Why and How to Call

Maybe I've been out of the state for too long but... (4.00 / 1)

... how could Lou D'Allesandro be undecided about this?  

---

by: NH Ex-pat @ Sat Apr 25, 2009 at 13:00:06 PM UTC

'Undeclared' may be more accurate (4.00 / 1)

Those listed as 'Undecided' have made no public declaration that I know of. But hey, an elected official who doesn't declare a position should be considered undecided rather than close-mouthed.

All the Dems voted For civil unions in 2007, though.

---

by: elwood @ Sat Apr 25, 2009 at 13:13:21 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

True... (4.00 / 2)

... I just thought this should be a no-brainer for D'Allesandro from the get go. I've always thought of him as a mainstream liberal and this is something he wouldn't hesitate to support. It doesn't seem like him. Unless someone knows something I don't know.  

---

by: NH Ex-pat @ Sat Apr 25, 2009 at 13:28:25 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

He's my Senator (4.00 / 1)

Just spoke to him. He's still noncommittal, but seems to be leaning against it.

He still believes CUs provide the same rights as marriage. He needs to hear from people who can show him that's not so.

One thing I forgot to bring up to him was that 2 of the 9 Republican Representatives in his district (Irene Messier and Cal Pratt) voted for it.

Either way, he seems to be on the wrong side right now, but he can be convinced if we act fast.

Classical Liberal since 1983

---

by: Reverend Ryan @ Sat Apr 25, 2009 at 15:09:42 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

He Needs To Know... (4.00 / 1)

...that even IF Civil Unions provided all of the same rights as "marriage," it isn't marriage, and therein lies the discrimination and inequality.  He's been happily married for many years.  Would HE trade his "marriage" for anyone else's "Civil Union?"  

---

by: Rep. Jim Splaine @ Sat Apr 25, 2009 at 15:20:09 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Someone... (0.00 / 0)

 

should arrange a meeting with D'Alessandro and human rights leaders working on passing it. I think they'll get the point across well.  

---

by: NH Ex-pat @ Sat Apr 25, 2009 at 16:00:01 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

That's weird... (4.00 / 2)

I could have sworn I read somewhere (probably in March) that said D''Allesandro was on board, and I don't think I just dreamt it. How sad to see him flip. :( Will e-mail him shortly, hope he gets the chance to read it.

---

by: Blanco @ Sun Apr 26, 2009 at 00:14:32 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Wrote him this followup: (4.00 / 4)

Sen. D'Allesandro,

Thanks for speaking with me regarding HB 436. I didn't want to take up too much of your time on the phone, but I want to share a few more thoughts with you.

You've no doubt been getting many calls about this issue. The truth is, a very well funded out of state lobby has been operating patch-through calls from a DC office, inciting fear, and then patching them through to your number - but only if they're opposed. They are targeting only citizens over 55, because they know that those 35-55 overall have no strong views on it, and those under 35 overwhelmingly support it.

I also want you to take notice that even two of the nine House Republicans who represent your district voted for the bill. I've spoken with both at length. They see it as consistent with the conservative values of nonintervention in private lives and the economic well-being of children and families.

The NHDP Platform reads, "We pledge to fight all efforts to divide our state because of race, religion, disability, immigration status, national origin, age, sexual orientation, or gender identity." This bill is consistent with Democratic values.

Civil unions divide our citizenry into two groups, based on a factor that should be completely arbitrary in the eyes of the law. As I've said, they don't completely provide the same legal status, even on the state level, as marriage. But even if they did, it's still a more subtle, but very real, modern version of separate drinking fountains. I have no doubt that if you and Patricia had the choice between a marriage and a civil union, you'd immediately choose marriage. To me, that makes the inequality glaringly obvious. They aren't the same. They aren't even equal. Civil unions can't be "fixed" either; separation ensures inequality, as it's an element of inequality itself.

I was brought up Catholic. I was baptized and confirmed at St. Mary's Church in Odessa, TX, moving to Manchester in adulthood. I never missed CCE/CCD, was a leader in our youth group, and served at the altar for many years. This bill in no way threatens my faith or anyone else's. It is about equal treatment by our government, which belongs to everyone. It is about the greatest commandment: love your neighbor as yourself.

Please, do the right thing. Search your soul and see that this is the right thing to do in the eyes of your constituents, in the eyes of the nation, and in the eyes of God.

Sincerely,
Ryan Marvin
(address removed)
Manchester NH 03102

Classical Liberal since 1983

---

by: Reverend Ryan @ Sat Apr 25, 2009 at 17:53:18 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Aside from "separate but equal" being a well-established fallacy, (4.00 / 3)

Civil Unions are not equal to marriage when you go to a state that doesn't have Civil Unions and they don't feel the need to recognize yours.

