Thanks for reading the third edition of The Burn. Share with your friends and make sure to subscribe.

The Defanging of Portland's Police Oversight

Portland voters approved a stronger police oversight board more than two years ago, but one still hasn't been established, owing to a mish-mash of vague delays, closed-door council sessions, and negotiations with the police department.

Now it could be even more punchless. New language defining the qualifications of those who can serve on the oversight board would narrow eligible candidates considerably, according to draft language shared with The Burn. Not only does the proposed language seek to disqualify applicants or any member of their immediate family (including spouses, children, grandparents, or grandchildren) who has been arrested by Portland police in the last 10 years, it also rules out anyone who has submitted a complaint against the PD.

This draft language would heavily restrict participation from people most likely to have direct experience with the police or justice system. For instance, it would restrict any resident who has been arrested at a protest, has a family member who has been to jail in the last decade, or anyone who has submitted a complaint against an officer. In their report to the city council, the charter commission specifically named removing eligibility restrictions as a key way they recommended enhancing the current board, though they left the specific language for establishing that criteria to the council.

The charter commission recommended these changes because the existing police review board is toothless in both its activities and power. The volunteer committee has no ability to independently investigate officers or practices and does not serve as an avenue for residents to submit complaints about the police to a third party. The volunteer board is only able to review the police's own internal investigations and then report on whether each was timely, complete, and accurate. Predictably, Portland's police rarely find their coworkers in the wrong, and the board — which has no power to hold its own investigations or to make recommendations — tends to agree.

Mayor Mark Dion clearly doesn’t agree with the voter-approved recommendation to strengthen the board. Last week, he commented on conservative talk show WGAN news that he doesn’t believe the Portland public has a trust issue with the police, reasoning “we have a really good police department.” Dion repeated the common refrain that Portland’s police are not plagued with the same problems of other large metropolitan bureaus. 

Mayor Dion shared that he expects the council to hold a public workshop on the police review board in the next few weeks. Workshops are usually when city staff share updates on a project; it’s unclear if the public will have an opportunity to comment. 

Maine’s Delegation Offers Key Votes to Trump’s Budget

After an avalanche of chaotic executive orders, illegal firings, and tariff uncertainties, Congress had its first big showdown of the second Trump era last week. With a government shutdown looming, the Republican-controlled congress needed to pass a spending bill to keep the lights on — and needed Democratic votes to do it. 

The bill includes far-reaching changes that give Trump new authority over how the budget is spent — and contains cuts to healthcare and housing as well as a boost to military spending. The six-month spending bill gives Trump access to unrestricted funding that he can direct without Congressional approval, which some House Democrats refer to as a “blank check.” The bill also grants Trump new powers, such as the ability to start new military programs that haven’t even been authorized by Congress.

Republicans drafted the bill and they are in charge of the House, Senate, and the White House. Yet, according to Senator Chris Murphy (D-CT), Republicans never negotiated with Democrats — even though they needed Democratic votes in the Senate to get it passed. 

Good negotiating strategy says: if whole departments of the government are already getting shut down by Trump and Musk and this bill needs your party’s votes to pass — you have leverage! It’s not much, and the stakes are high when a government shutdown is on the line. House Democrats decided to fight: every House Democrat voted against the spending bill — with one notable exception: Maine’s Jared Golden. 

Senator Chris Murphy, who voted against the bill, reasoned that “Democrats risk putting a bipartisan veneer, an endorsement on their plan to hand the government over to billionaires” by approving it. Golden handed the House Republicans that veneer with his sole affirmative vote.

The bill needed a handful of Democratic votes in the Senate to pass. For a brief moment this week, it seemed that Democrats in Congress were about to put up a fight — to go on the offensive and shine a light on the Trump administration’s corruption and ransacking of the federal government. Then, without extracting a single concession or change to the bill, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer released a statement giving his support to move the bill forward. One by one, enough Democratic senators came forward and gave up their leverage. Angus King was a key vote allowing the bill to pass.

A mere month ago, Angus King gave a righteous speech on the Senate floor bemoaning Trump's unconstitutional moves, declaring "I'm just waiting for this whole body to stand up and say no, no, we don't do it this way. We do things constitutionally." 

King’s phone lines were busy and his office was no longer taking voicemails leading up to the vote, though he did reportedly take the rare step of recording a specific voicemail message to all callers defending his vote. King reasoned in his defense that a government shutdown was a worse option than rewarding Trump with new spending powers. (But at least now it’s bipartisan.)

The silver lining to this, if any, is that calls for changes to Democratic Party leadership are no longer contained to the left. Even centrist members of Congress are reportedly encouraging Rep. Alexandria Ocasio Cortez to primary Schumer. 

Hangry Hospitals: the State Budget, Explained

Lest the nonsense be contained to D.C., Maine Republicans tanked a routine budget bill last week that threatens funding for hospitals, nursing homes, and doctors across the state. 

The state has two budgets: a biennial budget and a supplemental budget. The biennial budget is the big budget. It's the meat and potatoes of state funding — the main course. The biennial sets the priorities for two whole years, and it's where politicians haggle over what they definitely want to get funded. 

The supplemental budget is meant to be a stopgap, in-between funding bill that keeps the lights on once the biennial runs out of money but before the next big budget is passed. The supplemental budget is like the snack you make at 5 pm when you're eating dinner at 7. It's tactical and fast and usually pretty no-nonsense. It's also kind of essential, especially if you get hangry. Crackers and cheese, pickles and peanut butter. No judgment. This "snack" is the bill the GOP decided to tank.

The vast majority of the supplemental budget this year is money the state gives to hospitals and medical providers who serve MaineCare patients — $118 million out of a total $121 million is dedicated to these reimbursements. These providers, especially rural providers who have a higher share of elderly and low-income patients, need MaineCare reimbursements to keep their doors open. 

State Republicans and Democrats came to the table last week and hammered out a compromise supplemental budget bill that contained some elements each side wanted, including some specific Republican provisions about rooting out supposed fraud in the MaineCare system. Everything moved forward. Then, the Republicans changed their minds and pulled their support for the bill, deciding they needed to extract more cuts in order to pass it. 

Democrats are now planning to pass a budget without Republicans. It’s unlikely the bill gets implemented immediately and the state is likely to start seeing the fallout from this mess in the coming weeks and months if nothing changes. Meanwhile, a hospital in Waterville announced its closure last week. It might not be the last. 

Thanks for reading the third edition of The Burn. Keep reading! Please subscribe and share with your friends, too.

Authors and Editors

Em Burnett wrote this edition of The Burn, with editing from Nick Schroeder and Emma Reynolds.