gas bombs to shatter civilian morale and force peace.
The Royal Air Force embraced this doctrine. Up to Hitler’s rise it envisaged France as its target. Air Marshal Trenchard, its commander, was not concerned with French retaliation. Having a low opinion of Frenchmen he reckoned they would “squeal first.” During World War II the head of RAF Bomber Command, Sir Arthur Harris, bitterly resisted any diversion from targeting German civilians. United States air power doctrine did not accept Douhet. Its doctrine called for targeting “bottle-neck” industrial structures, even single factories. By 1945, however, we shifted to a strategy of systematically incinerating Japanese cities. Atomic bombs did not lend themselves to pin-pointing bottle necks. They were deployed against civilian populations (after preliminary warnings) to break the morale of the Japanese leadership.

The sort of terrorism that now concerns us has a good deal in common with the air power and atomic warfare rationales. The violent anarchists of the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries aimed at terrorizing government officials. Presidents of France and the U.S., a king of Italy, a Hapsburg empress were all killed by anarchists. In Russia they aimed at the Tsars on top to policemen at the bottom in the hope of provoking repression which would alienate the people. There’s no point in killing civilians when a government is a dictatorship or despotism. The rulers tend to take care if that kind of killing themselves.

It’s only with democracies that random killing of civilians produces a political benefit. Since all legitimate power derives from the people they are the preferred target. Terrify the mass of the population and they will put pressure on the government to change its policies. This worked in Spain with the Madrid subway bombing.

I have no opinion on the Boston Marathon massacre. My sole objective is to explain the strategic rationale of terrorism aimed randomly at civilians.

About the Author

John Frary

Professor John Frary of Farmington, Maine, is a former US Congress candidate and retired history professor, a Board Member of Maine Taypayers United and an associate editor of the International Military Encyclopedia, and can be reached at jfrary8070@aol.com.

The post The Frary Home Companion – Terrorism appeared first on Exploring Lincoln.

So what makes these government employees feel so “bullied”?  The Party, whose symbol is an ass, wants Maine citizen’s to feel shock and outrage that the Governor is demanding accountability from State employees for their performance and ethics…cue sound of crickets.  They only shock Maine residents are feeling is one of the more pleasant varieties, to hear that accountability is actually being demanded for a change in Augusta.

But at least Democrats are showing some initiative.  They are trying to get their legislative feet underneath them.  But so far the Dems seem more suited for a bill for beer drinking on St. Patty’s Day (ah, the Celts were in full throat heralding the feat), a bill to take the Governor’s pension (to which the “Bully” said, “Bully, bring it on”, pay the debt), a bill to take the Governor’s mansion (Wow, I didn’t know it was theirs to take…) and a bill to regulate your daughter’s tanning habits (hmmm, not sure that’s any of their business either).  Lets review to date, the Democrats want to facilitate beer drinking, take some money away from a guy they don’t like, kick him out on the street and, oh, take over raising your children just for good measure.  And who is the bully now?

Realizing the legislative session is near at end; our blue clad politicians from Augusta have decided to round out their accomplishments for the year with 22 bills against the 2^nd Amendment and one bill to ban flea collars.  Flea Collars??!!  Didn’t you know?  Why, the markets are infested with them!  Hear the shrieks and cries of terror?  We didn’t know?  Why weren’t we warned?  Eh, gads, grab your children, make for the bunkers and hide there until the brave men in the HazMat suits arrive.

Yes, if Democrats have their way, flea collars will be banned from use by the lowly unwashed.  They can only be purchased from and affixed to your trembling domesticated creature by a veterinarian, who is certified flea collar safe.  I am sure the obligatory Agency of Flea Collar Safety and Education (AFCSE) is only a matter of time.  Perhaps if you can complete the 30-hour course and pay the exorbitant fee, you too could be a Certified Flea Collar Technician (CFCT).

But, what of the hospital debt?  Why can’t we get a collar on that little nagging issue, the one Justin Alfond said just ignore?  While the Alfond Democrats and their merry band of media scribes continue to paint the Governor a bully, the hospitals of this great State struggle to function beneath the weight of Democrat mandated debt.  The collar these liberals seem bent on applying is the one around our necks with a ball and chain attached.  One consolation for the Bully of the Blaine House, if the nagging and whining gets too loud, he can always wave a flea collar.  They’ll all dive for cover.