Sure, some won't recognize gay marriages anyway, as per DOMA, but at least that can be struck down by a court eventually. Or, you know, repealed, if we ever get a Democratic Congress and a Democratic President.

---

by: This Was The Moment @ Sat Apr 25, 2009 at 18:27:27 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Senator lookup page (4.00 / 2)

You might want to add a link to the General Court's Who's My Legislator? page, which lets you pick your town from a dropdown or map to find your Reps and Senators.

---

by: Vis Unita Fortior @ Sat Apr 25, 2009 at 13:45:35 PM UTC

This turned up in my in-box (4.00 / 2)

this morning:

Martin Luther King writes in his "Letter from a Birmingham Jail": "

More and more I feel that the people of ill will have used time much more effectively than have the people of good will. We will have to repent in this generation not merely for the hateful words and actions of the bad people but for the appalling silence of the good people. Human progress never rolls in on wheels of inevitability; it comes through the tireless efforts of men willing to be co-workers with God, and without this hard work, time itself becomes an ally of the forces of social stagnation. We must use time creatively, in the knowledge that the time is always ripe to do right."

Also, I hope the good Senators are aware that there is a paid out of state campaign behind many of the pro-discrimination phone calls, e-mails, etc.

It seems HB415 is getting lost in the shuffle. I hope that committee reprt can be reversed as well.

---

by: Jennifer Daler @ Sat Apr 25, 2009 at 13:58:11 PM UTC

Suggestion (4.00 / 2)

If you have an extra ten or 20 minutes today, call or e mail your friends, family members or whoever who are in favor of the Equality Bill.  Ask them to call their or e mail their senator.  I keep repeating this - the anti-Equality people are calling people over 50 (as someone who is about to turn 55 this is embarassing to me that my age group is fertile ground for this targetting) and asking them to call their senators in three districts: Lou, Betsi and Peggy.  These three particularly need to hear from the rest of us. It makes a difference when 100 people call saying vote no, and only six or seven call saying vote yes.      



"When you get to the end of your rope, tie a knot and hang on."  Franklin D. Roosevelt    

---

by: Kathy Sullivan 2 @ Sat Apr 25, 2009 at 14:05:48 PM UTC

Is it worth it for out of district folks to call those folks? (0.00 / 0)

As D10'er does Lou care to hear from me?

Hope >> Fear





Create a free Blue Hampshire account and join the conversation.

---

by: Mike Hoefer @ Sat Apr 25, 2009 at 16:14:59 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Yes (0.00 / 0)

...Yes!

---

by: Rep. Jim Splaine @ Sat Apr 25, 2009 at 16:17:28 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

msgs left with (4.00 / 1)

D'Allesandro
Sgambati
Hassan
Gilmore
DeVries

No voicemail picked up on Sen. Larsen's line.

Took maybe 15 minutes total

Core Message
- NH is ready.
- It will be nice for our state to be on the leading edge of a civil right's rather than the trailing edge.

Give this comment a "4" if you have made your calls!

Hope >> Fear





Create a free Blue Hampshire account and join the conversation.

---

by: Mike Hoefer @ Sat Apr 25, 2009 at 16:48:22 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Don't laugh... (4.00 / 1)

... but I e-mailed Teddy-boy Gatsas. I used the horse racing angle and then weaved in why the marriage equality bill is consistent with Republican/Libertarian values. Whatever works right?  

---

by: NH Ex-pat @ Sat Apr 25, 2009 at 15:57:57 PM UTC

LOL (0.00 / 0)

...okay, I take the LOL back.  Give 'em a try.  I think several of the Republicans "get it," but in their case they're playing politics to their perceived base.  Playing politics is what Democrats should NOT do.  They should be honest with themselves, and with us -- to support equality, or not to support equality, that is the question.  

---

by: Rep. Jim Splaine @ Sat Apr 25, 2009 at 16:02:39 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I was amazed... (0.00 / 0)

at the number of Republicans in the Vermont House who supported the bill and the veto override. Former House Speaker Rick Hube (R-Londonderry) and current Minority Whip Patty Komline (R-Dorset) both supported it. When I heard they were, I knew a lot of Republicans would follow. Hube is Mr. Moneybags for the Vermont GOP. Komline is, well, the Minority Whip. Hube made an eloquent speech how marriage equality is consistent with GOP/Libertarian values. He said people should have the right to determine their own lives and that the bill was consistent with that. Period. It blew me away because I didn't expect him to support it, plus he got it. He understood the connection between individual choice/responsibility and marriage equality.

So #1. Go after the Republican leadership. and/or #2. talk with the "friendly" GOP how this is consistent with individual choice making. Maybe that might work. It did with THE most important GOP reps. in the Vermont House.  

