Prog Blogs, Orgs & Alumni
Bank Slate
Betsy Devine
birch paper
Democracy for NH
Granite State Progress
Mike Caulfield
Miscellany Blue
Pickup Patriots
Re-BlueNH
Still No Going Back
Susan the Bruce
New Hampshire Labor News
Chaz Proulx: Right Wing Watch
Politicos & Punditry
The Burt Cohen Show
John Gregg
Landrigan
Pindell
Primary Monitor
Scala
Schoenberg
Spiliotes
Campaigns, Et Alia.
NH-Gov
- Maggie Hassan
NH-01
- Andrew Hosmer
- Carol Shea-Porter
- Joanne Dowdell
NH-02
- Ann McLane Kuster
ActBlue Hampshire
NHDP
DCCC
DSCC
DNC
National
Balloon Juice
billmon
Congress Matters
DailyKos
Digby
Hold Fast
Eschaton
FiveThirtyEight
MyDD
Open Left
Senate Guru
Swing State Project
Talking Points Memo
50 State Blog Network
Alabama
Arizona
California
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
Florida
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Missouri
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada New Hampshire
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
North Carolina
North Dakota
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Rhode Island
Tennessee
Texas
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin
(Part moved below the fold - promoted by William Tucker)
I write a column in The Portsmouth Herald, published on Sundays, on local, state and national issues. I don't post many here, but with dialogue in another thread about what has been accomplished with John Lynch as our Governor, including some criticism of his work, and to contribute to the discussion as to what is yet to come, I thought I would offer this week's column in this post.
NEW HAMPSHIRE AFTER JOHN LYNCH
We should thank John Lynch. Regardless of political party or philosophy, age, occupation, or whether we're new to the state or lifelong residents or gay or straight or rich or not -- he has done good things for the people who call New Hampshire "home."
On issues of education, environment, diversity, employment, rights of working men and women, health care, and the needs of seniors and children, New Hampshire is better because he has been our governor for the past seven years.
Just as important is that he has done it all while remaining true to his core of being a genuinely nice person. I have known him since 1974, and in all those years whenever we would cross paths I found him to have the same personal qualities we see in him today -- he's humble, compassionate, down-to-earth, and has a steady demeanor.
His position and wealth hasn't gone to his head. He has always had a desire to help people. When we get to the latter years of life, those are important qualities to have. It's not about the sum of our dollars in our bank accounts or the property we own, it's what we have done for others that really makes our lives have a purpose. John Lynch has seemed to maintain his human roots and can still look you in the eye and relate one-to-one.
(Kathy breaks the news on BH. Lynch will not seek 5th term. - promoted by Mike Hoefer)
Many familiar faces,
Plus many little children sitting on floor.
NH press out en mass.
I am standing way in back, near press.
As soon as Governor makes announcement, I will post.
When the New Hampshire legislature passed SB 154, which would end the state's participation in the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI), House Speaker Bill O'Brien claimed the action would "offer relief to our residents and employers" and "get our economy moving forward." More than 225 New England businesses disagree and have signed an open letter to the region's governors supporting the initiative.
The letter, coordinated by the New England Clean Energy Council, calls for governors of RGGI states to support the initiative and improve it by updating the emissions cap and increasing the scope by reaching out to other states.
“We believe strong clean energy and clean air policies create jobs and stimulate economic growth. RGGI shows that market-based programs can reduce greenhouse gas emissions while boosting our economy,” the letter reads. “By reducing spending on out-of-region fossil fuels, RGGI improves energy security and economic competitiveness and frees up energy dollars for spending in other parts of our economies.”
Gov. Lynch vetoed SB 154 declaring RGGI "is helping to reduce our dependence on foreign oil, creating jobs, and helping our businesses save money and become more competitive." The legislature is expected to attempt to override the veto this fall.
When Gov. Lynch vetoed SB 129, the bill that would require voters to present photo identification before casting a ballot, he offered a very simple, very clear explanation.
An eligible voter who goes to the polls to vote on Election Day should be able to have his or her vote count on Election Day. SB 129 creates a real risk that New Hampshire voters will be denied their right to vote.
House Speaker O'Brien pooh-poohed his concern.
"It certainly is not a major imposition to ask for a driver's license or other ID in order to protect the integrity of voting."
In contrast to the diary posted yesterday showing Reps. Bass and Guinta "underwater", Gov. Lynch remains extremely popular in New Hampshire.
We should see this as an endorsement of his strong opposition to the far-right lunatics running the state legislature. Gov. Lynch's popularity will be important as we prepare to fight the battles ahead in the coming year.
(This week is the start of veto override votes.. - promoted by elwood)
This is from an email sent yesterday by Majority Leader D.J. Bettencourt to every House Rep (emphases mine):
RE: Please override the Govenor on Parental Notification.
