1

2014 Gubernatorial Candidate Questionnaire You have communicated to my campaign that your endorsement will not be based solely on your organization’s principles, so I do not wish to be considered for Environment Maine’s endorsement.

Nonetheless, the questions you have asked in your survey involve important issues that I care deeply about, and I hope that you will forward my answers to your entire membership. 1. What do you see as the most pressing environmental issues facing Maine?

Climate change is the greatest environmental challenge of our time. Climate change portends massive and adverse effects on our public health and our way of life, and the next governor of Maine must exercise strong and informed leadership in limiting and mitigating those impacts. A good starting point will be to acknowledge the following facts about climate change:

• Climate change is real.

• Human activity is chiefly responsible for it.

• Maine’s economy and quality of life – including Gulf of Maine fisheries, forest products, farms and four-season tourism – depend on the quality of our water, our coastal resources and communities, our wildlife habitats and our infrastructure. All these resources and our public health are threatened by rising sea levels, rising water temperatures and changes in our flora and fauna.

• Maine can’t solve the carbon emissions problem alone, but we can meet our own commitments and set an important example for others.

Earlier in this decade, Maine was a leader in setting goals to cut carbon dioxide emissions. We committed to reduce carbon dioxide emissions to 1990 levels by 2010; 10 percent below 1990 levels by 2020; and ultimately by as much as 80 percent. These goals are similar to those set by the Kyoto Protocol. Moreover, in 2005 the Governor of Maine signed the Memorandum of Understanding adopting the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI) calling for total emissions in RGGI states not to increase from 2009 to 2014, and then to fall by 2.5% per year through 2018, so that by 2019 emissions must be at least 10% below the 2009 level. In 2013, the member states further agreed to reduce the emissions from power generating facilities by 45% between 2014 and 2017.

  2

If I am elected governor, the reduction of carbon dioxide emissions and other emissions such as sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxide, ozone, mercury and small particulates – both in Maine and in neighboring states whose policies we can help influence and whose achievements we can help make possible – will be a priority. My administration not only will work to keep Maine on track to achieve the goals that we already have set for ourselves, but also will consider tougher and more challenging goals if that is what sound science directs. To reduce carbon emissions in Maine, the Cutler Administration will –

• Redouble Maine’s efforts at conservation and energy efficiency, starting with a comprehensive review of existing incentives – including the renewable portfolio standard and the PUC’s long-term contracting authority – and a study of the potential for new incentives, such as a more comprehensive feed-in tariff or an enhanced renewable portfolio standard (RPS) that could be carefully tailored to encourage renewable development without unsupportable price impacts;

• Push forward with the development in Maine of distributed generation of electricity from renewable resources such as onshore and offshore wind, tidal and solar generation;

• Increase the availability and use of natural gas, biomass and biofuels and geothermal energy to back out as much carbon emitting oil burning as possible;

• With the cooperation of Maine’s attorney general, aggressively join litigation to defend and to enforce federal regulations that will protect Maine from upwind emissions of greenhouse gases, ozone precursors, particulates and toxics; and,

• Reverse the parochial, insular and ham-handed behavior, evidenced by Governor LePage’s treatment of Statoil, that discourages companies and industries that can help us meet our goals from doing business in Maine.

In every instance, we will pursue these efforts in concert with a renewed commitment to preserving Maine’s quality of place. Sprawl increases carbon emissions at the same time that it makes public services more expensive, weakens communities and makes Maine a less attractive destination for visitors. These concerns should strengthen the arguments for making available more efficient forms of transportation – such as rail, buses, carpooling and bicycling – wherever they are economically feasible. Further, I will call for the enactment of LD 825, the bill vetoed by Governor LePage, to develop and implement a coordinated statewide plan to reduce the risks posed by climate change, to increase our resiliency in the face of more severe and frequent storms, and to help Maine residents, communities and businesses adapt to climate change.

  3

Mr. Michaud’s Congressional website’s section on energy states that he supports “an everything on the table approach,” whatever that means.

The website goes on to say that “he supports increasing domestic production, but in a way that gives states like Maine a say in what type of drilling takes place off its shores.” I am opposed to any drilling for oil and gas off Maine’s shores.