About the Author

Andy Torbett

Andy Torbett is a General Contractor in carpentry/masonry who served over 28 years in the ministry. He writes about faith and values and political satire, and can be reached at andynsara@mainestream.us. You can also read more from him on his blog at www.meconservativevoice.com, or follow him on his Facebook page.

The post The Maine Conservative Voice – Why Can’t We Collar the Debt? appeared first on Exploring Lincoln.

AARP Maine’s State President works in collaboration with the State Director to further our vision, mission and strategic priorities in the state and serves as Chair of the AARP Maine Executive Council. The Council, in partnership with the State Director and staff, provides strategic guidance and implements state plan activities in the areas of economic security, health and long-term care, and livable/age-friendly communities.

Rich is a retired business consultant who resides in Auburn and who essentially has had three careers. His early experience in the Washington, DC broadcasting industry included consulting for numerous television and radio stations nationwide. That career evolved into his position as the marketing partner and chief operating officer of a $35-million advertising and public relations agency representing local, regional and national clients in a wide variety of industry categories. Rich’s third career, as a strategic planning and communications consultant to a cross-section of New England-based ventures, followed the lifestyle-related decision to relocate with his family to Maine, in 1992.

Rich brings a diverse background to his new role including experience in the fields of public affairs, public and media relations, legislative affairs, advocacy, philanthropic consultation and strategic planning. He has served as member of numerous boards of directors and as a four-term city councilor in Auburn, where he was also a member of the Maine Municipal Association Legislative Policy Committee and a delegate to the National League of Cities.

When the announcement was made, Rich stated he felt privileged to have been chosen. He said “AARP Maine’s mission is to make things better for society and I am honored to have been chosen to serve as the next State President as we work to address the issues that matter to those 50+ in Maine. This is a critical time for many of Maine’s older and at-risk residents and their families who are grappling with economic and health challenges. Together, AARP Maine staff and volunteers will be addressing these challenges and working with our legislative and community leaders to find solutions that make sense.”

AARP volunteer State Presidents may serve up to a six-year term in two-year increments. Further information about AARP and our work in Maine can be found at www.aarp.org/me

On behalf of our volunteers and 230,000 AARP members in Maine, AARP is delighted to welcome Rich Livingston as our new volunteer State President. Rich is a person of energy and commitment who is passionate about Maine and the well-being of the people who live in our state. We are excited to have found the right person to help us forge dynamic social change for Mainers 50+ and their families!

About the Author

Jane Margesson

Jane Margesson is the Communications Director for AARP in Maine. She can be reached at 1-866-554-5380 or aarpme@aarp.org.

The post AARP News You Can Use – Please Welcome Our New State President Rich Livingston appeared first on Exploring Lincoln.

Our Constitution, at age 225, is the oldest in the world. Some argue that this makes it antiquated.. Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg advised an Egyptian TV audience to reject the American constitutional model and consider the more modern South African constitution instead.

Although some professors and pundits scoff at what they describe as Americans’ “religious veneration” of their Constitution, the value of the document comes from just such veneration. That is what validates it, not the theoretical admiration of professors or oaths by elected officials to uphold it.

The French Constitution of September 3, 1791.was the first to follow the American. It created a constitutional monarchy with a popularly elected unicameral legislature. It lasted until September 22, 1792 when the monarchy was terminated, a republic declared and a national convention was elected to write a new constitution. The king himself was executed in January 1793.

The National Convention wrote a fine document which was more democratic than the American. It was ratified by a popular referendum in June 1793 and suspended “for the duration of the war.”

The Convention ended before its wars and in August 1795 a new constitution created a bicameral legislature with a five-man Directory as its executive. It set up a complicated system of governance and before anyone could figure it out, it was replaced by the Constitution of December 1799 which created an executive called the Consulate, effectively Napoleon Bonaparte’s military dictatorship. This was approved by a vote of 3,000,000 for, 1,500 against.

Despite its popularity Napoleon felt the need to enact the new improved Constitution of 1802, making him First Consul for Life.

Two years later the Constitution of 1804 replaced the Republic with the First Empire, making Napoleon emperor by popular vote and naming his unborn son as the next emperor.

After an alliance defeated the emperor and exiled him to Elba, the Bourbon king they put in his place issued the Charter of 1814, restoring the constitutional monarch. Napoleon sneaked back from Elba, chased the king away and issued the Charter of 1815, which was very liberal. Two legislative chambers were elected by democratic vote. It met twice, then came Waterloo. The king returned, Napoleon went to St. Helena Island way down south in the Atlantic Ocean, and France went back to the Charter of 1814.