---

by: NH Ex-pat @ Sat Apr 25, 2009 at 16:16:23 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

thing is (0.00 / 0)

they have no incentive not to play politics. Someone like Gallus is safe from a Democratic challenger in District 1, thanks to the gerrymandering of the past. He has no incentive whatsoever to risk the wrath of his party by doing the right thing.  

---

by: susanthe @ Sat Apr 25, 2009 at 16:34:58 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Office vs. Home (0.00 / 0)

My opinion:

If your Senator has publicly taken a position, call their office.

If your Senator has not taken a position, I think it's entirely appropriate to call them at home, provided it's not during dinner hours, etc.

Never call a Senator at home unless you're a constituent.

Classical Liberal since 1983

---

by: Reverend Ryan @ Sat Apr 25, 2009 at 16:58:33 PM UTC

Disagree. (0.00 / 0)

They have office lines, don't call at home unless it's an emergency.

---

by: This Was The Moment @ Sat Apr 25, 2009 at 18:32:24 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Emergency? (4.00 / 2)

Thousands of our fellow citizens are being denied basic human rights.

We have 4 days to change several hearts and minds.

If we don't, it will be another 2 years before we can try again.

Their office lines are being jammed with patch-through robocalls funded by the Mormon Church.

Senators on the fence urgently need to hear from their constituents.

I'd say this qualifies as an emergency.

Classical Liberal since 1983

---

by: Reverend Ryan @ Sat Apr 25, 2009 at 18:53:18 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Emergency! (0.00 / 0)

Red Light Emergency!!!

Call.  Contact.  Bother.  Interrupt.  Let 'em hear us.  Equality.  2009.  This Wednesday.

---

by: Rep. Jim Splaine @ Sat Apr 25, 2009 at 19:42:39 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Most Senators list their home phone (0.00 / 0)

You can certainly make a case that constituents are entitled to call them at home.

I didn't post home numbers simply because I believe an office call will be equally effective and doesn't carry the same risk of backfiring by annoying someone you are trying to influence.

---

by: elwood @ Sat Apr 25, 2009 at 19:20:48 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Annoying Is Good (0.00 / 0)

Annoy too.  If someone would vote against this issue because we are annoying them, then God please help us.  And forgive them.  

I've been harassed, bashed, and intimidated (attempted, at least -- it's mighty hard to intimidate me) all my life.  The Senators on-the-fence have to hear from us.  

Remember, too -- they ARE hearing from the other side.  

---

by: Rep. Jim Splaine @ Sat Apr 25, 2009 at 19:45:51 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Senators expect you to call them at home (4.00 / 1)

Of course keep it brief, polite and respectful, and NOT during dinner hour.  

No'm Sayn?

---

by: BurtCohen @ Sat Apr 25, 2009 at 21:10:57 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Senator Bragdon is using Govenor Lynch as cover to vote against this bill (4.00 / 1)

In an email to me, Senator Bragdon said: "I agree with Governor Lynch that the term "marriage" is one that has a very traditional meaning and that the term should not be used for same-sex couples."

Oy vey.  

---

by: Putney Swope @ Sat Apr 25, 2009 at 20:59:46 PM UTC

Nice try, Senator Bragdon. (4.00 / 2)

You voted against civil unions in 2007, too. And the Governor signed.

Lynch has nothing to do with your vote. You're a homophobe, like every other Republican in the Senate.

---

by: elwood @ Sat Apr 25, 2009 at 22:15:44 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I went through all the (D) undecideds (4.00 / 1)

Not all the numbers picked up for an answering message but a good deal did.

I rambled on the first calls. But by the last call the message was finally clear -- say right at the front of the call I'm so and so, and as a New Hampshire Democrat I am asking you to support the Marriage Equality bill. And that I feel this will be the legacy of this Senate session, and this will be how history remembers them and us. And I hope they will make New Hampshire proud. Please support this bill. Thanks for your time.

So I've got a script for myself, down. Maybe I should call them all again tommorrow?

I wanted to also call Molly Kelly and thank her for her unflinching support of this -- it makes me proud to be her constituent. But the answering machine did not pick up on that one (I seemed to be being forwarded to addt'l numbers maybe?). That's definitely one call that I will retry later. I think its important we show our appreciation for Senators that are not making us beg for basic rights legislation.

---

by: Mike Caulfield @ Sat Apr 25, 2009 at 21:13:31 PM UTC

Email to Molly Kelly (0.00 / 0)

Subject: Thank you for supporting the Marriage Equality Bill

I haven't always agreed with your votes or stances. But I am so proud to be from Cheshire County right now. When other Senators wavered, you were firm.

Thank you, thank you, thank you.

Best,

Mike Caulfield

---

by: Mike Caulfield @ Sat Apr 25, 2009 at 23:02:04 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I've been told that Jackie Cilley is still undecided (0.00 / 0)

---

by: Putney Swope @ Sat Apr 25, 2009 at 22:39:04 PM UTC

Changed her to light green based on this (4.00 / 1)

Hope >> Fear





Create a free Blue Hampshire account and join the conversation.

