Bill to cover prosthetics signed into law

AUGUSTA – A bill, sponsored by Rep. Mark Bryant, D-Windham, and co-sponsored by Rep. Matt Peterson, D-Rumford, to require insurance plans to cover the latest prosthetic limbs was signed into law by Governor John Baldacci today. Under current law, health insurance carriers are required to provide coverage for prosthetic devices, but coverage is not required for those devices containing a microprocessor. The bill removes the exclusion for prosthetic devices that include a microprocessor.

“Microprocessors have become far more common and affordable,” said Bryant. “Most artificial limbs prescribed to amputees by doctors today have microprocessor chips in them. This bill is a needed step to bring the law covering artificial limbs up to date. At the public hearing we heard from dozens of people who utilized artificial limbs, they all testified that going from an older prosthetic to one that contained microprocessor technology had huge benefits for their health, mobility and overall quality of life.”

The original law requiring policies to cover prosthetic limbs was passed over a decade ago, when microprocessor technology was very new and expensive. Microprocessor chips are tiny computers embedded into the artificial limbs that allow them to move and react more like a real limb.

“Technology has continued to improve the lives of people living with a disability, and no place have these advances been more significant than in the development of sophisticated prosthetic devices that expand the capacity and independence of people who have lost a limb,” said Peterson. “This law is designed to do one simple thing--to make sure that insurers in our state will make available the most appropriate alternative available to those they cover. This is what we all expect when we purchase insurance, and we have the responsibility to ensure that these expectations are enshrined in our statutes and regulations. This is another important step in making sure the insurance climate in Maine strikes the proper balance.”

The bill, LD 20 “An Act To Require Insurance Companies To Cover the Cost of Prosthetics Containing Microprocessors,” passed with overwhelming bipartisan support in both the House and Senate.

Remarks at the Hope Association Annual Meeting May 18, 2010

On May 18th, 2010, I was honored to be featured as the Keynote Speaker at Hope Association's Annual Meeting.

For decades now, Hope Association has been providing top-quality services to individuals in the River Valley living with developmental disabilities. To learn more about Hope Association please visit their website at http://www.hopeassociation.org/.

Reprinted below is a copy of the remarks I offered at Hope Association's Annual Meeting:



It is truly a great honor to be invited to share this evening with you and to offer a few remarks. Having grown up in Rumford, I have long been aware of the great work that this organization has done on behalf of other Rumford citizens. You have been one of the real leaders in Maine in serving a very special population with creativity and dedication. It is a privilege to join you and a distinct honor to get a chance to talk with you tonight.

I have to admit that I’ve known about his speaking engagement for quite a while, and I’ve had lots of time to think about what to say -- which means I’ve had lots of time to worry over what I should say and do and how I could rise to the occasion of sharing my thoughts and my experience with a room full of such dedicated and caring people. What I mean to say is this -- What can I possibly say that would be worthwhile to such an audience? I’m truly humbled by this crowd and your record of service to our community.

Fortunately, having spent two years in Augusta, I’ve had plenty of experience observing people who are willing to talk at great length about things they know very little about -- so I certainly know how to “take the plunge!” Please don’t quote me to any of my Augusta colleagues -- although we’ve all been guilty at one time or another. I don’t want to dive in -- so I thought I’d talk about some of my own experiences and things that I do feel qualified to talk about.

I thought I’d take my few minutes tonight to consider some of the lessons I learned from the Legislature in the last session -- and some of the larger issues they suggest, including some of my life lessons. I’m the kind of guy who has to bring things down and internalize them -- apply them to my own life and experience to really understand them. I grasp things -- but to really understand them, I have to see ideas through the lens of my own life. I’m a pretty concrete thinker in that way -- it’s just the way I’ve always been made, and it has served me pretty well. I hope so anyway -- because I don’t imagine I’ll wake up tomorrow having become a theoretical astrophysicist overnight.

So, tonight I want to talk about two themes that came through over and over in the last session and that have larger implications for almost all we do. The themes are balance and resiliency. They are both pretty important ideas to me personally, and it seems like they are engines for this great organization, too.