2. If elected, what are the three most important things you will seek to accomplish

on the environment and energy? Vigorous protection of our natural assets is one of the most important investments we can make in Maine’s future. If I am elected governor, the protection of Maine’s environment will be at the top of my personal priorities and a principal criterion for every item on my administration’s agenda. At the outset, our top three priorities will be:

• Rebuilding Maine’s Department of Environment Protection. We will restore the DEP’s leadership, integrity and funding so that it once again will have the staffing levels, competence, expertise and leadership it needs to protect Maine’s environmental quality and public health. The DEP will once again work in the interests of all Maine citizens and be an environmental leader for the nation.

• Reducing carbon dioxide emissions at a faster pace. In order to mitigate and limit the effects of climate change, my administration will (i) work with our neighbors to develop a clean fuels standard for Maine and New England that will reduce the carbon content of our transportation fuels over time; (ii) promote cost---effective transportation alternatives that will decrease our dependence on oil; and (iii) redouble Maine’s efforts at improving energy efficiency and energy conservation, starting with a comprehensive review of existing programs – including the renewable portfolio standard and the long term contracting authority – and the potential for new incentives.

• Promoting distributed generation and the diversification of Maine’s renewable energy portfolio. Natural gas is certainly a cleaner alternative than oil or coal for electricity generation and is a necessary bridge fuel, but for several reasons we should try to leapfrog as much as possible our growing dependence on it. My administration will work to protect and develop export markets for Maine’s renewable energy production and assist in the development of solar, land-based and offshore wind and tidal generation of electricity in ways that are cost effective from a life-cycle perspective and are consistent with the protection of Maine’s vital interests.

3. What do you see as the best evidence in your record to support our choosing

you as the gubernatorial candidate who will best protect and champion Maine’s environment?

  4

I have a world of experience in environmental policy and management in both the public and private sectors that neither of my opponents can match. When I worked with Senator Ed Muskie from 1967 to 1973, I helped write the Clean Air Act and the Clean Water Act – so that Maine’s bays, rivers and air would be clean again. The most vital and enduring legacy of Ed Muskie is that the vitality of Maine’s natural resource-based economy depends directly on protecting our environment. As Associate Director of the White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for Natural Resources, Energy and Science under President Carter, I supervised the policies and budgets for the Departments of Interior, Agriculture, and Energy, the Environmental Protection Agency, the National Park Service and the Forest Service. I was in charge of ending wasteful water projects; restoring the National Park Service, the Forest Service and EPA to healthy budget and personnel levels; deregulating oil and gas prices; building America’s first renewable energy and conservation programs; reclassifying Alaska lands and countless other matters. Later, I founded and built the world’s second largest environmental law firm and represented scores of cities, counties and states in battles over airports and highways. I was responsible for writing and negotiating the toughest noise regulations for airports in the world; supervised our firm’s pro bono work on the Edwards Dam case; engineered the legal strategy that led to the landmark agreement to clean up the spent nuclear waste at West Valley, New York; and worked with justices of the Supreme Court of the Peoples Republic of China to strengthen China’s air pollution regulation. I am the only one of the three gubernatorial candidates with deep environmental experience and whose record consistently has demonstrated leadership, independence and integrity on environmental issues. During Mr. Michaud’s time in the Maine Legislature, he compiled only a 55% lifetime score from the Maine League of Conservation Voters. Said another way: Mr. Michaud voted the wrong way on nearly half of the votes that Maine’s environmentalists judged to be important over a 17-year period. As a member of the state legislature, Michaud voted to allow jet skis in Acadia National Park. He voted against community “Right to Know” legislation, against energy efficiency standards, against stronger wetlands protection, and against GMO labeling. In the US House of Representatives, time and time again, Michaud cancelled out the votes of his delegation colleagues, Representatives Tom Allen (D-ME) and Chellie Pingree (D-ME), casting votes to eliminate food safety warnings, to continue taxpayer subsidies for the oil industry, and to allow snowmobiles in Yellowstone and Grand Teton National Parks.

  5

4. What do you see as the appropriate role for environmental regulation?

In my opinion and experience, the keys to striking the right balance are a transparent discussion of potential impacts, the development and even-handed implementation of sound, science-based standards to protect the public health and welfare and the quality of our environment, and rigorous and predictable permitting and enforcement. I know how to ensure that the right balance is struck, because I have done it. I helped write our nation’s foundational environmental laws. During the course of my long career as an environmental and land use policy official and lawyer, I successfully blocked bad projects and guided the permitting of good ones –airports, highways and other major facilities – by preventing and mitigating adverse impacts. My Administration will see to it that we strike the right balance in Maine.

