Is Speaker O'Brien Plotting a Surprise Veto Vote on Thursday?

Close eye? (4.00 / 6)

Every Democratic legislator should plan to be in their seats on Thursday.  



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

---

by: Kathy Sullivan 2 @ Fri May 27, 2011 at 16:00:24 PM UTC

of course... (4.00 / 4)

we can always count on O'Brien to have them escorted to their seats if they are not already in them.

Have you told a stranger today about Bill O'Brien and his Tea Party agenda? The people of NH deserve to hear about O'Brien  and his majority committed to destroying New Hampshire and remaking it into a armed survivalist preserve.  

---

by: Ray Buckley @ Fri May 27, 2011 at 17:48:46 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I kinda like the idea of (0.00 / 0)

having 30 Dem legislators across the street, then taking their seats and voting a couple of minutes after O'Brien brings the veto up.

But I don't know how the parliamentary dance steps work here...

---

by: elwood @ Sat May 28, 2011 at 00:31:04 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Very West Wing, n/t (4.00 / 1)

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

---

by: cblodg @ Sun May 29, 2011 at 12:42:54 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

It should be illegal (4.00 / 3)

to hold a session without informing every single representative and the public at least 24 hours in advance.

--
Hope > Anarch-tea
Twitter: @DougLindner

---

by: Douglas E. Lindner @ Sat May 28, 2011 at 05:00:12 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

To call a "surprise" session O'Brien needs to (4.00 / 2)

get word to at least 198 Republican legislators, no? No quorum without a "majority of the members."

Does O'Brien have a list of that many stalwarts who will keep the secret session quiet?

---

by: elwood @ Fri May 27, 2011 at 23:46:49 PM UTC

we Democrats aren't stupid (4.00 / 2)

Us House Democrats aren't as dumb as we look.  It has occurred to us that O'Brien might call a session on June 2nd.

---

by: TimothyHorrigan @ Sat May 28, 2011 at 00:14:23 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Say... (4.00 / 1)

maybe you guys could make a big deal about hiring a bus to, like, take you on a trip out of the state, and get, like, a decoy bus that gets switched with the first one, and takes off for Foxwoods or Canada or Wisconsin or someplace, and they start to vote and all of you suddenly burst in and say, like, "AHA!" and stuff. (Jon Lovitz style)  Yeaahhh, that's the ticket!  

They. Don't. Care.
We do.
Rinse, repeat.

---

by: GreyMike @ Sat May 28, 2011 at 01:37:17 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

The nisnocsiw (4.00 / 1)

Nobody ever expects the nisnocsiw.

---

by: elwood @ Sat May 28, 2011 at 01:48:26 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

So then if we sing the fight song (4.00 / 2)

it's nisnocsiw no?

They. Don't. Care.
We do.
Rinse, repeat.

---

by: GreyMike @ Sat May 28, 2011 at 03:02:15 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

There was a West Wing episode on that premise. (4.00 / 2)

The Republican Speaker of the US House wanted to hold a vote with Dems out of town and moved it when he saw he'd lose, so once he'd rescheduled it, Dems hid in the ceremonial office of the (cooperating) Vice President, only to burst onto the House Floor at the last minute and kill the Speaker's bill.

Members of British Parliament famously did the same thing in real life, and said they got they idea from the show.

--
Hope > Anarch-tea
Twitter: @DougLindner

---

by: Douglas E. Lindner @ Sat May 28, 2011 at 04:58:28 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

not sure it would work (4.00 / 1)

The Congress has votes over 15 minutes for voting, NH House can be less than 5 minutes and the doors can be locked once the vote is called.

---

by: robert @ Sat May 28, 2011 at 15:24:29 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Paging the lawyers... (4.00 / 2)

Are there no public meeting laws in this state? Is there the possibility of a court challenge (as in Wisconsin) subsequent to a dirty un-American move like this, or is there no recourse against  such trickery and malfeasance?

Classic example of the difference between legal and ethical.

I suppose the court of public opinion will speak in 2012, but much damage will have occurred in the interim if they pull this off, much to the delight of Lord Vader and his thralls.

They. Don't. Care.
We do.
Rinse, repeat.

---

by: GreyMike @ Sat May 28, 2011 at 15:53:18 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

We could all hide out (4.00 / 3)

in that little back stairway by sections 4 and 5--then burst in on the scene when we hear "ROLL CALL!"  That would be so fun!

You have not converted a man because you have silenced him.  (John Morley, 1838-1923)

---

by: Marjorie Porter @ Sat May 28, 2011 at 17:45:22 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Jack Kimball is not being coy (0.00 / 0)

Jack Kimball, the chair of the NH Republic Party, is not being coy about why he supports No Rights At Work:

CONCORD --Jack Kimball, Chairman of the New Hampshire Republican Party released the following statement regarding the postponed vote to override a veto of the right-to-work bill.

"A vicious cycle exists in New Hampshire: union contracts force people who aren't union members to pay dues.  The union bosses, flush with cash, funnel millions of dollars toward liberal Democrat candidates.

Republicans are fighting to break this cycle.  We stand for individual freedom, and we don't believe a worker should be forced into giving money to a union that they don't belong to.

When we take away this extortionate revenue from unions, they'll have less money, but its money they should have never had in the first place.

I applaud Speaker O'Brien for taking this issue seriously and for planning the best way to override Governor Lynch's anti-business agenda."

---

by: TimothyHorrigan @ Sun May 29, 2011 at 21:30:51 PM UTC

Has anyone actually totaled the agency fees (0.00 / 0)

to see how many "millions" are actually being "extorted" from these unwilling workers? And, of that amount, how
much is actually being "funneled" to any political party? I think the facts on this would tell the tale.

Of course, this isn't about "workers" anyway, it's pure ideology, as Kimball clearly states.

They. Don't. Care.
We do.
Rinse, repeat.

---

by: GreyMike @ Mon May 30, 2011 at 03:54:47 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Agency fees are not applicable (4.00 / 1)

to political campaigns, workers can have the fees reviewed and can object if any are being applied to political campaigns of any stripe.

---

by: robert @ Mon May 30, 2011 at 04:33:48 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Exactly. (0.00 / 0)

So the whole thing is based on a baldfaced lie. I'm shocked.

They. Don't. Care.
We do.
Rinse, repeat.

---

by: GreyMike @ Mon May 30, 2011 at 05:27:37 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

The notion of hiding (0.00 / 0)

until a vote is called has occurred to me, but correct me if I am wrong.

Even if 20-30 Democrats were to "hide" until a vote is called, once we reenter the chamber for a vote couldn't DJ or Jasper then move to table (a higher priority motion) if the numbers were not in their favor?

It only takes a majority to put something on the table.  Even if it takes 2/3 to take it off, that's the number they need to override anyway, so it doesn't hurt them.

I am willing to stand corrected by someone with better parliamentary knowledge than me.

---

by: demondeac007 @ Mon May 30, 2011 at 00:25:31 AM UTC