First, balance. I’ve gotten a little bit of attention in the news recently for something that was almost accidental. As you may know, one of the initiatives I sponsored in the last session was a bill to sanction and regulate mixed martial arts events in Maine. I’m a huge fan of the sport. I was a wrestler in high school, and my younger brother was one of the greatest wrestlers to come out of Mountain Valley. He has continued to train and has become a mixed martial artist. I have friends who are fighters and trainers and promoters, and I wanted to bring the sport to Maine while making sure that there were standards and oversight to protect the health of all those involved in the sport.

I won’t go into a lot of detail about the mechanics of the legislation -- but we had to pass something because in 2007, the Maine legislature eliminated the Maine Athletic Commission that used to oversee professional boxing events. Apparently, it had been years since there was any boxing match scheduled, maintaining the Athletic Commission cost the state money, and so in 2007, the Legislature voted the Commission out of existence. Nobody came to testify against that action, there were no questions asked about the elimination of an organization that apparently had no function.

In 2009, we created a new regulatory body -- the Mixed Martial Arts Authority -- designed to oversee mixed martial arts or MMA events. The Governor appointed members to the Authority, they have been meeting and working on rules, and the first MMA contests will be held later this year. Here’s where the story gets complicated. I read an article in the Lewiston Sun Journal about the Gamache family planning to have a prize fight in June in Lewiston. I was at an MMA Authority meeting, sitting next to a representative from the Attorney General’s Office and asked him if he had seen the article. I was actually reading the article on line at the time. He said, he hadn’t seen it and would I send him the link. So I did -- with a simple question : Who is overseeing these fights?

To make a long story short, the Gamaches were eventually contacted, informed that the fight they had planned was illegal under a 19th century Maine statute and that they should consult a lawyer before they proceeded with the fight. Apparently, my question started a process that ended up with the Gamaches being “warned” against holding the event. Since then, I have been working to try to find a way to let this fight move ahead under emergency rules passed by the MMA Authority. Unfortunately, the AG’s office has vetoed the idea and so now it looks like the fights will have to be moved to next year after the Legislature can create a new statute allowing boxing to once again be sanctioned in Maine.

So -- what does this have to do with balance? Besides the fact that boxers need good balance. As you can imagine -- I have gotten a fair number of e-mails and calls from irate boxing fans who want to tell me how stupid the state is for eliminating the Athletic Commission -- WHAT WERE WE THINKING? My favorite was from a constituent that I hear from a lot. He has strong opinions about many things and I enjoy the exchanges because he is a thought-provoking, common sense fellow I have known all my life.

He let me have it in an e-mail. Augusta this, and Legislature that -- you get the idea. We were interfering where we had no business and so forth. Why I liked the e-mail so much was because I had gotten one from him just a few days before complaining about the way we “wasted money in Augusta” spending it on all kinds of unnecessary things -- bureaucracy that didn’t do anything, and on and on …..

I hadn’t had the chance to respond to that first e-mail, so they were both in my inbox, and ended up next to each other. I suppose you can see where I am going with this ….. How do we balance such competing interests? When the Legislature eliminates a Commission that was costing taxpayer dollars but hadn’t had any activity in years -- it looked like a good idea -- one he could certainly support. It was a good idea, until the Commission was needed to license a boxing match -- which he really wanted to attend. Tough to be a fan of less government, smarter budgeting and fiscal responsibility -- and still want all the services that government provides -- including regulating prize fighting.

It’s all about finding the balance between what we need, what we want and what we can afford.

That has been a big lesson for me serving the River Valley in the House of Representatives. How do we find that balance? Another way to think about it is -- how do we set the right priorities? As a member of the Health and Human Services Committee that was the stark lesson from every day’s sessions. There are so many valid, yet competing claims for the limited resources. Allocating those limited resources requires a real balancing act -- and lots of priority setting.

