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
The Headline from NH Political Report says it all:
Lynch attacked with 200k worth of tv ads from National Organization for Marriage
This is only the beginning. The address listed on the NOM website is in Princeton, NJ. Last I looked, that's so far from NH, I can't even see it from my backyard!
An out of state organization dedicated to curtailing individual freedom is pouring its money into New Hampshire to influence our next election. They will most likely be funding Republican state senate and state representative campaigns as well.
From the Wiki page on NOM,under the heading "Alleged Disclosure Violations" :
Accusations by Karger also lead the Maine Commission on Governmental Ethics and Election Practices to schedule consideration of an investigation.[57] Maine laws require that organizations which solicit more than $5000 for a ballot question campaign file disclosure reports.[21] NOM has contributed $1.6 million to Stand For Marriage Maine, as of October 23, 2009, without filing any disclosure reports.[21] The commission approved an investigation on a 3-2 vote, overriding the recommendation of their staff.[58] NOM responded by filing suit, claiming that the state's election laws violate the Constitution.[59] NOM used the likelihood of their suit's success as an argument to obtain a federal restraining order which would keep them from having to provide donor names before the date of the election; the request was turned down by federal Judge David Brock Hornby.[60] In January 2010, representatives of the group were subpoenaed to appear before the commission. In February, the group requested that those subpoenas be dropped, but the commission voted unanimously to deny that request.[61]
In Iowa, the organization faces accusations from the Interfaith Alliance of Iowa Action Fund and One Iowa that it has failed to properly disclose its contributors.[19] NOM's efforts in that state included spending $86,060 on the failed state House of Representatives campaign of Stephen Burgmeier.[62]
What an incredible week! Concord was rockin' as the winds of change blew through the capitol.
No matter which side of the political aisle you call home, or if your place of comfort is to straddle the aisle, this most recent session of the New Hampshire House of Representatives - the people's legislature - should have left you exhilarated.
Granted, no one is totally satisfied with the legislation passed. Count me as displeased with several outcomes. But I can live with that. And so can you.
(What exactly DOES it serve us to ruin people's lives over minor marijuana offenses? - promoted by Laura Clawson)
This afternoon the New Hampshire House of Representatives, the most democratic deliberative body in America and a "citizens legislature," voted to make the smallest possible change imaginable to our drug statutes.
New Hampshire residents could possess one-quarter ounce or less of marijuana without facing jail under a bill headed to the state Senate.
more stories like this
The House voted 193-141 Tuesday to decriminalize the small amount of the drug, making possessing it a violation subject to a $200 fine. Under current law, possessing that amount could mean spending a year in jail and paying a $2,000 fine.
This was not an agenda item for House Democrats. In fact, the floor fight consisted of only one Democrat speaking in favor along with two Republicans, and the final roll-call vote reflected this consensus.
For: 153 D
40 R
Against: 47 46 D 93 94 R (corrected numbers from Landrigan)
This strongly bipartisan coalition consisted of members of every profession, place, and political persuasion represented in our diverse body, and included the majority of committee chairs.