Your editorial on Oct. 12-13 took me to task for a lack of clarity on two points: terrorism and taxing Social Security. At your suggestion, I write to set the record straight.

In a televised debate last week, I was asked for my views about a pending war with Iraq. I began my answer by saying that we must leave politics at the water’s edge on this issue. I then went on, as your editorial accurately portrays, to offer a commentary on the many dangers a military action by the United States might provoke from Iraq.

I further said as you pointed out that I didn’t think there was a real threat of more terrorism back here in the United States (from Iraq). This assessment was confirmed the very next day by the head of the CIA in testimony before Congress. Regrettably, I did not, in that sentence, qualify my statement about terrorism here in the United States with a direct reference to Iraq. We are generally given one minute to answer questions in these TV debates. Obviously, my opponent knew what I was referring to with that statement during the debate or he would have asked me a follow-up question to clarify my position.

But the very next day, in an attempt to score political points, Kevin Raye regrettably took this one statement to the press across Maine to somehow suggest that I wasn’t concerned with terrorism and homeland security. This sort of reaction is exactly why we need to leave politics at the water’s edge regarding war with Iraq. Because I wanted to make sure no one in the press was confused by the Raye press release, my press secretary called all of the major reporters covering this race including your own. The reporter for the Bangor Daily News, like all the others, chose not to write a followup on Raye’s political charge.

To further clarify my point for Raye, I provided him a letter making clear what seemed to be clear to everyone else. While terrorism in general continues to be a real threat, acts of terrorism by Iraq here in the United States are not an immediate threat. I strongly support President Bush in his war on terrorism. So when Raye continued to politicize this serious issue the very next night in another debate, I did in fact suggest he was distorting my position.

As to the so-called vote to tax Social Security, the people of Maine have heard Raye’s distorted one-sided version of this legislation for four months now. So let me once again try to set the record straight. In 1999, both Democrats and many Republicans in the Maine Legislature sought to provide tax relief to approximately 51,000 retired teachers, military personnel and public employees because their pensions had been so unfairly taxed by the state of Maine.

AARP supported this legislation until some Republicans in the Legislature scared seniors across Maine into thinking that everyone who received Social Security would see a tax increase. In fact, the legislation sought to conform with federal statutes regarding Social Security and would have had absolutely zero impact on 90 percent or 225,480 Social Security recipients while providing a modest tax cut to those 51,000 Maine seniors on a public pension. Given the public outcry resulting from the very serious confusion surrounding the legislation, the governor ultimately vetoed the bill. I, along with every single member of the Maine Senate, voted to sustain his veto in order to end, once and for all, the confusion over this issue. Social Security is not taxed in Maine and never has been.

The very next year, as Senate chair of the Appropriations Committee, I helped appropriate general fund revenue in the supplemental state budget to include a modest tax cut for those retired teachers, military personnel and public employees who had been so unfairly taxed by the state of Maine. In fact, in my eight years in the Maine Senate, I’ve voted for more than half a billion dollars in tax cuts – all of which were passed and signed into law by Gov. King.

Finally, let’s consider how my opponent has used this issue. He is running an ad saying the average Maine Social Security recipient would have been taxed more than $500. This is a bold faced lie as the legislation would have had zero impact on 225,480 or

90 percent of Social Security recipients across Maine.

I understand the temptation of politicians and their friends to take votes and distort their impact and their purpose. But when you put that together with the money we see in modern politics, like the one million dollars my opponent is spending on negative ads, then you have a blue print for destroying responsible government.

The reason it’s getting harder and harder to find a member of Congress who will vote responsibly is because of tactics like Raye’s. Someone like myself, who has made the tough decisions and voted to cut spending and reduce taxes, sees their motives totally distorted by the Kevin Rayes of the world. What is the result?

No one in Washington is willing to do the responsible thing because they fear an attack ad in the next election will so distort their position that even the candidate won’t recognize it. The Bangor Daily News was right a week ago when it said that the best way to deal with this sort of politics was not to reward it on Election Day.

Michael Michaud is the Democratic candidate for Congress in Maine’s 2nd District.