I wish I could come here tonight and say -- things in the next budget will be better, it will get easier, money that has been cut will be restored. But that is not the case. We will have even greater demands and even more fiscal constraints in the next session. In the last session, we were able to fill some of the gaps with the infusion of federal resources from the stimulus act. Those funds will not be available as we project the next two year budget. As a result, we can expect even more belt tightening, even more cut backs, and an even harder time trying to provide essential services to Maine’s most vulnerable citizens.

Sounds pretty bleak, doesn’t it?

So that brings me to my second theme for the evening -- Resilience. We not only need to keep our balance -- we need to find the ways to bounce back -- be resilient. I can tell you right now that there will be pressures on the state funding that Hope Association receives. That will be true of every health, human services or social services organization that receives state funding or state contracts. I don’t know what the pressure will look like -- but it will be coming. Guaranteed.

As someone who has lived with a disability for more than a decade -- I’ve learned firsthand the value of resilience. Without an ability to bounce back, I don’t know where I’d be. That same resilience is characteristic in the lives of so many of the individuals and families that your organization so ably serves. Resilience is what we do -- and what we will be called upon to do even more if we are to continue to serve.

But even before my injury, resilience is something that I learned growing up in the River Valley. We’re a place and a people who come back. We’ve seen difficult economic times -- and we are still seeing them. We’ve seen big changes at the mill and in the paper and woods industry -- but we know how to bounce back.

Resiliency requires some creativity. After my injury I had to learn lots of new ways to do things I had been doing all my life. In hindsight, I realize I had to unlearn a number of things -- old patterns, old ways of doing things that just didn’t work anymore because of my changed circumstances. Being creative, learning new approaches became a lot easier when I finally let go of some of the patterns that had dominated my life. The key to resilience is that ability to let go of old patterns that may have worked well in the past, but have a more limited application in the future. Tough to let go of things that have served us well -- but it is necessary to face the new challenges.

For an organization like Hope Association that is all about promoting resilience for individuals and their families -- I know you can and will rise to the challenge. You have got to find new ways to reach out and to serve, even in an era of fewer resources. You will have to find new ways to help families become more resilient, more independent and more creative as we all struggle to do more with fewer resources.

We have a lot going for us. The River Valley is a strong community of neighbors and friends. We have a tradition of caring and looking out for each other. Hope Association is a perfect example of that spirit. And we have a history of picking ourselves up and moving forward despite setbacks.

Now is the time to start exercising those creative muscles. Go back to the roots of the organization and look for new ways to accomplish your goals. Prepare now for the changes that are coming -- don’t wait to be overwhelmed by them. This is a strong and vital organization -- and its true vitality will be found in its resiliency in this changing environment. Don’t just react to the change -- lead the change.

Speaking to an organization with a name -- Hope Association -- you cannot deliver anything but an upbeat message. Yes, times ahead will be challenging. My commitment to you is that I will work as hard as I can to find balance and help the state set the right priorities between supporting programs that people depend upon, and operating in the most cost-effective manner possible.

I hope you will work with me in seeking that balance -- with your good ideas, your thoughtful analysis of alternatives, and your commitment to resiliency. Together, we will find a way to continue the outstanding record of service that has characterized Hope Association for decades.

Thank you for the opportunity to be here tonight. I look forward to working with you individually and as an organization. Thanks again.

The 124th Legislative Session -- Impacts to the River Valley

Now that the 124th Legislative session has been adjourned for a couple of weeks, the dust is starting to settle and it seems a good time to take stock of what happened during the session and how the decisions made in Augusta may impact the River Valley. I’ve spent the last week reviewing the Legislative summaries and talking to leaders in government, business and social services in our communities to measure the outcomes from the work in Augusta in 2010. First, I want to thank all the people who took the time to talk with me about how the legislative session will likely impact our community.

Budget Concerns

Overall impressions are that the session was a difficult one -- but the results were better than anyone really expected based on the first projections of the state’s fiscal situation and the expected budget impacts. To put this in some context -- the supplemental budget passed for the fiscal year that will begin on July 1 of this year is roughly equivalent to the budget passed for the first year of the Baldacci administration -- eight years ago. Given the cumulative rate of inflation over those eight years -- this means that the new budget is a reduction of approximately 20% in real dollars over that period. Inflation in areas like energy and health care costs was higher than 20% over this period, and since a larger portion of the state budget is devoted to such areas, the overall reduction in real state spending may be greater than the 20% would indicate.

