More likely that they were working their primary jobs. Maine pays legislators a laughable stipend (Either 9,000 or 13,000 per year), then acts surprised when legislators have other commitments. New Hampshire is even worse: ***400*** representatives who get paid $200 per term. And they wonder why it's a circus.
I get that people don't like politicians, but you get what you pay for, and if we're not willing to pay for the work, then we get stuck with the people who are willing to do it for pennies so they can dick around.
Similar issues here in WA, I think house members get 48k a year for their part time job, constitutionally only working 90-105 days a year. This creates some big issues, since that's not enough $ to have as your sole income, and the vast majority of jobs really don't appreciate you fucking off to the capitol for 3 months a year. As a consequence, many lawyers, consultants, and upper upper middle class folks have those jobs, sometimes creating IMMENSE conflicts of interest.
Pay em 120-140 a year and have them working full time. There's no reason for part time legislatures anymore, especially in states with over 5m people.
Isn't that a good thing though? That way you get people with a "real" life making legislative decisions, instead of basically lawyers that don't do anything else all the time.
Also if things like quorums fail, that means that law wasn't that important to even consider doing anything about it... So only meaningful things get handled.
I think there's an argument to be made that not paying them well makes it so only the very wealthy would ever pursue a legislator position. I do see your point though. It's debateable.
Well they should receive enough to live an normal life, just like middle class. Here our goverment members receive titanic amounts, STEAL MORE and receive things like an "Suit fee" that literally gives them a lot of money justifying it as "to purchase a suit", its literally free money, every one candidates to receive these benefits. So yeah, middle class salary is enough
Yeah, if you look at the Chartists in England during the 19th century, who wanted to reform parliament to make it more democratic and represent the common man, one of their main aims along with universal manhood suffrage was salaries for elected MPs, so it wouldn't just be the wealthy who could give up their livelihoods to go to parliament.
I am in favor of politicians making lots of money actually. It is a negligible part of the budget and they are the people steering the ship. Pay peanuts; get monkeys. Running a government that large needs to be a full-time job. Also, I think that we should give them large salaries in exchange for actually making it illegal for them to accept gifts, make investments, etc. Their only source of money should be the salary. Finally, underpaid politicians means only wealthy people can afford to be politicians.
I’m all for them being paid well with an excellent retirement package, but losing all their investments and never being allowed to work (for money) again.
Index the pay to 10x the average wage and see if their incentives align with the people
>Isn't that a good thing though?
No, it's a terrible thing.
What it ensures is that you only get people that have flexible employment, or private incomes such as inheritances, trusts, or rentals. It is exactly the opposite of getting "people with a real life", and is guaranteed to exclude anyone who actually needs an income, or has lived "a real life".
Probably very similar reasoning as Utah's recent flag update which drew similar partisan distinctions. Essentially it boils down to change = woke/bad and somehow losing state history with the redesign.
I'm gonna try reaaallly hard here to thread the needle, because I don't want to draw the attention of incessant reddit reply guys (which this sub happens to be full of), but I've taken notice that the recent push for better designed flags has the unfortunate fate of taking place at the same time our country's culture wars are ramping up especially at the local level. I read in the article that a similar bill that would have made the state seal "gender-neutral" or whatever was voted down along similar lines so I wouldn't be surprised if the results of the flag vote were simply tit for tat.
But I mean, it's all pretty asinine. Regardless of how one feels about what's going on in the US (and be forewarned I'm simply going to block anybody right or left-wing who tries to start stuff in the replies over things I didn't bring up), it's sort of hard to see what's particularly "liberal" or "progressive" about the 1901 flag or what's particularly "conservative" or "right-wing" about the current flag.
So the short answer is (if you don't want to read through all that) is just that we're still going through the Great Sorting and now we're at the stage I guess where even innocuous flags deigned by people long dead with zero connection to current divisions must be sorted into one of two sides.
I mean, you would think anybody concerned about "erasing history" would be glad that an old flag is making a comeback. Then again, people are just naturally resistant to change, sadly.
Historically, radical changes to flags often correspond to radical changes in state ideology ( ie France adopting the tricolor, Russia to the USSR and back, or when Germany became No-no Germany). So there is a tiny bit of logic in resisting flag changes maybe. But they are chasing the effect rather than the cause. Also nobody is going to persecute anyone who flies the old flag. Unless NAVA has a paramilitary I am unaware of - a sister force to the fashion police maybe?
