Opinion: Legislators ‘take a walk’ to avoid Maine’s child protection problem

In the early hours of April 18, Maine’s legislators left the State House after spending months workshopping, debating and voting on bills that impact the lives of all Mainers.

Legislators are expected to return just one more time to vote on whether to override any vetoes the governor issues before adjourning for good. Mainers paying attention will notice that the Legislature concluded the bulk of its work without addressing one of today’s most urgent concerns: Maine’s failing child protection system that places kids in harm’s way.

A critical piece of legislation, L.D. 779, would have removed the Office of Child and Family Services from under the Department of Health and Human Services and made it its own department, thus increasing transparency and dedicating more resources to this pressing issue.

• I sponsored a nearly identical bill when I was a state senator in 2021; that bill failed to become law after earning bipartisan support in the Senate but failing to earn enough support in the House.
• Rather than taking honest votes for or against this bill, legislators avoided a politically thorny issue by taking advantage of little-known parliamentary maneuvers to skirt accountability and avoid healthy debate.
• Once again, the measure received overwhelming bipartisan support in the Senate, with 22 senators supporting and eight opposed.
• When it was time for the House to vote, amid speculation that the bill could actually pass, the bill was tabled, and it would remain tabled until the Legislature adjourned.
• Thus, L.D. 779 and any chance of its passage was killed, without even the chance for discussion on the House floor.

There were reasons to be hopeful that the Legislature might be ready to make real change this year. In November 2023, the director of the Office of Child and Family Services resigned amid ongoing frustration and scrutiny from the public and members of the Legislature’s Government Oversight Committee. In December 2023, the nonprofit Walk a Mile in Their Shoes released a 32-page report outlining the ways in which Maine’s child protection system is failing and making recommendations for improvements. The report reflects the voices of hundreds of Mainers who came forward to share their experiences with the child protection system, often at great personal risk.

And in January 2024, just as the Legislature started its work, the Maine Child Welfare Ombudsman released her fourth report in as many years highlighting the serious deficiencies in Maine’s child protection system that leave children vulnerable to neglect and abuse. Perhaps more than ever, Maine people were mobilized in support of real change to the system, and they were ready to advocate for that change at the State House.

That’s what makes the fate of L.D. 779 and this lack of legislative accountability all the more frustrating.

• For this important bill to be killed without even the chance for open debate is disrespectful to the many people who have dedicated years of their lives to improving the protection of children in state care.
• As the bill’s sponsor, Sen. Jeff Timberlake, told the Press Herald: “We could have at least had the conversation.”

For a total of 26 years, I served in the Maine House of Representatives and the Maine State Senate. I am familiar with the tactics legislators use to avoid going on the record in support of or in opposition to controversial issues. These “strategies” – including “taking a walk” to miss a vote – come in handy when legislators fear that their positions will come back to haunt them in future elections or make life difficult for their allies.

Some of these tactics are hard for the public, the media, and in some cases even fellow legislators to detect. Indefinitely tabling a bill – knowing that the bill will automatically die when the Legislature adjourns, as happened to L.D. 779 – is just one way this can happen.

I write to help the public better understand the tactics that were used to block a healthy discussion about child protection in our state. They are tactics that the people of Maine should not tolerate from their representatives, especially as Maine children experience recurring maltreatment at more than twice the national average.

Maine people need to have the tools to understand what’s happening in Augusta, especially when it comes to the critical issue of protecting children. And Maine’s legislators need to prioritize child protection and government accountability over political expediency and the wishes of DHHS. Maine’s children are counting on them.

SDGs, Targets, and Indicators

1. Which SDGs are addressed or connected to the issues highlighted in the article?

• SDG 1: No Poverty
• SDG 3: Good Health and Well-being
• SDG 5: Gender Equality
• SDG 10: Reduced Inequalities
• SDG 16: Peace, Justice, and Strong Institutions

The article discusses the failing child protection system in Maine, which relates to SDG 1 (No Poverty) as it highlights the vulnerability of children in state care. It also connects to SDG 3 (Good Health and Well-being) as it mentions the recurring maltreatment of Maine children. The issue of child protection is also relevant to SDG 5 (Gender Equality) and SDG 10 (Reduced Inequalities) as it affects the well-being and safety of all children, regardless of gender or socio-economic background. Additionally, the article mentions the lack of legislative accountability and the use of parliamentary maneuvers, which relates to SDG 16 (Peace, Justice, and Strong Institutions) as it highlights the need for transparent and accountable governance.

2. What specific targets under those SDGs can be identified based on the article’s content?

• Target 1.3: Implement nationally appropriate social protection systems and measures for all, including floors, and by 2030 achieve substantial coverage of the poor and the vulnerable.
• Target 3.2: By 2030, end preventable deaths of newborns and children under 5 years of age, with all countries aiming to reduce neonatal mortality to at least as low as 12 per 1,000 live births and under-5 mortality to at least as low as 25 per 1,000 live births.
• Target 5.2: Eliminate all forms of violence against all women and girls in the public and private spheres, including trafficking and sexual and other types of exploitation.
• Target 10.2: By 2030, empower and promote the social, economic and political inclusion of all, irrespective of age, sex, disability, race, ethnicity, origin, religion or economic or other status.
• Target 16.6: Develop effective, accountable and transparent institutions at all levels.

Based on the article’s content, the specific targets that can be identified are:
– Target 1.3: The article highlights the need for improved child protection systems to ensure the well-being and safety of vulnerable children.
– Target 3.2: The article mentions the recurring maltreatment of Maine children, indicating the need to reduce preventable deaths and improve overall child health.
– Target 5.2: The article discusses the importance of protecting children, including girls, from violence and exploitation within the child protection system.
– Target 10.2: The article emphasizes the need for inclusive policies and actions to address the failing child protection system and reduce inequalities in child welfare.
– Target 16.6: The article criticizes the lack of transparency and accountability in the legislative process, highlighting the importance of developing effective and transparent institutions.

3. Are there any indicators mentioned or implied in the article that can be used to measure progress towards the identified targets?

Yes, there are indicators mentioned or implied in the article that can be used to measure progress towards the identified targets. However, specific quantitative indicators are not explicitly mentioned in the article. To measure progress towards the identified targets, indicators such as the number of child protection cases, child mortality rates, rates of violence against children, inclusion of vulnerable groups in child protection policies, and transparency in legislative processes can be used.

SDGs, Targets, and Indicators Table

Copyright: Dive into this article, curated with care by SDG Investors Inc. Our advanced AI technology searches through vast amounts of data to spotlight how we are all moving forward with the Sustainable Development Goals. While we own the rights to this content, we invite you to share it to help spread knowledge and spark action on the SDGs.

Fuente: pressherald.com

Join us, as fellow seekers of change, on a transformative journey at https://sdgtalks.ai/welcome, where you can become a member and actively contribute to shaping a brighter future.