In short, we once again met the constitutional mandate to provide a balanced budget and we did that by making significant cuts to programs and restructuring other efforts. There were no broad based tax increases, nor were there any real “budget gimmicks” that would book significant one-time savings. As a result, the Legislature passed a strongly bi-partisan budget that was supported by all the members of the Appropriations Committee and large majorities in both the House and Senate.

We had some help in solving the problems in this budget cycle that may not be available next year, so everyone is already preparing for a difficult budget session next year. One of the biggest aids in resolving the budget shortfall was the infusion of additional federal dollars -- particularly in the area of health and human services that came from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 that provided stimulus funds in a number of areas. These funds filled some gaps, but they will not be available for the next budget cycle so additional cuts may have to be made if the economy continues to lag.

Many of the River Valley leaders I spoke with left the impression that we did about the best we could, having been dealt a bad hand. Financial impacts were kept to a minimum, but there will be some real changes as a result of this year’s budget.

First, state aid to education will be reduced to RSU 10 by approximately $1 million or a little more than 3%. While this is not as bad as was first projected since close to $350,000 was added back near the end of the session—this will still mean either cuts to the budget or an increase in local share, or both. School leaders have developed new budget proposals based on these changes, and we will all feel the impacts -- in the classrooms and in our tax bills.

The towns were similarly affected with reduction is Revenue Sharing. For example, Rumford will see Revenue Sharing drop from approximately $1.1 million to about $800,000, with the $315,000 needing to be made up through reduced services or increased revenues. Compared to the reductions for other municipalities, it could have been worse, but it is still a reduction in resources from the state to assist Rumford citizens.

The agencies that serve River Valley citizens in meeting their physical and mental health needs were very concerned at the start of this year’s session. Most already felt they did not have the resources to meet the needs of people in our community and the initial rounds of cuts would have eliminated so much support that many programs risked being discontinued entirely. A few services may well be curtailed in the River Valley, but in the short term both our institutional and community based services will remain intact. Providers are bracing for deeper cuts in the next session and are already working to find creative ways to do more with the diminishing resources. Having served on the Health and Human Services Committee in the last session, I was very engaged in these issues and I understand many of the challenges on the road ahead.

Jobs and Development

There were a number of initiatives that could have major impacts -- both positive and negative -- on jobs and economic growth in the River Valley. Fortunately most of the news in this area was positive. For example, one bill involving the use of bonded Canadian labor in wood harvesting could have had the impact of raising the overall cost of raw materials for the mill. The bill would have impacted the cost of timber throughout Maine’s wood-basket, potentially impacting the Mill, local loggers, and landowners. Fortunately, a compromise was reached that will mitigate most negative impacts.

Other similar issues, including those to balance the needs of workers and the needs of businesses were carefully considered as we work together to restore Maine’s economic health and vitality. Many of these issues come up almost every session, so we can expect that the dialogue will continue in future Legislatures. Finding a balance is always a key.

Energy and Windpower

At the end of the session, a bill was passed that enables local areas to have a greater say in the development of energy corridors. This can be an important opportunity for the River Valley since we live in an area with existing and emerging energy resources. Our gas fired generation facility, permitted and proposed wind energy facilities, our hydro resources, the potential for bio-mass co-generation, as well as our proximity to Hydro Quebec power resources all make the River Valley an energy gateway. This new energy corridor legislation may create opportunities for citizens and businesses to work together on initiatives to build new employment in our region.

Windpower continues to be an important topic, and initiatives will likely emerge in the upcoming Legislative session to continue to look at permitting and health issues related to the operation of these facilities. Although major legislative initiatives were not considered in the last session, they will certainly be on the agenda in the upcoming session, with the goal being an evidence-based approach to permitting new land based wind facilities to insure that they do not have unwarranted impacts on the health and safety of local citizens. These topics are sure to lead to lively discussion and exchanges -- and hopefully some sound policy judgments in Augusta.