5. Do you support the Board of Environmental Protection? Why? Would you seek to change the role or structure of the BEP? If so, how? Yes, I support the review functions of the Board of Environmental Protection, but I do not believe that the Board as currently constituted is competent to do its job. To do its job well, the Board of Environmental Protection should become the Board of Environmental Appellate Review -- an appropriately staffed three-person appellate panel that will have the training, expertise and resources necessary to serve as the first forum for appellate review of decisions by the DEP. Decisions of the Board would be reviewed directly by the Maine Supreme Court.

The inability of the Board as currently structured and supported to professionally review environmental rules and decisions became painfully apparent when the Board sought to modify the metallic mining rules initially issued by the DEP late last year. I submitted testimony opposing the rules to the Maine legislature’s Environment and Natural Resources Committee because I felt strongly that these rules, created as part of a flawed, limited, and non-transparent process, did not regulate mining in ways that will adequately protect Maine’s environmental resources.

6. What do you see as the most promising energy sources for Maine moving forward? Why?

Promoting distributed generation and the diversification of Maine’s renewable energy portfolio will be a priority. My administration will work to protect and develop export markets for Maine’s renewable energy production and assist in the

  6

development of solar, land-based and offshore wind and tidal generation of electricity in ways that are cost effective from a life-cycle perspective and are consistent with the protection of Maine’s vital interests.

Natural gas is certainly a cleaner alternative than oil or coal for electricity generation and is a necessary bridge fuel, but we need to focus our attention as well on developing Maine’s clean, renewable energy resources, including land-based and offshore wind power, in ways that are cost-effective and consistent with the protection of Maine’s vital assets.

I share rational concerns about how and where generation and transmission facilities are sited, about their noise, wilderness and view-shed impacts, and about their effects on wildlife and habitat. We need to strike and restrike, over and over, the right balance between meeting our energy needs with renewables and protecting what is unique about Maine.

7. Currently, Maine is essentially tar sands-free; however, by 2020 due to new pipeline and refinery infrastructure in the U.S. and Canada, tar sands-derived fuel could comprise as much as 18 percent of our fuel mix—which would entirely wipe out the promised carbon reductions under the landmark Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative. Do you support policies to keep tar sands crude and tar sands-derived fuels out of Maine?

Fuels refined from diluted bitumen (tar sands) aren’t good for the planet. I share the views expressed by Senator King and Representatives Pingree and Michaud to the effect that any reversal of flow through the Portland Pipeline, particularly if it involves anew form of oil such as diluted bitumen (tar sands), should not be undertaken in the absence of a new Presidential Permit, which would need to be preceded by an environmental impact statement. As governor, I will aggressively promote policies – such as a regional carbon-content standard for transportation fuels – that discourage the use of high carbon fuels like tar sands and ensure the safe transport of petroleum products. Neither Congressman Michaud nor Governor LePage has made such a commitment.

  7

8. What are your views on natural gas fracking? What do you see as the role of

natural gas in Maine’s energy future? Do you think our state is over-dependent on natural gas? How do you weigh energy efficiency, renewable heating, and distributed renewables to keep gas demand low versus new pipeline infrastructure in the region? Should the Maine people publicly finance new natural gas pipeline infrastructure in the region, as envisioned by the Maine Legislature’s 2013 omnibus energy bill (LD 1426)?

While natural gas is cleaner than coal and oil, I recognize that it is a fossil fuel. The extraction of natural gas, through hydraulic fracking, should not compromise ground and surface water quality and air quality, and in this regard the process should not be exempt from regulation under the Clean Water Act and the Clean Air Act. Moreover, the operator should provide verifiable financial assurances to demonstrate that it can meet its obligations to protect the environment. Natural gas is a cleaner alternative than oil or coal for electricity generation and is a necessary bridge fuel, but we should try to leapfrog as much as possible our growing dependence on it. I support the introduction of natural gas into more Maine communities as a lower cost bridge fuel between higher carbon fossil fuels and cleaner renewable energy sources, helping more Maine communities attract and maintain employers. To that end, I will support regional efforts for investment in increased pipeline capacity to deliver natural gas to Maine and the rest of New England.