I am disgusted that Governor Lynch has turned his back on the parents of New Hampshire by vetoing legislation that supports their right to know when their minor daughter chooses to have an abortion. This is infuriating to House leadership who had received a verbal commitment from the governor that he would work with us on parental notification language that he could agree with. Throughout the entire process Governor Lynch remained silent and now it is clear that he misled us and never had any intention of working toward protecting children or parental rights in New Hampshire. In 2006 he told his constituents, 'As governor, and as a father, I believe parents should be involved in these important decision.' But once again, when it comes time to make the hard decisions, Governor Lynch has proven that he is not a leader. Instead he has shown that beneath his friendly moderate facade lurks a radical who has sided with the extreme special interest groups in denying a parent the right to know what is happening in the lives of their minor children. All of Governor Lynch's concerns could have been addressed had he opened his mouth.
...I will absolutely vote to override this veto and hope my colleagues will do the same.
Do note that nowhere in that description of allegedly bad faith negotiations by Governor Lynch is there that House leadership communicated with him on getting the bill right the first time, thus preventing a veto.
But let's live in D.J.'s world of rhetorical bombast for a moment and pretend what he is saying is true, that he is a helpless victim, deliberately tricked by the Governor. Here's what the Governor said in his veto message:
I am particularly troubled by the lack of an exception for the victims of rape, incest and abuse. If the legislature works with me on this change and the other limited, common-sense changes outlined in this message, I would sign parental notification legislation.
If D.J. Bettencourt were truly interested in the merits of this legislation, he would now work with the Governor on those changes. This is how democracy and governance work.
On the other hand, forcing a rape victim to get permission from her rapist before undergoing a legal medical procedure is not going to last very long in a court of law. And it's not like there isn't recent history for House leadership to look to for figuring that out.
So let's not pretend they are motivated by the alleged merits of this legislation. Bettencourt's email shows he is more interested in partisan gain and showing off his GOP supermajority override power than the young women he purports to be protecting.
This is, as the Bill O'Brien circle has shown again and again since January, the weakest kind of leadership there is.
Today, House Speaker Bill O'Brien, Majority Leader D.J. Bettencourt, and the majority of the House GOP supermajority were given five lessons in government. They are:
HB 133 repeals the New Hampshire minimum wage law, which has been on the books since 1949.
One line that the dishonest GOP spin doctors are using is, "A state minimum wage creates the possibility of having a state standard higher than the federal minimum wage, and that would kill jobs." This is dishonest because the GOP majority in the US Congress has voted to eliminate the federal minimum wage, too.
Republicans simply want to ensure that bosses can cut wages as low as possible.
I'm interested in Lynch's veto strategy. This bill passed the House by 239-106, the Senate by 19-5. That means the Republicans may have enough votes to override the veto.
But, among other things, this forces O'Brien to use up some chits on another vote.
House Speaker O'Brien is angry at Gov. Lynch for not keeping him in the loop and consulting with him about his plan to address the budget deficit for the current fiscal year.
The House leader said he was miffed that Lynch and his budget team showed reporters how they would cope with the shortfall with a plan that includes tapping some dedicated funds.
“I’ve heard dedicated funds is one option; he knows that takes legislative approval,” O’Brien said.
“Where he is going to get this approval where he won’t talk to the house is beyond our ability to understand.”
Gov. Lynch is refusing to "talk to the house?" Here's a little background.
April 17, 2011: Lynch, the popular four-term Democrat, extended the first olive branch to the first-term House boss, offering to meet in his office on a weekly basis.
The sessions included the House and Senate presiding officers and majority leaders.
But Lynch revealed that O’Brien canceled them more than a month ago.
“He said they weren’t very productive. I don’t know if it was something I said or someone else in the room,’’ Lynch said, half jokingly.
I have sent the following e-mail to 4 of my 5 state representatives, Reagan, Tasker, Duarte and J. Sullivan, and to my senator, Jack Barnes, asking them to read the governor's veto statement on the Right to Work for Less bill:
(O'Brien questions Constitutional separation of powers? Seriously? - promoted by William Tucker)
House Speaker Bill O'Brien is nervous that he can't override Lynch's inevitable veto for Right to Work for Less.
And so he betrays his incapacity to comprehend the basics of our system of government:
"My caucus members are concerned that they are united that the Governor cannot function as a third branch of the legislature. The senate and the house have spoken with very strong majorities that right to work is what the people of NH want."
You know what the people of New Hampshire wanted, Mr. Speaker?
John Lynch 52.6%
John Stephen 45.1%
Perhaps some day Mr. O'Brien's megalomania will subside and he will understand and respect the constitution and our three branches of government. Not today.