Looking Back

Veteran legislators tell me it is a lot easier to serve when you can carry home good news to your community rather than bad news. This was not the year for funding new projects or new initiatives. This was a session to look carefully at expenditures and set priorities for our hard earned tax dollars. Next session promises to be more of the same -- maybe even tougher. I appreciate all the ideas and input from people in the River Valley -- before, during, and after the session. I want to keep up the conversation and if I am fortunate enough to return to represent you in the 125th Legislature, I will need that input even more. Thank you again for the opportunity of a lifetime to represent the River Valley in the Maine Legislature.

Roll Call Voting Percentage for the 124th

Last week the official Roll Call Voting Percentages for the 124th Maine Legislature were released. For the Second Regular Session of the term I had a 100% attendance record. My overall attendance record for the First and Second Regular Sessions combined was 96%. Unfortunately, during the First Regular Session I was absent during a day and a half in the six-month schedule and missed a few votes. The days I missed were during a trip to California to lobby a prominent promotions company to bring their business to our state as a part of the legislative initiative I sponsored to sanction mixed martial arts in Maine. It was worth missing those votes since during the trip I received a commitment directly from the company’s President that they would work hand-in-hand with us to bring their brand to Maine generating a potential for millions of dollars in new business revenues.

Two people rarely—if ever—align perfectly on every issue in life. Ideas and opinions are as varied as the constellation of bills that are brought forward by the thousands in almost every legislative session. I would never pretend that every single person in District 92 will agree with every vote I cast in the 124th Legislature. If that were the case, we wouldn’t be an independent and passionate part of the world. I intend to continue to show up for every vote -- because the River Valley deserves a strong voice for all the issues we face as a state.

One thing that almost all of us in the River Valley can agree on is working hard and remaining committed to a goal. When you sent me to Augusta, my goal was to show up every day and fight for the jobs and systems change we need in order to have a successful Western Maine way of life. I believe my attendance record reflects the consistency that I see all around me every day in the hard working men and women of our community, and I hope you feel the same way. Thank you for giving me the opportunity to represent our area in Augusta.

Josh Thornton, state wrestling champion, honored at the State House

AUGUSTA - Rep. Matt Peterson, D-Rumford, recently presented Josh
Thornton, of Rumford, with a special legislative sentiment honoring his
first place finish at the 2010 Class B Wrestling State Championship in
the 140-pound weight division.

"Josh's path to a state championship was not without its challenges this season. He sustained losses along the way, but he learned from those lessons and applied all of that knowledge to go all the way when it counted," said Peterson. "And he's not done yet, Josh is only a junior this year and we just recently learned that he was invited to participate in the prestigious Maine-Nebraska wrestling exchange, so you can bet that this experience out west will help to prepare him to repeat the performance next year."

Thornton began his wrestling career in the first grade and was a New England Champion in the second grade. In the eighth grade, he went undefeated all the way to a state title. As a sophomore, he won the Western Class B Regional competition, placed fourth at the state championships and the Eastern National Tournament. He had a 34-4 record during the season he earned his state title, placing first at the prestigious Redskin Invitational Tournament, the Mid-State Championship and the Western Class B Regional Tournament.

Peterson noted that wrestling is a family affair in the Thornton household when he pointed out that Josh's younger brother, Jake, competes for the Mountain Valley Middle School wrestling team. Josh and Jake's father, Joe, was one of Peterson's middle school wrestling coaches. A patient teacher as well as a fierce competitor, Joe has passed his will-to-win along to his sons who have been making good on a family commitment to excellence.

"I wish Josh and Jake continued success, and congratulate a proud mother and father that will be cheering them along all the way," said Peterson.

