Bipartisan Disgrace

Byzantine politics on this, as usual (0.00 / 0)

Will the House kill it again?

Will the House GOP attack it from the right?

Will the House pass a different version of the amendment that the Senate will not accept, so nothing comes out of Concord?

Molly Kelly is my Senator and has lost my vote in the November election because of this vote. (I won't support her Republican opponent; I'll leave the office blank). I wonder if she'll get primaried for this?

---

by: elwood @ Mon Feb 25, 2008 at 21:43:35 PM CST

Not for nothing (0.00 / 0)

quid pro quo
Pronunciation: "kwid-"prO-'kwO
Function: noun
Etymology: New Latin, something for something
: something (as consideration) given or received for something else
Merriam-Webster's Dictionary of Law, © 1996 Merriam-Webster, Inc.

http://dictionary.reference.co...

6 days till election day
Have you knocked on doors today? Have you made calls ? Have you talked to your neighbors ?  

---

by: JonnyBBad @ Mon Feb 25, 2008 at 22:00:43 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Tir for tat. (0.00 / 0)

Nice English translation.

---

by: elwood @ Mon Feb 25, 2008 at 22:07:59 PM CST

[ Parent ]

(Or would be, if I could spell) (4.00 / 1)

---

by: elwood @ Mon Feb 25, 2008 at 22:08:21 PM CST

[ Parent ]

It's interesting. (4.00 / 1)

The phrase does mean in English "something for something", but in Latin it's really "what for what?"

"Something for something" would properly be "aliquid pro aliquo."

I think the phrase must have arisen out of a legalistic Latin sentence starting with a subordinating conjunction, because, as the grammar song goes, after "si," "nisi," "num," and "ne," all the "ali"s drop away!

Wow, I'm a nerd.

birch, finch, beech

---

by: Dean Barker @ Tue Feb 26, 2008 at 11:27:42 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Anybody here support the amendment? Care to explain why? (0.00 / 0)

--
"Don't lose your grip on the dreams of the past; you must fight just to keep them alive!"

@DougLindner

---

by: Douglas E. Lindner @ Mon Feb 25, 2008 at 21:59:03 PM CST

Haven't looked at it yet (0.00 / 0)

..but from what I understand, it's even more watered down than the one we voted down last year.

For myself and probably the majority of the Democratic reps, our first opportunity to pick apart and discuss the Senate's constitutional amendment will be next Tuesday, when we have a Democratic Caucus Education Forum.

We should be hearing from the Adequacy Costing Committee then as well so this should allow us to better assess what we're looking at in terms of numbers (last year when we considered the amendment, we had only gone as far as defining an adequate education, no price tag).

It's time we steer by the stars, and not the lights of every passing ship

---

by: Andy Edwards @ Tue Feb 26, 2008 at 00:40:50 AM CST

[ Parent ]

CACR 34 text: (0.00 / 0)

In fulfillment of the state's duties set forth in the preceding article, the general court shall have the authority and responsibility to reasonably define the content of an adequate public education and to distribute state funds for public education in the manner that it reasonably determines to alleviate local disparities.

---

by: elwood @ Tue Feb 26, 2008 at 11:43:30 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Reasonably (4.00 / 2)

is legal code for lowering the bar as far as redress of grievances in a court of law goes. This is very, very similar to CACR-18, IMHO.

---

by: Jennifer Daler @ Tue Feb 26, 2008 at 11:56:56 AM CST

[ Parent ]

It actually might not be bad, except (0.00 / 0)

except for the part about defining adequacy.

--
"Don't lose your grip on the dreams of the past; you must fight just to keep them alive!"

@DougLindner

---

by: Douglas E. Lindner @ Tue Feb 26, 2008 at 18:11:46 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Maybe you haven't followed this. (0.00 / 0)

Current court rulings say the state must pay the full cost for an adequate education statewide.

This amendment eliminates that. Under it:

1. The state determines what constitutes adequacy
2. The state can help localities to reach adequacy if it chooses
3. If the result is an education that doesn't meet the adequacy standard, tough luck. The 'no unfunded mandates' lets localities off the hook

---

by: elwood @ Tue Feb 26, 2008 at 18:35:27 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Good points. (0.00 / 0)

And you're right, I haven't been following the saga as closely as you have.

--
"Don't lose your grip on the dreams of the past; you must fight just to keep them alive!"

@DougLindner

---

by: Douglas E. Lindner @ Tue Feb 26, 2008 at 18:53:08 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Be sure to support (4.00 / 4)

The three Democratic Senators who voted against the amendment - Sen.  Sgambati, Sen. Cilley, and Sen. Estabrook.  Both Sgambati and Cilley are first serving their first term.

I have a feeling they are going to need all the help they can get.

The truth shall set you free.

---

by: NHFlatlander @ Mon Feb 25, 2008 at 22:16:58 PM CST

Sen. Cilley is Chair of Trade Commission (0.00 / 0)

We meet this Monday at 9 in the LOB

6 days till election day
Have you knocked on doors today? Have you made calls ? Have you talked to your neighbors ?  

---

by: JonnyBBad @ Tue Feb 26, 2008 at 18:51:53 PM CST

[ Parent ]

anyone know (0.00 / 0)

if any of the senators released press releases on why they voted for or against.

---

by: sdoyle @ Tue Feb 26, 2008 at 17:05:41 PM CST

According to the Concord Monitor - (0.00 / 0)

Sen. Cilley is concerned about down shifting the education costs to the local taxpayers.

"Those communities that suddenly find themselves receiving fewer educational dollars, or no educational dollars, are going to wake up to the fact that that's going right back to their property taxpayers," Cilley said.

Sen. Estabrook was concerned about future legislatures cutting funding.

"I lived through 10 years of one-party control where the effort was constantly to minimize the costs," she added.

Sen. Sgambati wasn't quoted, but she voted against the second version last year because the 50% threshold was too low. The article is here

The truth shall set you free.

---

by: NHFlatlander @ Tue Feb 26, 2008 at 21:13:50 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Thank you (0.00 / 0)

I think the phrase is

Plus Ça Change, Plus C'est La Même Chose

6 days till election day
Have you knocked on doors today? Have you made calls ? Have you talked to your neighbors ?  

---

by: JonnyBBad @ Wed Feb 27, 2008 at 19:40:38 PM CST

[ Parent ]