Maine also should make sound public investments in in order to spur the wider development of renewable, distributed generation. The Cutler Administration will establish the Maine Energy Finance Authority (MEFA) within the Finance Authority of Maine (FAME) – not in a separate new bureaucracy – to provide low-cost capital for 21st-century energy projects that promise to make energy more affordable for citizens and businesses. Through low-interest, tax-exempt financing and public-private partnerships, MEFA will encourage investment in renewable energy resources and help construct needed energy infrastructure. In circumstances where might discourage a company from locating in Maine or increasing existing activity and employment, for example, MEFA financing or contracting may be able to facilitate investments in cost-effective distributed generation.

  8

9. In the next 10 years, up to one-third of Maine’s most productive farmland will change ownership. What role do you believe the state should play during this transition?

Agriculture offers a compelling picture of a sector of the Maine economy where there is great potential and no plan. Farming is both central to our Maine heritage and can leverage big competitive advantages – plenty of water and arable land and proximity to affluent markets. Moreover, the more farms we have and the more local food we produce, the more good restaurants they supply and the more attractive a place Maine is for tourists to visit, helping to build Maine’s brand. According to the Maine Farmland Trust, there were 6.5 million acres under cultivation in Maine in 1880, when our state was a breadbasket for the northeastern United States. Today there are only 1.4 million cultivated acres – merely 20% of what we once had – even though transportation and technology have brought the northeastern markets much closer to us than they were 135 years ago. Acreage under cultivation in Maine is slowly growing again, generating jobs and incomes, but agriculture is not growing nearly as rapidly as it could if Maine were following a strategy to encourage it and put in place the right policies to make it happen. Many of Maine’s new farmers are young and educated; indeed, in a state that is the oldest in America and is aging faster than any other state, some have suggested that Maine’s population of farmers is among the youngest in America. Here’s a place where inventive public policies – focused on attracting young people to Maine to farm and helping them finance their entrepreneurial efforts – should both leverage competitive advantages and help turn around Maine’s demographic disadvantage. I have proposed, for example, that Maine recruit young farmers from around the country and the world by offering a dollar-for-dollar tax credit against Maine income tax liability for every dollar that a graduate who becomes a new Maine resident or who stays in Maine pays down his or her student debt. We also need to better coordinate public and private sector investments in aggregation, in cold storage and drying facilities and in other infrastructure and transportation resources that small farmers need to survive and prosper. 10. Do you support policies and programs to rebuild Maine’s agricultural

infrastructure and improve/incentive local food purchasing by state institutions? In general, how do you view the role of the state when it comes to supporting and expanding Maine’s sustainable food economy?

I do support these policies, so long as they are cost-effective for both buyers and sellers. Some 400,000 acres of farmland will be up for sale in the next few years as the current generation of farmers ages. It’s important that the state have a strategy for accelerating the development of Maine’s agricultural sector and that we invest in implementing that strategy. (See answer to Q9.)

  9

It is just as important that we avoid ruinous mistakes. In 2012 a narrow majority of the Maine Legislature voted to change Maine’s Dairy Tier Support Program, causing all our small farms to operate below their break-even point. Losing this support has made it impossible for some small dairies to stay in business. Tragically, more than 30 small farms have been lost in the last few months. I believe the Dairy Tier Program should allow all farms, no matter their size, to achieve a break-even price for milk. While the farm bill continues to be tied up in our dysfunctional Congress in Washington, we should make supporting Maine’s dairy industry part of our turnaround story for Maine and the Maine brand.

Helping small Maine family farms helps support the rural quality of life we all cherish. Young farmers give us a perfect opportunity to both increase agricultural production and combat Maine’s looming demographic winter.

11. Do you support the Land for Maine’s Future Program? Would you seek to make

changes to the program? If so, what changes?

Maine has a very special quality of place and a unique civic culture. Maintaining these important characteristics is one of the most important investments we can make. That means protecting our natural environment and our wild and scenic places; preserving farmland, forest, harbors and downtowns; and ensuring that people in historic mill towns and villages can both live here and earn a living. The Land for Maine’s Future Program continues to be an important mechanism for accomplishing those goals. 12. If there were clear support in the region, would you support and advocate for a

new national park and national recreation area on land east of Baxter donated by Elliotsville Plantation? How about a national monument on the same donated land?