Some Reflections on Legislative Service

Commuting from Rumford to Augusta for my Legislative duties gives me a chance to reflect on the nature of this public service -- especially because there are a number of spots where there is no cell coverage, so I can’t talk on the phone. First, I am overwhelmed by a sense of gratitude to my fellow River Valley residents for having the opportunity to serve you in Augusta for the last two years. The work has been challenging, filled with both disappointments and rewards, but the best part of this service has been the opportunity to deepen my relationship with so many of my neighbors.

My favorite part of the process is about to start, as the session winds down and I get the chance to get out in the community, talk with voters and discuss issues. Two years ago, I travelled throughout District 92 in order to introduce myself, listen to concerns and begin shaping the approach I have used in serving in the House of Representatives on your behalf. I have already started that process again and I hope to catch you home so we can talk as I travel throughout the District over the next few months.

The biggest lesson that I have learned in these last two years of service is that staying in touch and listening is the most important things I can do. There are plenty of jokes about politicians -- and spending as much time as I do in Augusta, I sometimes can understand why. By and large, I spend my time with many men and women who are truly committed to serving their communities -- and they are the best members of the Legislature. Regardless of party affiliation or ideology, the appetite to serve and the willingness to listen and work on behalf of constituents is what separates the best legislators from the people putting in their time or pushing an ideological agenda.

My job over the last two years has been challenging, but it has been made easier by your support, encouragement and -- most importantly -- your ideas and opinions. Hearing from you, keeping in touch allows me to stay grounded in the real concerns of people in the River Valley. That is the key to my being able to represent this area to the best of my abilities. The next session promises to be even more challenging and if I am fortunate enough to continue to represent the River Valley, I will need even more dialogue with my constituents. Over the next few months, I hope we can step up the dialogue. I am only able to be effective if I can hear your voice.

Transparency and access are keys to this process. Maine provides good access to the work of the legislature -- audio of every committee hearing and work session is streamed live on the internet and available. The discussions and activities in the House and Senate Chambers provide both live streamed audio and video when we are in session. A number of folks in the River Valley have commented positively to me about these features.

Finally, your voice is the heart of our democracy, and I want to do all I can to get your ideas and opinions. Over the last two years, I have used every means I can to reach out -- but I intend to keep getting better. So let me hear from you. You can find me on Facebook, contact me on Twitter, e-mail me at petersonhouse08@gmail.com, or call me at (207) 776-8051.

Our conversation and your input is vital as I continue to represent the interests of the River Valley in Augusta. I’ll look forward to continuing the dialogue.

Floor Remarks: LD 1360

On April 7th, 2010, LD 1360 "An Act To Allow Law Enforcement and Family Members To Petition the District Court To Initiate Assisted Outpatient Treatment", came to the floor of the House of Representatives. Reprinted below are the comments I made on the record from the floor:

Madame Speaker and Ladies and Gentlemen of the House...

I speak today in opposition to the pending motion, with great respect for my colleagues on the Health and Human Services Committee that are on the current report in front of us.

LD 1360 is a bill which was extensively discussed in the Health and Human Services Committee and resulted in a divided report with two very different amendments which reflect two different approaches to a complex issue -- the best way to treat Maine citizens with a psychiatric disability in a community setting.

The subject at hand is the use of the Progressive Treatment Program or PTP which has been court-ordered outpatient treatment, typically under very close supervision, as a means of providing treatment and support for a person with a significant psychiatric disorder. This Progressive Treatment Program approach was originally enacted as a pilot several years ago with a sunset provision for July of this year.

Should we fail to act on this matter, the Progressive Treatment Program will be curtailed and a tool that has proved valuable to some individuals will no longer be available. Acting to maintain this out-patient treatment tool seems to be reasonable -- for it provides additional alternatives for individuals who are dealing with the impacts of a psychiatric disability.

Where the committee disagreed, and we split on a 9 to 5 vote, was regarding what approach to take. Committee Amendment B, which was the minority report that I supported, essentially leaves the existing program intact, extends the sunset provision until July 1, 2014, and calls for additional review and analysis of the effectiveness of the Progressive Treatment Program -- with a report due to the Committee in January of 2012.

