About
Learn More about our progressive online community for the Granite State.

Create an account today (it's free and easy) and get started!
Menu

Make a New Account

Username:

Password:



Forget your username or password?


Search




Advanced Search


The Masthead
Managing Editor
Mike Hoefer

Editors
elwood
susanthe
 William Tucker
The Roll, Etc.
Prog Blogs, Orgs & Alumni
Bank Slate
Betsy Devine
birch paper
Democracy for NH
Granite State Progress
Mike Caulfield
Miscellany Blue
Pickup Patriots
Re-BlueNH
Still No Going Back
Susan the Bruce
New Hampshire Labor News
Chaz Proulx: Right Wing Watch
Defending New Hampshire Public Education

Politicos & Punditry
The Burt Cohen Show
John Gregg
Landrigan
Pindell
Primary Monitor
Scala
Schoenberg
Spiliotes

Campaigns, Et Alia.
NH-Gov
- Maggie Hassan
- Jackie Cilley
NH-01
- Andrew Hosmer
- Carol Shea-Porter
- Joanne Dowdell
NH-02
- Ann McLane Kuster

ActBlue Hampshire
NHDP
DCCC
DSCC
DNC

National
Balloon Juice
billmon
Congress Matters
DailyKos
Digby
Hold Fast
Eschaton
FiveThirtyEight
MyDD
Open Left
Senate Guru
Swing State Project
Talking Points Memo

50 State Blog Network
Alabama
Arizona
California
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
Florida
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Missouri
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
North Carolina
North Dakota
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Rhode Island
Tennessee
Texas
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin

Equality Watch: HB 437

by: susanthe

Wed Mar 21, 2012 at 04:00:00 AM EDT
Since we'll all be watching what happens at the NH House today, this is an open thread for discussion and updates.  
susanthe :: Equality Watch: HB 437
Tags: , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email

Equality Watch: HB 437 | 48 comments
Drew Cline thinks the bill lose (0.00 / 0)
Cline said on WGIR this morningthat he thinks the bill will be defeated.  
Outright? (0.00 / 0)
You mean he thinks it won't even get a majority in to send it to the Senate? Or did he mean it won't pass with enough votes to override a veto? I'll be very impressed--and for once in the last year-and-a-half, not embarrassed by news from Concord--if it fails to get even a majority today.
[ Parent ]
Count me in that crowd (4.00 / 1)
I'd be doubly surprised if it outright died in the House.  Though, I have a sneaking suspicion that if that happened I'm sure Bully would find some way of Reconsideration later on in the session or even day.

Please NH House, surprise me in a good way today!

"We start working to beat these guys right now." -Jed Bartlet

[ Parent ]
Cline said the bill would lose (0.00 / 0)
It will not pass in the House
If that's the case (0.00 / 0)
I doubt the Speaker will even bring it to a vote.  He won't be embarrassed by this.  He and the leadership have put their necks on the line for it.

If he even has an inkling it won't pass, he won't bring the vote.  

"We start working to beat these guys right now." -Jed Bartlet

[ Parent ]
How is that possible? (0.00 / 0)
I can understand how they wouldn't have enough votes for an override of a veto, but how can they not have enough votes in that freak show to pass it?
[ Parent ]
That's what I'm wondering (0.00 / 0)
I didn't hear the interview so I can only speculate that they wouldn't have the votes to over turn the expected veto.

"We start working to beat these guys right now." -Jed Bartlet
[ Parent ]
House votes to limit debate via rules. (0.00 / 0)
196-124, IIRC, to give each side 10 minutes, each speaker max 5 minutes, if I understand it correctly.

This applies to all debates today.

Currently in a confusion over a motion to ITL a motion to reconsider CACR 11, to put a constitutional amendment limiting judges to 5-year terms on the November ballot. It didn't have the votes to pass earlier today when it was taken off the table. Motion fails 172-176. Speaker "rules that there is no further business to be done on CACR 11." That's a new one to me.

Does O'Brien make the rules up as he goes along? (0.00 / 0)

[ Parent ]
That's a real rule. (0.00 / 0)
You have to get a 3/5 vote of the body, currently 239, to pass a CACR.   So if you vote Ought to pass, and the bill gets , say 230 votes, that CACR does not pass.  The next motion should be Inecpedient to legislate, but if those same 230 people vote AGAINST ITL, that does not pass either.  Our tradition has been ( in the absence of motions to Special Order, or Table or such)  to simply give up and move on.  In the case of regular bills, which just need simple majority, you need a positive ITL vote to get the bill to die.

Here is a fact that should help you to fight a little longer.
Things that don't actually kill you outright make you stronger.

Piet Hein, Grooks

[ Parent ]
One hour later, (0.00 / 0)
"destoination cancer hospitals" are given the go-ahead, 198-161, and reconsideration is killed.

For those who don't know what "reconsideration is killed" means, you may entirely ignore it. It essentially means, "Yeah, we meant that last vote."

Now on to CACR 26, "Providing that the article authorizing the chief justice of the supreme court to make rules governing the administration of all the courts of the state shall be repealed."

