A Message About "Clean Elections."

​

To Maine Citizens,​

​

Do you like this "money in government" image? I made it using A.I. in about 30 seconds, to make a statement about the need for Clean Elections to reduce the influence of entities who would exhibit monopoly powers over Maine citizens. 

​

The time has come to listen to people who are tired of the monopoly power of big pharma, big communications, and other market entities, who by their nature seek to dominate markets.

​​

Choose me to be your next governor.  I will be able to save us millions of dollars that are currently wasted by catering to entities with monopoly power. You will need to invest in me first, however.

 

I have made the very difficult decision to run as a "Clean Elections" candidate.

Running as a Clean Elections candidate in Maine empowers a gubernatorial candidate to promote transparency and accountability in politics. It ensures campaign financing that does not include lobbyist dollars. Elect Jim Libby, and you will have a governor who answers only to you.

​

My experience in the Maine Legislature demonstrated to me that legislative candidates take "Clean" tax dollars while leadership forms political action committees (PACS) that take millions of lobby dollars over time. While the lobby is a valuable for informational purposes, the money is influential.  If it wasn't, the lobby wouldn't spend on candidates. In all honesty, the effectiveness of a "Clean" system at the legislative level is zero, and the tax dollars are wasted.  Not so in gubernatorial bids. Candidates for governor cannot be associated with the creation of PAC's by law. It is a great opportunity for Maine people who have been frustrated by big government contracts or by mandates supporting big pharma. I for one am still angry about Mainers having to take an experimental vaccine as a condition of employment. Good people lost their jobs, even in the health care industry.

​

Most Legislators are principled, and while it is fair to state that lobby money may not influence their decisions, it only takes a few to tip the balance toward monopoly "rent-seeking."

​

I have never used the "Clean Elections" system in any of my four senate terms or two house terms.  If I don't believe in something, I am not doing it. Believe me, I was asked several times to take the tax money to in order to save fundraising capacity for other political party uses. Over two hundred legislative candidates used taxpayer funding last cycle, and some qualifying clean elections candidates received over $80,000 each for their races.  I do not agree that public money should be spent on Legislative races when PAC's can be formed by leadership anyway.  It is like having your cake and eating it too.

​​

Gubernatorial candidates can't form PAC's. I think Maine is looking for something different from their Governor.  They know the "big money" system isn't working. I hear the complaints every single day.  Let's do something about it.  

​

So, I am giving the Clean Elections Act one more go, as I did in 2002 when I ran in a gubernatorial primary. I feel in this case that taxpayers will receive value from public dollars allocated toward executive branch races, especially if a Clean Elections candidate wins. When elected, I will not support funding for Clean Elections in legislative races.  In addition, I have outlined over a billion dollars in tax cuts and A.I. labor savings that will make your public investment pay you back exponentially. 

​

We will see how it goes.  There are plenty of positives and negatives to debate.  My goal for you is to create a playing field where I report directly to you, without millions of dollars in lobby money standing between us.

​

Sincerely,

​

Jim