I believe that the designation(s) of approximately 75-150,000 acres as a National Park or National Recreation Area has real merit as part of a strategy to reinvigorate the economy of the Katahdin Region, one of Maine’s most important sporting regions. According to a Bangor Daily News article posted on 6/10/2014, both Governor LePage and Congressman Mike Michaud oppose the park. Maine’s North Woods are a valuable source of wood fiber and related jobs; the North Woods also are an important destination for hunters, fisherman, and tourists. We need to look at economic development strategies that will leverage these advantages, and I believe that a North Woods National Park or Recreation Area will help brand the Katahdin Region and attract people and jobs to the area. Sustainable natural resources – including Maine’s forests – are critical to Maine’s future growth and prosperity. They represent a key competitive advantage over other states and a strong foundation for creating jobs and reviving the economy. Northern Maine has important assets that are among those critical competitive advantages: farms, forests, lakes, rivers, streams, communities, and the people. We need to look at strategies that make use of these advantages in the

  10

broadest possible ways, and I believe that there exists considerable potential in identifying and branding areas of Maine – like the North Woods – in ways that will attract people and jobs to the area. Earlier in my career, during the late 1970’s, I led the federal government’s effort to classify the Alaska public lands under the provisions of the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act, and my team reviewed the prospects for conservation and use under a long list of native, state and federal classifications. I have commended Lucas St. Clair for examining some of the important questions concerning the creation of National Park: (i) what is the best balance of protection and use for current and future generations of Maine people, and (ii) what is the best mechanism to achieve that balance. As governor, I will work with the owners of the land, the affected communities, National Park advocates and other interests in the State to identify the optimum balance of preservation and use and the best mechanism to achieve it. 13. Will you support strengthening the Kid-Safe Product Act to ensure Maine makes

steady progress to phasing the most dangerous chemicals out of everyday products?

A top priority in the Cutler Administration will be to rebuild the capacity of Maine’s Department of Environment Protection (DEP) to protect human health from unsafe exposure to toxic chemicals and to establish consumers’ rights to know the nature of the substances contained in products they use and consume. To protect the health of women and their families, the Cutler Administration will:

• Work to Eliminate Toxins in the Environment. The DEP needs the

resources and capacity to implement the Maine’s Kids Safe Products’ Act and the Safer Chemicals program.

• Enact the Healthy Kids Bill. The Cutler Administration will seek enactment of the Healthy Kids Bill, vetoed by Governor LePage in July 2013, which would have required more stringent labeling of potentially harmful chemicals in food packaging in order to protect children and pregnant women from the harmful effects of potentially toxic chemicals such as BPA.

• Support GMO Labeling. The Cutler Administration will support the

labeling of genetically modified organisms in food. Mainer consumers deserve to know what’s in the milk and food they buy. They have a right to know that the milk they drink is free from artificial growth hormones (bSTs) and that the food they eat is free of genetically modified organisms (GMOs).

Today, no governmental agency can certify the safety of GMOs nor can companies - like the large chemical producer Monsanto - ensure that GMOs pose no health risk to humans.

  11

Labeling food, similar to the pledge made by Oakhurst Dairy that its milk did not contain artificial growth hormones, gives consumers an opportunity to know the origins of the food they are buying and to decide whether or not they want to purchase foods that contain GMOs. The bottom line is that Maine consumers ought to have the information they need to make informed choices about the food they buy and which agricultural practices they choose to support. A Cutler Administration will support Maine’s efforts under LD 718, An Act To Protect Maine Food Consumers' Right To Know about Genetically Engineered Food and Seed Stock, to require the labeling of food and seed stock containing GMOs. I believe consumers should have the information they need to make informed choices about the food they buy – and which agricultural practices they support. Apparently, Congressman Michaud does not share that commitment. Mr. Michaud has accepted thousands of dollars in campaign contributions from Monsanto’s PAC and voted for a Monsanto-supported bill that would have barred Oakhurst Dairy’s “No Artificial Growth Hormones” label. (HR4167, 3/8/06, Roll Call Vote #32. Congressman Tom Allen voted against the bill, and it failed in the US Senate.)

As a state legislator, Mr. Michaud voted against enacting Maine’s Right to Know law. Mr. Michaud also voted to kill a bill requiring retailers to label all genetically engineered food. (LD1928, 1994) Governor LePage has also vetoed bills to protect consumers.