CACR 26 vote: 237-115 motion fails (0.00 / 0)
It needed 239 votes.

Jasper moves to table.

Motion passes: 210-145. (0.00 / 0)
Now he can revive it later after arm-twisting.
[ Parent ]
Speaker recesses session until 3:00. (0.00 / 0)
Apparently needs ten minutes to decide on twisting arms or going for CACR 22, Providing that the chief justice shall adopt court rules with the concurrence of the general court.
[ Parent ]
Correction: motion fails 210-145: 2/3 needed. (0.00 / 0)
Now the Speaker has to either get someone to ask for reconsideration and come up with two more votes, or decide to give up on it and go for CACR 22, which he skipped over earlier to get to the (presumably preferred) CACR 26.
[ Parent ]
Reconsideration called on CACR 26 (0.00 / 0)
Rep. Hess got his arm twisted.

Roll Call requested.

Previous vote on CACR 26 was by division, so the speaker does not know who voted against it.

Rep. Jasper says we have a couple of more people in the hall now.

Vote is 242/111. Vote carries, so we will vote on OtP again.

[ Parent ]
Being arm-twisted into amending the constitution (4.00 / 1)
Anyone who can be arm-twisted into amending the constitution probably does not belong in public service. If someone can't feel strongly enough about changing the document that defines state government to withstand a little berating by an angry bearded flatlander, then I don't think they should be trusted with a crucial vote.
[ Parent ]
Reconsideration Ought to Pass Vote 239 to 114 (0.00 / 0)
Motion carries by the necessary 60%
[ Parent ]
Reconsideration gets enough votes to pass CACR. (0.00 / 0)
Rep. Weber asks, in PI, for those tired of "do-overs and game-playing" to vote No. Is hissed as she walks away from podium. Speaker has no comment.

CACR 26 passes, 239-114.

437 on: (0.00 / 0)
Dan McGuire talks @ his lesbian mom, sister, other relative in long, long lesbian relationships.

Is still in favor of repeal, because American Heritage Dictionary, extreme political correctness.

Is wearing dapper pink shirt.

Marilinda Garcia up. (0.00 / 0)
Seems to be reading a high school report on marriage.

Marriage exists to solve a problem, namely, what to do about what can result from sex between men and women which cannot result from sex between two same-sex people.

"For me, it's simple; it's purely based on biology."

"Your concern, as a state and society, is on my (ability to procreate.)"

"The cited benefits cannot be granted without telling a lie about what marriage is."

"No one is arguing that gay marriages will make marriages crumble tomorrow." Tell that to David Bates. But it will "contribute to the (undermining) of marriage."

Committee amendment fails by wide margin. (0.00 / 0)
Bates moves his floor amendment.

Mirski gets opinion of chair (currently Bettencourt) that Bates amendment is divisible (between two issues of repealing marriage and putting non-binding referendum question on the ballot).

Hopkinton Rep. (Richardson?) challenges division ruling.

Jasper speaks in favor, so that the two parts can be considered separately.

Division fails, 173-179.

This is where the wheels started to come off. (4.00 / 1)
Rep. Bates, who drafted the perfectly awful committee amendment, later drafted the amendment reinstating "true" civil unions and asking for the "non-binding" but still non-clarifying referendum, and he and repeal supporters were instrumental in defeating the committee amendment, because they wanted the vote to be on the later amendment.  Further on in the debate, when the later amendment had been defeated, suddenly Rep. Guida was moving reconsideration of the very amendment they had asked the House to vote down.

Here is a fact that should help you to fight a little longer.
Things that don't actually kill you outright make you stronger.

Piet Hein, Grooks

[ Parent ]
Bates spoke for 5 minutes. (4.00 / 1)
Said stuff. Wasn't really listening. Gaveled out of time.

David Welch speaks against referendum, calls it foolish. Says if you wanted a referendum, you should have written a bill for it.

Welch says he voted against allowing same-sex marriage all the way, then says he's against taking away rights from people, asks reps to vote against Bates amendment.

Jasper: don't ask people what they think after you vote on something. Oppose amendment.

Jen Coffey talks, makes sense. (0.00 / 0)
If you believe marriage is between one man and one woman, you have that right. If you don't believe it, you have that right. Keep gov't out of religion. Oppose amendment.
Murphy opposes amendment, bill. (0.00 / 0)
Manuse moves reconsideration of dividing bill, cause he really, really wants to get people's opinion.

Mirski agrees (I think; hard to understand him.)

Tammy Simmons disagrees: we're not a referendum state.

Dan Itse also against referendum, therefore for division.

Reconsideration fails by wide margin.

GOP rep Kidder PI: no to amendment (0.00 / 0)
Bates counters uninterestingly.

Bates amendment fails 162-188 (0.00 / 0)
O tempora! O mores! yada yada yada

Manuse moves floor amendment 1097h, Jasper complains that it's forbidden under house rules because it's substantially the same as a bill killed by the house last year. DJ concurs, rules motion out of order. 1097h seems to be the "no more marriages for anyone" bill.