Committee Amendment A describes a number of new elements in the Progressive Treatment Program, and expands both the mandatory nature of this out-patient treatment regime, the people who can order participation in the program, as well as the nature of that participation. In our debate today you have heard people speak about what they perceive as the advantages of these expansions of both mandatory participation and the people who can direct such participation. I will not comment extensively on the details of the approach because I did not support it. Frankly, I was not convinced in Committee or by the debate on the floor that the additional mandated elements would improve outcomes for the individuals or the community. While I think that a Progressive Treatment Program is another valuable tool in helping Maine citizens manage a psychiatric disability, I was concerned that the new elements have expanded the program in ways that could have unintended negative consequences. If you read the language and see the number of caveats, protections and limitations -- it becomes clear very quickly that we are on a slippery slope. I prefer to go slow on any mandated interventions that can deprive people of their freedom to choose.

All of us have encountered the impacts of psychiatric disability in our communities, perhaps in our own families. I am glad it no longer carries the stigma it once had, and that folks with a psychiatric disability are now able to be integrated into our communities and live productive and fulfilling lives. In my career as someone who encourages independent living for people with all types of disabilities -- physical, sensory, cognitive, or psychiatric -- I have worked closely with people who have made great strides in living as independently as possible. Providing the tools for that independence is the key to me. Community based service alternatives are essential -- but so is the freedom to choose the appropriate alternative. I am concerned that the majority report tips the delicate balance in the wrong direction on this matter of personal autonomy. Providing resources is essential, mandating the use of those resources … I am just not sure.

This discussion is a variation on a theme we often discuss in this Chamber and have for many, many years. How do we strike the balance between protecting the community and the individual, and giving individuals control, and the right to decide and even “the right to make the wrong decision?” There are some debates that come around over and over -- making helmets mandatory for all motorcycle riders -- there are always passionate voices and good arguments on both sides. Some of my colleagues would, no doubt, be happy to regulate a number of the behaviors that we know are “bad for us” like tobacco use. We always balance that in allowing for personal decision-making and autonomy. We must think long and hard when we tip that balance and take away people’s autonomy.

This body always struggles to find the balance -- and so we must here. This is another instance where we must find the “sweet spot” -- the point at which we encourage behaviors that are healthy and appropriate, without eliminating an individual’s autonomy. The sweet spot is hard to find on this issue -- because it is complex. How wide are our community norms? Where does behavior cross the line into being inappropriate? Who will be the keepers of those norms? Who decides? What is the basis for the decision? Should an ACT Team (Assertive Community Treatment Team) made up of a psychiatrist, a mental health nurse, licensed Master’s level clinicians, and counselors/case managers be the decision makers? Maybe the head of a psychiatric hospital? Or the Commissioner of Health and Human Services? Should it be a law enforcement officer who has information from a concerned family member? This proposal, even in its latest amended form introduces many more players and many more complexities into the mandating of treatments -- even in a community setting. It is not a responsibility I would personally welcome -- I know that. Do we really want to create this unwieldy system that can ultimately deprive an individual of his or her autonomy and decision-making?

I have not been convinced that a case has been made to expand the ways that a Progressive Treatment Program can be mandated -- without significant consequences for an individual living independently in the community. We need to maintain this tool, but we need to proceed with greater caution before we do anything that may take away the liberty or the autonomy of a person with a disability -- including a psychiatric disability -- no matter how good our motives may be. In this case, I am convinced that the motives behind the bill are well-intentioned. It is what is not intended, and the impact those unintended consequences may have on the lives of our fellow citizens -- that concerns me.

This vote will be a matter of conscience and one where we each weigh our values and our beliefs. I will continue to be voting against the majority report, Committee Amendment A as amended by the other body, and urge the more restrained approach taken by the minority of the HHS Committee in Committee Amendment B. I hope you will join me in rejecting the current motion, so we can have the opportunity to consider and pass Committee Amendment B and maintain this important tool for community based out-patient mental health services without unduly expanding its scope in a way that could undermine the autonomy of some of Maine’s vulnerable citizens.

Thank you, Madame Speaker.