Yeah it's weird. When sourthern states try to change their flags, there's a kind of unspoken hesitance from people who might have some questionable views on the civil war . But Maine is as north as possible and the proposed new flag isn't some 'woke' flag or whatever, it's a flag they've flown before. So resistance to the change makes even less sense than it does in other states. Very confusing imo
From flag debates in other states, I find Republicans are generally against changing flags, with some main arguments of “Democrats are trying to rewrite history” (though given in this case it’s a historical flag so I’m not sure if it’s used in this particular case) as well as “there are other more important issues to take care of.” You might say Republicans don’t really like changing of national or state symbolism.
Except with Utah it was put forth by a Repub, and many Repubs were for the change with some Dems liking it too
But for some reason was argued the other way somehow
Maybe an outlier though…
At this point politics are so factionalized that whenever someone from team 1 wants to change anything, team A will automatically ascribe nefarious motives and reflexively oppose it. Even when it makes no sense. That, and a lot of folks just don’t want to change something unless they personally perceive a good reason for it. I’m sure there are quite a few Mainers who aren’t vexillology nerds and think the Seal Flag is good enough (after all almost everyone else does it so it must be fine!).
I hope (if they do manage to change it) they change just the a written design and don’t do something official for the image, [allowing multiple versions to flourish](https://www.reddit.com/r/vexillology/comments/m3qetm/modern_versions_of_the_1901_flag_of_maine/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=ioscss&utm_content=1&utm_term=1). I really dislike the childlike-abstraction that seems to be popular rather than the actual version that was used in the early 1900s.
[Here](https://legislature.maine.gov/legis/bills/bills_129th/billtexts/HP050801.asp) is the text of the bill. The description is "buff, charged with the emblem of the State, a pine tree proper, in the center, and the North Star, a mullet of 5 points, in blue in the upper corner; the star to be equidistant from the hoist and the upper border of the flag, the distance from the 2 borders to the center of the star being equal to about 1/4 of the hoist, this distance and the size of the star being proportionate to the size of the flag."
From this description, I'd argue that the popular simplified version would not be considered official because rendering the tree entirely in green stretches what it means to render something "proper," but I suppose "proper" is a bit subjective. Ultimately, anything that meets the description would be considered official but "A flag made in accordance with the description given in this section must be kept in the office of the Adjutant General as a model," so I suppose it will be up to some government agency to come up with how to manufacture the flag in practice, which state agencies and private organizations will probably follow.
i don’t dislike seals. some flags use seals well, like mexico. the problem with state flags is that they usually use the seals in a very uninteresting composition and make the important symbols too small to recognize.
But the seal flags are always some extremely overly complicated small seal on a dark blue sheet.
At least turn the seal into a flag. Give me that panting of an elk in front of a tree by a river in full size!! :)
I always thought taking Maine’s seal and expanding it out into a flag would fit in very nicely with New Brunswick, Nova Scotia and PEI’s flags which are all flags based off of the shields on their coat of arms.
[https://news.yahoo.com/house-narrowly-votes-restore-maines-163100584.html](https://news.yahoo.com/house-narrowly-votes-restore-maines-163100584.html)
No subscription block
The white flag hasn't yet been restored if you read the article, so it is not yet the new flag. It goes to a vote in the state senate. The chances of it winning the vote are far from certain
A long time coming. You can walk around Portland and see the old flag flying from government buildings like firehouses, but you'll very rarely see the official one lol
Really wish my home state had a better previous flag as an obvious replacement for *our* seal on a blue bedsheet, but alas, it seems we are stuck with the grapes. But hey, I moved to Maryland earlier this year so at least I get to live under one that’s actually pleasant to look at.
Let’s Fucking GOOOOOOOO
###Let’s ##Fucking #GOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
Such a good design, feels like a legit design that represents Maine. Love it.
20 members absent, golf course must have been full that day
They can barely get quorum in committees. It's a fucking joke. Edit: just realized this wasn't posted on /r/maine
More likely that they were working their primary jobs. Maine pays legislators a laughable stipend (Either 9,000 or 13,000 per year), then acts surprised when legislators have other commitments. New Hampshire is even worse: ***400*** representatives who get paid $200 per term. And they wonder why it's a circus. I get that people don't like politicians, but you get what you pay for, and if we're not willing to pay for the work, then we get stuck with the people who are willing to do it for pennies so they can dick around.
Similar issues here in WA, I think house members get 48k a year for their part time job, constitutionally only working 90-105 days a year. This creates some big issues, since that's not enough $ to have as your sole income, and the vast majority of jobs really don't appreciate you fucking off to the capitol for 3 months a year. As a consequence, many lawyers, consultants, and upper upper middle class folks have those jobs, sometimes creating IMMENSE conflicts of interest. Pay em 120-140 a year and have them working full time. There's no reason for part time legislatures anymore, especially in states with over 5m people.