---

by: Mike Hoefer @ Sat Apr 25, 2009 at 23:16:08 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I'll get a list of Reps who voted for n/t (0.00 / 0)

---

by: elwood @ Sat Apr 25, 2009 at 23:21:39 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Cilley (0.00 / 0)

But I see she read this on behalf of her nephew, who signed in to the hearing but for some reason was not allowed to speak.  

So perhaps we are in error here?  

birch paper; on Twitter @deanbarker

---

by: Dean Barker @ Sat Apr 25, 2009 at 23:31:30 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Don't forget to link to this diary on Facebook and in emails. (4.00 / 1)

---

by: This Was The Moment @ Sun Apr 26, 2009 at 00:47:53 AM UTC

For the shy/lazy, here's what I've been leaving on Senators' voicemail. (4.00 / 1)

Beep.

Hi Senator [name], my name is [your name], I'm a New Hampshire voter, and I'm calling to ask you to do the right thing and support HB436, the marriage equality bill.  This is not a difficult issue.  This is an easy issue.  In a state that proudly proclaims, "live free or die", in a country founded on "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness", government cannot be telling people how to live their lives, or whom to live them with.  Civil Unions are not enough; we saw for far too long in America that there is no such thing as separate but equal.  Nobody is asking your CHURCH to participate in something you don't believe in.  We just want everyone to have equal rights under LAW, and this doesn't affect anyone except the people whose rights are currently being denied.  But none of us are free until all of us are free.  I know this is controversial now, but the arc of history bends toward justice, and in our lifetime, we WILL see equality for gays and lesbians, from sea to shining sea, just like we have seen equality for those of a different skin color.  The question is not whether, but when, and when the time comes, will you, Senator, stand on the right or the wrong side of history.  Life is short; please don't make our fellow New Hampshirites wait any longer to have their rights recognized.  Thank you for listening; I know you'll do the right thing.

Feel free to use any of that, but make it your own, even if that means simply cutting half the sentences. Nobody likes to listen to someone who's just reciting a script.

---

by: This Was The Moment @ Sun Apr 26, 2009 at 01:16:25 AM UTC

RE: The Full Court Press (4.00 / 1)

I received this email from Bob Meade this morning, I assume he must have sent it to the entire House (I can't imagine I'm on his personal email list!) The repugs are keeping the pressure on.

The liberal dems and the pro gay crowd.are pressing hard on Senators to support the (Gay marriage) HB436 and (The Bathroom Bill) HB415 being voted on this Wed. in the Senate.  These are the senators you need to contact and let them know you are not in favor of this social legisation.   Call or e-mail them and get others to do the same.

Senator Sgambati - (Tilton area)  286-8931  kathleen.sgambati@leg.state.nh.us
Senator Devries - (Manchester area)  647-0117   betsi.devries@leg.state.nh.us
Senator D'Allesandro - (Manchester area)  669-3494   dalas@leg.state.nh.us
Senator Hassan - (Concord area)  772-4187   maggie.hassan@leg.state.nh.us
Senator Gilmour - (Hollis area)  465-2336    Peggy.Gilmour@leg.state.nh.us
Senator Larson - (Concord area) 225-6130   sylvia.larsen@leg.state.nh.us
Senator Cilley - (Barrington area)  664-5597   jacalyn.cilley@leg.state.nh.us
Senator Reynolds - (Plymouth area)  536-5553   deb.reynolds@leg.state.nh.us

Thanks
Bob

Robert Mead
Judiciary Committee
NH State Representative
Hillsborough District 4

---

by: mrollo @ Mon Apr 27, 2009 at 16:26:31 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I actually replied to mead's message... (0.00 / 0)

This didn't get sent to his Voters Letter list but it presumably got to Mead:

Technically HB415 is not a bathroom bill: it has nothing to do with plumbing fixtures.  The opposition to it is motivated largely by fear of male-to-female transsexuals (who are actually a small group who are no more prone to criminal behavior than the rest of the population) and also by a desire to gut the Human Rights Commission.  There was another bill related to the Human Rights Commission which failed to get out of the House.

Oddly there seems to be no fear at all of female-to-male transsexuals.

--Rep. Timothy Horrigan (D-Durham)

PS: I am in fact a supporter of both bills.

One of the many ironies of this battle is that the rightwing Republicans in House opposed HB415 because they thought it would enable transsexuals to use the Human Rights Commission process--- whereas the moderate Democrats in the Senate opposed it because they thought transsexuals could already avail themselves of the Human Rights Commission process.  

---

by: TimothyHorrigan @ Mon Apr 27, 2009 at 23:43:15 PM UTC

[ Parent ]