Hunt moves to table, Bates opposes. (0.00 / 0)
Lots of red lights against tabling.
Rep. Lambert moves am. #0478 (0.00 / 0)
Banning left-handed marriages.

Some twit objects to the consideration of the motion, objects to being held up to ridicule.

....

Groen speaking: We're on a slippery slope. (0.00 / 0)
Says romantic dinner in Goffstown involves hot dogs around a campfire. This is undoubtedly relevant somehow.
Groen goes there: bigamy! (0.00 / 0)
"Once you breach the definition of a word, it's open for redefinition."

"Then, Muslims! They need lots of kids to take over the world, they need lots of wives!" Hissed.

Then, polyamory. Then, animals. Then gaveled out of time by DJ, just as he was getting on a roll.

Hooboy.

DeJong quotes scripture: "Judge not..." (0.00 / 0)
"My personal life is my personal life."

Speaks of strong Christian faith.

My mother convinced me that God loves all of his children.

"I cannot say enough, God loves us all."

"That said, God is my judge; this legislative body is not my judge."

"What goes on with my god is (not your business)."

"Thank you God, for giving me the courage to come before this body today."

Bates: (0.00 / 0)
US Supreme Court says sodomy is okay.

Says marriage equality isn't completely equal because siblings, relatives not allowed to marry.

If we can say brothers can't marry, then we can restrict marriage to a man and a woman.

Gaveled out of time.

Manchester rep Ball: (0.00 / 0)
Recalls busing in Orange County, when some of his friends disappeared from the classroom and inner city kids appeared. His grandfather told him about his earlier days in south Georgia, when he was asked why he let his black workers ride up front in the truck instead of in the back where they belonged. Grandfather told them, in less polite words, to mind their own business because, as he told Rep. Ball, he worked with them and he knew that they were people, just like him. And that's what this bill is about. People just like us.

"This bill needs to be put down. ... Put this dog down like it deserves to be."

Good grief, another reconsideration. (0.00 / 0)
Cartwright moves something or other that lost 82-266 earlier today. Giuda supports, Simmons opposes.

Vaillancourt now opposing. No fireworks.

Baldasaro! Tell us an angry story, Al. Oh look, he is. Can we have a nice quote like Rep. Groen gave us? We know you want to.

Finally doing PIs on OTP on 437. (0.00 / 0)
Anti-repeal: Simmons.

Pro-repeal: Bates.

Bates: 95% of US says no (0.00 / 0)
No real attempt at argument, just a plea.
Pathetic (0.00 / 0)
It's looking like even in a House with three Republicans for every Democrat, a plea is all this pathetic man can muster. His arguments and focus have no place in New Hampshire, or in the 21st century. It's starting to look like they may have no place even in a Republican super-majority.
[ Parent ]
Bill OTP fails 133-202! (0.00 / 0)
Simmons moves ITL, breaks down halfway through.
Wow! (0.00 / 0)
I really didn't expect this much of a victory. It's been a long time since I've been proud of anything the NH legislature has done. Obviously, I'd rather that this had never come up--our neighbors and friends don't deserve to have their rights debated, but on the bright side--does this make NH the only state to vote twice in favor of marriage equality?
[ Parent ]
Vaillancourt in good form for ITL. (0.00 / 0)
Flamboyant but appropriate history lesson re women's right to vote, lynch laws, American refusal to take away rights once granted.

ITL passes 211-116.

Good night and good luck.

(And Jen Coffey moves reconsideration, urging a No vote. Division called. And the red lights aren't working: it is literally impossible to vote no. The circus rolls on....)

OBrien back in chair, (0.00 / 0)
asks Rep. who requested division vote to withdraw his request, as it'll apparently take 7 or 8 minutes to fix problem.

Rep refuses. House waits around doing nothing in hot room on beautiful day, not allowed to leave seats.

[ Parent ]
Didn't take that long: 87-211 (0.00 / 0)
Obviously 29 reps fled hastily.

And that's a wrap.

[ Parent ]
Next vote: On urging Congress to privatize all aspects of Social Security. (0.00 / 0)
Chair issues a Call of the House: members to be rounded up, barred from leaving.
[ Parent ]
Soltani challenges O'Brien's authority to issue Call. (4.00 / 2)
Says only House has that authority.

Speaker rules that Speaker has that authority.

Soltani challenges ruling, speaks to challenge. If we allow the Speaker to arrest members, we insult all the blood that has been shed for our freedom. "This authority does not exist. It comes out of thin air."

[ Parent ]
I want to thank Tim C. (4.00 / 4)
for all the updates this afternoon.  Here's one guy whose very grateful to you blogging as well as for all those who voted to retain marriage equality in this state.  Also, a huge thank you to Jim S. for all he did to make this happen in the first place.
yes! (4.00 / 1)
Thank you to everyone who stopped by to post updates.

A special thanks to Tim for doing such a great job with play by play AND color commentary.

This is a BIG, BIG public failure for Bates and the O'Brien junta.  

[ Parent ]
Equality Watch: HB 437 | 48 comments

Connect with BH
     
Blue Hampshire Blog on Facebook
Powered by: SoapBlox