There will almost certainly be a state Constitutional amendment on the ballot to excuse the state from responsibility to educate our kids. (The only way it doesn't appear, is if the House and Senate can't agree on language.) It will be less stark that the House bill: it will pay lip service to the notion that the state cares, but it will wipe out any recourse by parents and local taxpayers if the state completely guts school funding.
There will be a new set of House and Senate districts. Incumbents in each chamber, in each party, will be competing in a new field. I don't understand just what that will mean for likely election results - but, in cities where neighbors have both won at-large, one will lose: they will run against each other for a ward seat.
Republican State Senators will be quietly portraying themselves as the grown-ups, a check on the crazy Bill O'Brien House. "Sure, things were out of control in Concord this session in the House - it's a good thing I was there to rein them in."
The Republican Presidential primary will be long over. It will have energized Republican / tea party activists. The national party will be trying hard to keep them all energized - probably through a "balanced ticket," with a relatively "traditional" Presidential candidate and a tea party Veep, who will believe that Obama was probably born in Africa.
The Republican primary will also have filled the coffers of the local party and local right-wing groups, who will manage to raise money on tickets and advertising for candidate appearances and debates. That influx of money and publicity won't be there for Democrats, because we don't have a primary contest.
Two concerns will dominate the national election factors: the economy and the Republican votes to kill Medicare and give the wealthiest another tax cut. When the economy is bad it hurts incumbents: meaning it hurts Obama, but it hurts Bass and Guinta too. The net effect is bad for those two.
All of the traditional Democratic constituencies in the state will be extremely motivated. Environmentalists will be motivated by the attack on RGGI; organized labor by the Right to Work bill - and probably by massive layoffs in state and local government and schools; educators by the constitutional amendment, the effort to encourage dropouts, and the attack on tenure; women's health activists by the parental consent bill and efforts to kill Planned Parenthood; the legal community by the interference with the Attorney General's office.
The Republican constituencies, however, may be split. The "social conservatives" will be happy, with the attacks on women's health programs, the 2012 votes to outlaw gay marriage, and the university system. But the business community will be uneasy. The ideology coming from the O'Brien crowd hurts them, too: construction companies need to have taxes raised to fund highway and bridge construction, for example. The libertarian community will find itself at a crossroads: they have discovered a path to power, but the price has been surrendering core principles.
The big missing piece in this diorama is the Governor's race. If the election is a referendum on the performance of the 2011-2012 state legislature, does that make Lynch the best-positioned standard-bearer? Or is dissatisfaction likely to hurt all incumbents, including Lynch? (Polls don't say that today.) If the Republican candidate is a relative fresh face (e.g., Ovide Lamontagne) talking about the future, does that put a premium on a fresh Democratic face? Does the Governor's race get wrapped up in the school funding ballot amendment?
It's early, but I look forward to hearing what other www.BlueHampshire.com posters have to say about the potential candidates for offices. Since I'm a fan of both Ann Kuster and Carol Shea-Porter, I see the "action" for 2012 mostly in the Governor's race. Democrats are wealthy in that we have a strong "bench" developing.
Since November, 2012 is just 563 days from now, or just over 80 weeks, it's not too early to consider their strengths or lack thereof. Here are some of my initial thoughts, in no specific order:
1. John Lynch. John Lynch should run for a 5th term. While I didn't support his first race for the nomination -- I supported a lifelong friend, two-time Democratic Gubernatorial nominee Paul McEachern in 2004, Lynch has impressed me greatly. McEachern didn't win in 2004, but I think he made John Lynch a better candidate, who went on to smash then-Governor Craig .... I forget his name.
Last November was John Lynch's toughest election, but he won, and he won well, and he won with class. And thank goodness. Can you imagine today, with this right-wing Legislature, if it was "Governor Stephen" or "Governor Kimball?" John Lynch saved us from all that. And his vetoes of horrible bills during the next few months, and next year too, will protect the lives of real people who would otherwise be hurt by some horrible legislation. By those vetoes, Lynch will feel a renewed spirit of purpose and need. He can win big in November, 2012. Let's draft him.
The Bill O'Brien statehouse is so eager to look Austere and Mini-Hoover they plan to toss over 800 people and the families that depend on them into joblessness during the worst economic times since the Great Depression:
That, [Transportation Commissioner George Campbell] said, would eliminate about 845 full-time positions, mostly in the operations division. More than 40 planned capital projects this decade, including the upcoming replacement of Concord's Sewalls Falls Bridge, would be delayed or killed.
Highway grants to towns and cities would be cut, and paving work would be scaled back.
Governor Lynch, who every day appears to be putting aside more and more of his customary reserve in the face of such gobsmackingly shortsighted policy from the Concord House Circus, responded:
"The idea of laying off 800 Department of Transportation employees is preposterous. That we're not going to plow the roads? That we're not going to repair the red-listed bridges that need repairing? That we're not going to be able to give money to the local communities to ensure that their infrastructure is of high quality?"