That lasted until the Constitation of 1830 which created a more liberal constitutional monarchy. This did very well, comparatively. It lasted until the Constitution of 1848 created the Second Republic. Louis Napoleon Bonaparte was elected the first president of the new republic. He was also its last since he seized power and established the Second Empire with the Constitution of 1852.

The Third Republic was established by the Constitution of 1875. The Constitutional Law of 1940 replaced the Third Republic with the Vichy dictatorship. The Constitution of 1946 created the Fourth Republic. The Constitution of 1958 created the Fifth Republic.

Considering this history, which is pretty typical of what has happened to all the constitutions written after ours, I think it best to see how the long the more up-to-date alternatives last. Professorial approval has never counted for much in the real world of politics.

About the Author

John Frary

Professor John Frary of Farmington, Maine, is a former US Congress candidate and retired history professor, a Board Member of Maine Taypayers United and an associate editor of the International Military Encyclopedia, and can be reached at jfrary8070@aol.com.

The post The Frary Home Companion – Constitutional History appeared first on Exploring Lincoln.

The “chained CPI” would cut Social Security and other benefits for today’s seniors and veterans, and increase taxes for most taxpayers. The “chained CPI” would change the way the cost-of-living adjustment is calculated, thereby reducing Social Security benefit amounts every year starting in 2014. For many in our state, any reduction in their benefit would have a huge impact. The average monthly Social Security benefit in Maine is just over $1,000 and over one third of Maine’s Social Security beneficiaries 65+ have no other source of income.

Older voters in Maine appear to have a good memory about some of the promises made during the elections. According to a recent AARP survey of voters 50+ in Maine, 90% percent of respondents believe it is very important not to reduce Social Security benefits for current seniors. Their rejection of “chained CPI” is not limited to one party. According to the survey, 94 percent of Democrats, 86 percent of Republicans, and 91 percent of Independents in Maine oppose it.

Chained CPI’s negative effects would grow higher every year, making it increasingly challenging to pay for life’s essentials such as groceries, heat and medicine. For the average 65+ retiree, the cumulative benefit cut would be more than $5,000 by age 80 and more than $14,000 by age 90. With people living longer, it is easy to see how short-sighted this proposal truly is.

Older veterans would be hurt twice by chained CPI because it would cut both their Social Security and Veterans Administration benefits. A 62-year-old veteran would lose $32,000 in total benefits by age 90. Chained CPI would also be particularly detrimental to women. Women live longer than men, are paid less than men and are more likely to have gaps in their work history than men in large part because of the time they take out for family caregiving or care of ailing parents.

While the chained CPI would primarily impact Social Security benefits, it would also affect other calculations such as the tax code which is indexed to the CPI. Once again, the impact would be felt the most by those of modest incomes. According to the Joint Committee on Taxation, by 2021, taxpayers making between $10,000 and $20,000 would see a 14.5 percent increase in their federal taxes under a chained CPI.

Those who support the chained CPI portray it as a more accurate indicator of the cost-of-living. It is based on the faulty assumption that if the cost of an item goes up, a consumer will simply switch to a cheaper alternative. This idea is flawed because many seniors are already choosing the least expensive products and many of their daily necessities – prescription drugs and health care – have no lower-cost substitutes. The reality is many seniors in Maine are just trying to warm their homes and keep food on the table.

In addition to being harmful and short-sighted, Chained CPI has no place in the discussion about the nation’s deficit. Social Security is a self-financed program providing earned benefits and it has not contributed one cent to the deficit. Maine people deserve a separate, national conversation about how to protect Social Security for today’s seniors and responsibly strengthen it for generations to come.
If you want to find out how much the “chained CPI” would cost you, go to www.aarp.org/whatyoulose and then ask your elected officials to reject this unfair proposal.

About the Author

Jane Margesson

Jane Margesson is the Communications Director for AARP in Maine. She can be reached at 1-866-554-5380 or aarpme@aarp.org.

About the Author

Jane Margesson

Jane Margesson is the Communications Director for AARP in Maine. She can be reached at 1-866-554-5380 or aarpme@aarp.org.

The post AARP News You Can Use – Tell Washington To Reject The “Chained CPI” appeared first on Exploring Lincoln.