Opening day at the Legislature last week — usually a moment of celebration and selfies, congratulations and renewal — turned into a bad day for lawmakers, and a worse day for Gov. Janet Mills.

The fault is largely the governor’s. Mills knows what it’s like on swearing-in day; she’s been elected attorney general four times and served three House terms. Yet she tried to force through a nearly $500 million spending bill before many legislators had found their seats.

Supposedly, there were precedents for this extraordinary ask, but there are none. The most recent example, the 1994 organizing session, appropriated a mere $100,000 to contest just-announced closings of Loring Air Force Base and Portsmouth Naval Shipyard. Portsmouth survived; Loring did not.

Consider: No Appropriations Committee members have been appointed to review spending. No members of the public have spoken up about L.D. 1. The state budget won’t be presented until January.

Maybe none of this would matter if there was a clearly defined need, and an obvious solution. The governor’s bill meets neither test.

Though we fear dire consequences before winter begins to bite, we don’t really know where the needs will be greatest: housing, heating, medical care or food. The Mills proposal assumes it’s primarily fuel, but even if it is, L.D. 1 is hugely inefficient and untargeted.

Dig down into L.D. 1 and you’ll find sections devoted to direct relief — chiefly emergency housing assistance, and state money for the federal LIHEAP program that’s subsidized home heating since the 1970s. They amount to 16% of the bill’s costs.

The vast bulk — 84% — would go to $450 checks to individuals in households earning up to $200,000, virtually everyone in Maine. And the majority of that money will go to people who either don’t need it, or can afford to do without it.

Blanket check-writing made some sense last year, when the Legislature was divvying up a record $1.2 billion surplus with $850 checks. It makes none when there’s no budget on the table, a recession could be in the cards, and there are many other needs not yet considered by lawmakers.

It may sound harsh, but much of the $400 million for checks would be wasted. L.D. 1 spends the entire projected surplus through June 30, plus another $200 million in “fund transfers.”

Mills and legislative Democrats blame Senate Republicans for the bill’s failure, but they haven’t considered whether this was the only, or the best, solution.

In the hallways, I kept hearing it was the only way, but that’s not convincing. Last time it took more than three months to get all the checks out — a herculean effort.

Perhaps the Appropriations Committee, when appointed, could take another approach. First, scrap the checks and then focus on what will make the most difference for those in need.

LIHEAP has unrealistically low income standards. They should be raised, the dollars in L.D. 1 perhaps doubled, and many more state workers assigned to take applications. The Labor Department, which staffed up during the pandemic, and DHHS, which did huge amounts of COVID outreach, are likely sources.

Yes, it’s an essentially new program, but likely to be far more effective than indiscriminate check-writing that can be spent anywhere. The same goes for housing assistance — more than in L.D. 1, though we should realize the state simply can’t replace all the federal pandemic subsidies now expiring.

There are likely other needs a bipartisan bill could address. Even with generous provisions, it wouldn’t cost more than $200 million — and should get targeted dollars flowing faster.

We must understand that state government can’t do it all. Maine has resilient communities, and caring neighborhoods that help pick up the slack in a crisis.

There’s a budget process for good reason. No one person has the answer, and it’s the Legislature’s job to bring its own judgment to bear.

The worst thing about Mills’s opening day demand was that it reignited the partisan suspicions of each other’s motives that dogged the Legislature throughout the pandemic, when it hardly met in person for nearly three years.

This session can break that regrettable pattern, but only if lawmakers trust each other. I’ve heard accusations that Republicans will reject any emergency spending for those homeless, hungry and cold, but that’s hard to believe — and blaming each other gets us nowhere.

The only way to find out is to draft the bill, hold public hearings, and negotiate a final version — all of which can be done relatively quickly.

Any legislator who then holds out will have to answer to their constituents. That’s the ultimate test, as it should be.

Douglas Rooks, a Maine editor, commentator and reporter since 1984, is the author of three books, and is now researching the life and career of a U.S. Chief Justice. He welcomes comment at: drooks@tds.net