I suppose one silver lining here is that the unsafe chaos that will be the GOP Legacy of our road infrastructure will only hasten our move toward rail.
Oh, right. I forgot. Bill O'Brien and his gang of geniuses bragged today about the vote to abolish even planning a future in rail.
1) Take everything you don't want to pay for now, wrap the "Constitution" around deleting it, and watch New Hampshire's economy suffer in the future:
[Education Chairman Michael] Balboni, a Nashua Republican, said the state Constitution does not allow for policies of compulsory attendance.
2) During a severe economic recession, with double-digit unemployment for those without a high school diploma, work to reduce the dropout rate, ease suffering and strengthen the long-term economic future of New Hampshire (via press release):
Gov. John Lynch today announced a 44 percent reduction in the state's annual dropout rate.
A report released today by the State Department of Education shows that for school year 2009-2010 the annual dropout rate decreased to .97 percent, down from 1.7 percent in 2008-2009.
This continues a significant decline in the number of young people dropping out of school. Since the 2007-2008 school year, the dropout rate has declined 61 percent from 2.51 percent.
...Gov. Lynch has made increasing New Hampshire's high school graduation rate a priority in order to ensure that New Hampshire workers have the skills they need to compete and that New Hampshire businesses have the educated workforce they need to grow. Gov. Lynch and the State Board of Education have set a goal of reducing New Hampshire's dropout rate to zero by the 2012-2013 school year.
"I am proud that at a time when dropout rates are of epidemic proportions in other states, we in New Hampshire have worked together to drastically reduce the number of young people dropping out of high school," Gov. Lynch said.
"We have changed a century-old way of thinking and sent a strong message to our young people about the importance of earning a high school diploma. As a result, more and more of them are recognizing that a high school diploma is absolutely necessary if they want to enter today's workforce," Gov. Lynch said.
The House Judiciary Committee has scheduled an Executive Session for Tuesday, March 1st at 1:00 PM, Room 208 of the Legislative Office Building (behind the State House), for three marriage bills: House Bill 437, HB 443, and HB 569.
Those bills are:
HB 437-FN, relative to the definition of marriage.
HB 443-FN, establishing that marriage between one man and one woman shall be the only legal domestic union that shall be valid or recognized in this state.
HB 569-FN, establishing domestic union as a valid contract and extending certain rights to parties to a domestic union.
Last Thursday at the State House was amazing. The turnout and the Sea Of Red in favor of marriage equality was heart-warming for all those who have worked on this cause through the years and faced considerable abuse for their personal and political positions. But it's clear that the American Way is that when people have a taste of freedom and equality, they won't give it up easily.
We need to do follow-up, especially since we don't know absolutely for sure what will happen at the Judiciary Committee Executive Session on March 1st. And even if the bills are "retained," they can be brought up by next January.
We passed marrage equality by showing our faces and telling our stories. Here's what we can continue to do:
1. E-Mails, letters, telephone calls to all House members in your district. They need to hear from their own neighbors. That's vital. And effective. For now at least, contact all House Judiciary Committee members -- Democrats and Republicans. http://www.gencourt.state.nh.u...
This is a key moment in the history of the Bill O'Brien statehouse, though there have been glimmers of this realization here and there with the Brunelle absurdity and the massive outcry over HB39.
when the public shows up in force at public hearings
when the press plays an active role in ridiculing them, and finally
when the Governor gets involved
...the Bill O'Brien Supermajority Statehouse folds like a house of cards.
The leadership in Concord right now is not driven by principle. Rather, by lust for power and by fear over the next election. This makes them inherently weaker than they appear.
There is hope still that New Hampshire can emerge from this biennium not too damaged from the Red Tide. (birched first)
Faced with a huge public outcry over the anti-child bill to eliminate kindergarten, including a rebuke from the Governor himself, the reaction of the bill supporters was typical of what we've seen from the Bill O'Brien statehouse.
Bill sponsor Jonathan Malz hides behind the skirts of his interpretation of the Constitution:
"I don't have anything against kindergarten," Maltz said. "I just don't think that a town should be forced to do something it said it didn't want to do, and the state not pay for it."
...
Maltz, the bill's sponsor, said the testimony about lasting positive effects of kindergarten was beside the point.
"That may well be true," he said. "It's not really germane to the actual concern I have, which was, this is a fundamental violation of the New Hampshire Constitution."
And Education Committee Vice Chair Ralph Boehm spins away as fast as he can:
"Nobody's going to do away with kindergarten. The funding isn't going to change," Boehm said. "It (the legislation) gets people up in arms for no reason at all. Kindergarten will still be funded."
Gutting kindergarten is an audacious move. But audacity and courage are apparently unrelated attributes.