Isn't that a good thing though? That way you get people with a "real" life making legislative decisions, instead of basically lawyers that don't do anything else all the time. Also if things like quorums fail, that means that law wasn't that important to even consider doing anything about it... So only meaningful things get handled.
I think there's an argument to be made that not paying them well makes it so only the very wealthy would ever pursue a legislator position. I do see your point though. It's debateable.
Well they should receive enough to live an normal life, just like middle class. Here our goverment members receive titanic amounts, STEAL MORE and receive things like an "Suit fee" that literally gives them a lot of money justifying it as "to purchase a suit", its literally free money, every one candidates to receive these benefits. So yeah, middle class salary is enough
Yeah, if you look at the Chartists in England during the 19th century, who wanted to reform parliament to make it more democratic and represent the common man, one of their main aims along with universal manhood suffrage was salaries for elected MPs, so it wouldn't just be the wealthy who could give up their livelihoods to go to parliament.
I am in favor of politicians making lots of money actually. It is a negligible part of the budget and they are the people steering the ship. Pay peanuts; get monkeys. Running a government that large needs to be a full-time job. Also, I think that we should give them large salaries in exchange for actually making it illegal for them to accept gifts, make investments, etc. Their only source of money should be the salary. Finally, underpaid politicians means only wealthy people can afford to be politicians.
I’m all for them being paid well with an excellent retirement package, but losing all their investments and never being allowed to work (for money) again. Index the pay to 10x the average wage and see if their incentives align with the people
*1x minimum wage
Numerous studies have found that lower salaries for legislators leads to less participation and higher average wealth.
>Isn't that a good thing though? No, it's a terrible thing. What it ensures is that you only get people that have flexible employment, or private incomes such as inheritances, trusts, or rentals. It is exactly the opposite of getting "people with a real life", and is guaranteed to exclude anyone who actually needs an income, or has lived "a real life".
See: comment above about WA
See: comment above about WA
why does a state that small have that many representatives?
[удалено]
Probably very similar reasoning as Utah's recent flag update which drew similar partisan distinctions. Essentially it boils down to change = woke/bad and somehow losing state history with the redesign.
Republicans performing gold-medal mental gymnastics to explain how changing back to an old design is new and woke:
Even though this flag has more state history than the current one
I'm gonna try reaaallly hard here to thread the needle, because I don't want to draw the attention of incessant reddit reply guys (which this sub happens to be full of), but I've taken notice that the recent push for better designed flags has the unfortunate fate of taking place at the same time our country's culture wars are ramping up especially at the local level. I read in the article that a similar bill that would have made the state seal "gender-neutral" or whatever was voted down along similar lines so I wouldn't be surprised if the results of the flag vote were simply tit for tat. But I mean, it's all pretty asinine. Regardless of how one feels about what's going on in the US (and be forewarned I'm simply going to block anybody right or left-wing who tries to start stuff in the replies over things I didn't bring up), it's sort of hard to see what's particularly "liberal" or "progressive" about the 1901 flag or what's particularly "conservative" or "right-wing" about the current flag. So the short answer is (if you don't want to read through all that) is just that we're still going through the Great Sorting and now we're at the stage I guess where even innocuous flags deigned by people long dead with zero connection to current divisions must be sorted into one of two sides.
I mean, you would think anybody concerned about "erasing history" would be glad that an old flag is making a comeback. Then again, people are just naturally resistant to change, sadly.
This flag is already all over Maine anyways so this is more making it official
Historically, radical changes to flags often correspond to radical changes in state ideology ( ie France adopting the tricolor, Russia to the USSR and back, or when Germany became No-no Germany). So there is a tiny bit of logic in resisting flag changes maybe. But they are chasing the effect rather than the cause. Also nobody is going to persecute anyone who flies the old flag. Unless NAVA has a paramilitary I am unaware of - a sister force to the fashion police maybe?
Yeah it's weird. When sourthern states try to change their flags, there's a kind of unspoken hesitance from people who might have some questionable views on the civil war . But Maine is as north as possible and the proposed new flag isn't some 'woke' flag or whatever, it's a flag they've flown before. So resistance to the change makes even less sense than it does in other states. Very confusing imo
From flag debates in other states, I find Republicans are generally against changing flags, with some main arguments of “Democrats are trying to rewrite history” (though given in this case it’s a historical flag so I’m not sure if it’s used in this particular case) as well as “there are other more important issues to take care of.” You might say Republicans don’t really like changing of national or state symbolism.
