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 Editors


Jennifer Daler

Contributing Writers
elwood
Mike Hoefer
 susanthe
 William Tucker
ActBlue Hampshire

The Roll, Etc.
Prog Blogs, Orgs & Alumni
Bank Slate
Betsy Devine
birch, finch, beech
Democracy for NH
Live Free or Die
Mike Caulfield
Miscellany Blue
Granite State Progress
Seacoast for Change
Still No Going Back
Susan the Bruce
Tomorrow's Progressives

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

Campaigns, Et Alia.
Paul Hodes
Carol Shea-Porter
Ann McLane Kuster
John Lynch
Jennifer Daler

ActBlue Hampshire
NHDP
DCCC
DSCC
DNC

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

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

Is This What NH Voters Wanted?

by: Kathy Sullivan 2

Tue Nov 16, 2010 at 16:33:59 PM EST
(I love the refreshing honesty here - prioritizing the list for whom the GOP dominated legislature can be bought or sold.   - promoted by Dean Barker)

I just saw a set of "immediate leadership tasks" that Paul Mirski, who wants to be the House Republican majority leader, has established. The tasks include:

Propose rules changes that would improve ability of Republicans to achieve their legislative agenda.

Develop an index of lobbyists and determine client interests.

Establish liaison with lobbyists and lobbyist clientele.

Establish liaison with all individuals that gave significantly to Republicans in the last election.

Is this what New Hampshire voters want? A legislature that stacks the rules in order to carry out a Republican agenda? Not the people's agenda, a Republican agenda. A legislature that has, as immediate tasks, figuring out the interests of lobbyists' clients, and establishing a liaison with lobbyists?  Get the special interests in at the ground floor? And have a special liaison for large Republican donors? I don't think so.

In fairness, these are not the only items on the immediate tasks list. But there is nothing in this list about establishing a liaison with constituents, for example, or initiating a program to solicit input from consituents.  This is not a recipe for responsive or responsible government,  unless you are a lobbyist or a  big Republican donor.

For the complete list, see:
http://granitegrok.com/blog/20...  
Kathy Sullivan 2 :: Is This What NH Voters Wanted?
Tags: , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
Is This What NH Voters Wanted? | 14 comments
No, they elected them so NH can finally have a State Color and it's.... (0.00 / 0)
Purple!

Rep. Shaun Doherty (R) has introduced an LSR designating purple as the official state color.

It's a round, round world - Stan Freberg


State color is okay with me (0.00 / 0)
I believe that this is being done as one of those educational efforts that pop up everyone once in a while, like the state fruit or the state drink.  It is good for the students.  So, good for Rep. Doherty for helping out some of his younger constituents.      



"When you get to the end of your rope, tie a knot and hang on."  Franklin D. Roosevelt    
[ Parent ]
Sorry, I'm not as nice as you (4.00 / 1)
We just spent 4 years of the Republicans railing against bills like this as waste of the taxpayer's money.  To have Rep. Dougherty introduce this bill, whether or not it is a student bill, is hypocritical.


It's a round, round world - Stan Freberg


[ Parent ]
Don't agree (0.00 / 0)
Not all R 's railed against student sponsored bills. If Rep. Doherty objected, then yes, you are right, but if he didn't, then I can't call him hypocritical.



"When you get to the end of your rope, tie a knot and hang on."  Franklin D. Roosevelt    
[ Parent ]
Lavender! How Gay! (4.00 / 5)
Doherty will now change his mind!
[ Parent ]
If they wanted to turn the state purple (4.00 / 2)
they went a little too far...
[ Parent ]
Of course they did not vote for this, however... (4.00 / 4)
this is what we need to get into the papers and into LTEs from now through November 2012.  It's exactly the sort of nonsense that will give the electorate a reason to give Democrats back their majority.

It's a bit like this "good enough for me, but not for you" nonsense that has already popped up in DC:

http://www.politico.com/news/s...

Freshman Republican Harris, straight off his win built upon a commitment to repeal "Obamacare" complained during orientation that he's not getting Gov't (as in, taxpayer-funded) health-care fast enough.

Of course I fully expect Guinta and Ayotte to fore-go their participation in same.  cough  cough

These guys are so transparent...but it's up to us to call them out for the next 24 months.  The press won't do their jobs anymore - that whole sector is little more than an entertainment sidebar at this point.  So, get those letters into the paper and don't let up.

Welcome (sort of). (4.00 / 2)
Wow - a user id in the lowish double digits from November 2006!

Glad to see you writing.

birch, finch, beech

[ Parent ]
(sound of uncomfortable laughter...) (4.00 / 3)
Yes, that's me.  LOL...hope to be more active.  I'm certain the next 2 years will give us all adequate fodder.
[ Parent ]
I think we need a special BH award for you (4.00 / 6)
for remembering your password!

birch, finch, beech
[ Parent ]
GREAT To Have You Here, Chris... (4.00 / 2)
...you're going to be a great replacement for Paul McEachern and me from Portsmouth!  For those who don't know:  Chris is back after having served two terms in the House and taking the past two years off.  He was one of the original House members supporting gay marriage in 2005, even before we got Civil Unions.  
[ Parent ]
In the bi-polar, bilateral, bipartisan conservative mind, the role of (0.00 / 0)
the ruler has always been to dole out rewards to supporters and punishment for the opposition.
Besides, conservatives are quite cognizant of the fact that as members of a public corporation (an artificial, man-made body), they have much in common with their private corporate partners.  Indeed, because of the limitations imposed by our various Constitutions on the powers of the agents of government, private corporations increasingly serve as a relief valve, to undertake endeavors the public corporations are prohibited from carrying out (like spying on telephone users).

Finally, according to the conservative rubric, the rule of law is simply an instrument of subjugation, an impersonal rendition in writing of what, in the past, were the whimsical dicta of the ruler. From this perspective, the rule of law is a wonderful improvement over rule by a flesh and blood tyrant because nobody can simply off the law's head.  

Whom are you going to decapitate for the decimation of Iraq?  The AUMF made it all legal.  Ditto for the carnage being perpetrated in Afghanistan.  It's all legal.  All hail to the rule of law.  

Democratic Members of the House (4.00 / 1)
could find that this task is is a major threat.

Assign members to specific committees based upon legislative agenda, skills and interests but most of all -with regard to achieving Republican Party legislative goals.

It could mean reassignment of Democrats to committees in which Republican leadership judges that they would be less effective in protecting the work of the last several years.

Not how it works. (0.00 / 0)
Members of each party decide who goes to which committees. The House does operate on majority-rules basis, so yes, it would be possible for the majority party to unilaterally declare who gets to be on which committee, but they would then open themselves up to the same thing later on. Neither side is willing to go quite that far, or they'd eliminate minority-party representation in committees altogether and only let the minority party participate in floor votes.

Only the left protects anyone's rights.
[ Parent ]
Is This What NH Voters Wanted? | 14 comments

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