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
ActBlue Hampshire

The Roll, Etc.
Prog Blogs, Orgs & Alumni
Betsy Devine
Blue News Tribune (MA)
Democracy for NH
Live Free or Die
Mike Caulfield
Granite State Progress
Seacoast for Change
Susan the Bruce

Politicos & Punditry
Krauss
Landrigan
Lawson
Pindell
Primary Monitor
Scala
Schoenberg
Spiliotes
Welch

Campaigns, Et Alia.
Paul Hodes
Carol Shea-Porter
John DeJoie
Ann McLane Kuster
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

Re: the Gov's statement - anybody know?

by: elwood

Thu May 14, 2009 at 20:18:20 PM EDT
  • Does HB436 go back to the legislature for amendment?
  • If so: does it take the original route: House Judiciary, House, Senate Judiciary, Senate?
  • If so: Is the question before the bodies: Shall we amend? With a 'No' meaning 436 stays approved as is?
  • Or does even entering this process unapprove it?
  • Or does 436 stay holstered while a different bill emerges?
  • More broadly: just how much room is there for mischief and wiped fingerprints here?
elwood :: Re: the Gov's statement - anybody know?
Tags: (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
Re: the Gov's statement - anybody know? | 12 comments
Also, a time frame would be nice. (4.00 / 1)

The Process (4.00 / 3)
House Bill 436, the core of creating marriage equality, has passed the House and Senate.  It has been "enrolled," and is on the House Speaker's desk.  It cannot be recalled by the Legislature.  The bill will be held by the House Speaker until "companion legislation," for want of a better term, is ready to pass on.  Already, House Bill 320 is a bill that has passed the House and Senate that has a few sentences of technical correction in the marriage laws.    

House Bill 73 is a bill that covers issues relating to marriage statutes, unrelated at the moment to marriage equality.  It could be amended to include the statutory references that Governor John Lynch wants changed to provide for greater and clear religious protections.  The bill has a hearing next Tuesday when we'll be offering language that will improve the statute which the Governor wants.    

Then, if the Senate and House approve with House Bill 73, with the new language, it too will be ready for signature.  That bill, along with House Bill 436 will go to the Governor and he has said he will sign them -- HB 436 providing marriage equalty, and HB 73 as well as HB 320, each dealing with small statutory changes so that HB 436 meets his requests.  

All this is an open process which, really, has been eight months in the making, and which include recommendations of the House, Senate, and now the Governor's Office.  The timing could be that all will be finished by the end of next week.

Please keep contacting your House and Senate members and ask them to support the completion of this process so that House Bill 436 and marriage equality will be a reality.  

to be perfectly clear, Jim (0.00 / 0)
does this mean another round of votes?  
[ Parent ]
Only On House Bill 73... (4.00 / 1)
...the other bills have passed.  They cannot be returned to the House or Senate.  This process happens frequently, and should be no problem if those of us who have worked for months on this remain focused and unified.
[ Parent ]
Small correction (4.00 / 1)
The first "companion bill" is HB 310, not HB 320.

http://www.gencourt.state.nh.u...

Classical Liberal since 1983

[ Parent ]
Thanks Ryan... (0.00 / 0)
...I've been talking with so many people today since early morning, numbers are melting together.
[ Parent ]
So we will end up with either: (0.00 / 0)
436: Passed; 320: Passed; 73: Passed - or

436: Passed; 320: Passed; 73: Rejected.

The Governor will face one of those two situation, correct?

(For the record, I hope it will be the first.)

[ Parent ]
Let's Focus On The Positive... (4.00 / 6)
...that he'll have all three bills ready to sign in a week.  That will happen if all of us who have brought this issue to this point stay together, unified, focused, and continue to let our House and Senate members know that we want them to finalize the process by approving House Bill 73 next week.

We can do this, but not if we allow ourselves to get sidetracked.  It's been a long train.  

Thank you; keep us posted. (4.00 / 1)

[ Parent ]
I think I'm hearing: not much rooom for mischief. (4.00 / 3)
There is no way for opponents to leave the Governor with no chance to sign a marriage equality bill.

Opponents could block his clarification language and dare him to allow passage without it.

But they can't use his position to kill it outright.

ya think ? n/t (0.00 / 0)


"Poetry is not an expression of the party line. It's that time of night, lying in bed, thinking what you really think, making the private world public, that's what the poet does." Allen Ginsberg
[ Parent ]
If opponents (4.00 / 1)
blocked his clarification language, they would be voting against stronger protections for religious organizations who wish not to participate in Same Sex marriages.  Rather hypocritical.  
[ Parent ]
Re: the Gov's statement - anybody know? | 12 comments
Connect with BH
     
Blue Hampshire Blog on Facebook
Powered by: SoapBlox