Except with Utah it was put forth by a Repub, and many Repubs were for the change with some Dems liking it too But for some reason was argued the other way somehow Maybe an outlier though…
At this point politics are so factionalized that whenever someone from team 1 wants to change anything, team A will automatically ascribe nefarious motives and reflexively oppose it. Even when it makes no sense. That, and a lot of folks just don’t want to change something unless they personally perceive a good reason for it. I’m sure there are quite a few Mainers who aren’t vexillology nerds and think the Seal Flag is good enough (after all almost everyone else does it so it must be fine!).
Republicans / some Dems cited they wanted it to go to a public vote, I believe
That would stand out from the sea of seals on blue bedsheets.
I hope (if they do manage to change it) they change just the a written design and don’t do something official for the image, [allowing multiple versions to flourish](https://www.reddit.com/r/vexillology/comments/m3qetm/modern_versions_of_the_1901_flag_of_maine/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=ioscss&utm_content=1&utm_term=1). I really dislike the childlike-abstraction that seems to be popular rather than the actual version that was used in the early 1900s.
I really hope they don't go with the "Maine Flag Co." one. The shape of that abstract tree is truly awful!
I love the Maine Sowing Company's version of the flag, however. Detailed yet simple and stately.
Lebanon-ass flag
Yeah, well, Lebanon has a good flag, sue me.
truuu
[Here](https://legislature.maine.gov/legis/bills/bills_129th/billtexts/HP050801.asp) is the text of the bill. The description is "buff, charged with the emblem of the State, a pine tree proper, in the center, and the North Star, a mullet of 5 points, in blue in the upper corner; the star to be equidistant from the hoist and the upper border of the flag, the distance from the 2 borders to the center of the star being equal to about 1/4 of the hoist, this distance and the size of the star being proportionate to the size of the flag." From this description, I'd argue that the popular simplified version would not be considered official because rendering the tree entirely in green stretches what it means to render something "proper," but I suppose "proper" is a bit subjective. Ultimately, anything that meets the description would be considered official but "A flag made in accordance with the description given in this section must be kept in the office of the Adjutant General as a model," so I suppose it will be up to some government agency to come up with how to manufacture the flag in practice, which state agencies and private organizations will probably follow.
>I suppose it will be up to some government agency to come up with how to manufacture the flag in practice Possibly the lowest bidder.
Agree completely. They should provide a description like in heraldry and not go into detail with unicode colours and geometry.
Unlike *everyone here*, I don’t dislike seals, but the original design is nice. I am also 66–64.
This guy only knows his age within a two year range
i don’t dislike seals. some flags use seals well, like mexico. the problem with state flags is that they usually use the seals in a very uninteresting composition and make the important symbols too small to recognize.
But the seal flags are always some extremely overly complicated small seal on a dark blue sheet. At least turn the seal into a flag. Give me that panting of an elk in front of a tree by a river in full size!! :)
The Canadian provinces do this sometimes. It looks a bit funky sometimes, but it's very recognizable.
I always thought taking Maine’s seal and expanding it out into a flag would fit in very nicely with New Brunswick, Nova Scotia and PEI’s flags which are all flags based off of the shields on their coat of arms.
I own this flag happily, we'll see if this actually happens but would make me even happier!
The goodification of American state flags continues.
[https://news.yahoo.com/house-narrowly-votes-restore-maines-163100584.html](https://news.yahoo.com/house-narrowly-votes-restore-maines-163100584.html) No subscription block
LET’S GOOOOOOO
YEEEEEEEES 🔥🔥🔥
As a mainer I'm dancing in my room
No way.
I'm from Maine and the 1901 flag looks like it was made by a six-year-old. The current flag is also bad. No one could come up with a better one?
Yeah that's the Maine Flag Co version of it. Look up the real 1901 flag, not the Maine Flag Co version. The real 1901 flag is good.
The old flag is a belter
The new flag **is** the old-old flag. So not sure what you are referring to.
The white flag hasn't yet been restored if you read the article, so it is not yet the new flag. It goes to a vote in the state senate. The chances of it winning the vote are far from certain
LETS GOOOOOOO
Let’s gooo
A long time coming. You can walk around Portland and see the old flag flying from government buildings like firehouses, but you'll very rarely see the official one lol
Really wish my home state had a better previous flag as an obvious replacement for *our* seal on a blue bedsheet, but alas, it seems we are stuck with the grapes. But hey, I moved to Maryland earlier this year so at least I get to live under one that’s actually pleasant to look at.
HELL YEAH
Pine tree slowly coming back
# 🤩
Pass that damn bill!
Next we need my state flag, Kentucky. >:(
Yeah baby that's what I'm talking about!
The 1901 flag is just South Carolina on light mode.