Prog Blogs, Orgs & Alumni
Bank Slate
Betsy Devine
birch, finch, beech
Blue News Tribune (MA)
Democracy for NH
Live Free or Die
Mike Caulfield
Miscellany Blue
Granite State Progress
Seacoast for Change
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
From the NHGOP press release yesterday that they must now wish they had never sent out:
"Additionally, Governor Lynch must finally break his silence and call for all records relating to the collapse of these failed companies to be made available for public inspection. Director Connolly's allegations raise serious concerns that political considerations are improperly influencing the investigation of this scandal. Governor Lynch needs to recognize that Granite Staters expect transparency from their elected leaders, and realize that sunlight is still the best disinfectant for government.
Well, golly gee, NHGOP, it sure would be great to have those records. Sunlight is still the best disinfectant- I agree!
Except there are no email or calendar records from the Attorney General at the time (you know, Kelly Ayotte, your senate candidate, not that there are any "political considerations" to this, or anything), and Governor Lynch never authorized them to be scrubbed.
A spokesman for Gov. John Lynch said the governor did not sign off on the deletion of years of e-mails and the public schedule for his two time appointed Attorney General Kelly Ayotte, which occurred some time prior to November.
When asked Lynch press secretary Colin Manning said Tuesday afternoon that Lynch did not approve of the deletion and that the administration's policy regarding the matter is consistent with state law. This is the same law that Ayotte's campaign cited.
I would only add that it is perhaps premature to refer to Ayotte's records as deleted. I'm no techie, but I do know that email thought to be lost can be retrieved.
State Senator Bob Odell, as you probably know, writes an occasional column which he posts on the Democracy for New Hampshire site. This week's offering of CapitalComments seems just a tad peculiar--until one remembers that Bob Odell, like Karl Rove and Charlie Black, is a political operative back from the days of Richard Nixon and not likely to engage in purposeless musings. So, attention should probably be paid.
I'll just point out a few sections of his report that struck me as strange.
Word is spreading that Governor John Lynch confirmed today that he is intends to run for a fourth term. I want to be one of the first to say, I stand with John Lynch in this effort.
Governor Lynch has maintained steady, effective leadership since he was sworn in back in 2003. Our state had been rocked by a series of ethical scandals tied to the Benson administration; under John Lynch's leadership, we have seen none of the shenanigans or secretive governing that took place in those long two Benson years.
John Lynch has always been truthful to the people of New Hampshire. When he started this third term, at one of the bleakest points of the recession, he said that not only would the state not be able to do all that we wanted, it would not be able to do all that it should. He, along with our legislature, has taken and continues to take steps to deal with the fallout from the reckless Bush years that has decimated state governments across the country.
Pindell gets the Gov's reaction to the out-of-state intolerance brigade's media swarm:
"I'm disgusted with it. I think it's an attack on New Hampshire."
The ad, paid for by the National Organization for Marriage, is running on WMUR and cable television outlets. The group said they are spending $200,000 to air the ads
This is exactly right, and exactly the way to treat Maggie's out-of-state, ethically dubious front group.
In the comments to my earlier post on this, Douglas made an incredibly perceptive observation:
No other Governor is in the position Lynch is in with respect to marriage equality. Vermont's Governor (a Republican) vetoed it and was overruled. Maine's Governor signed it, but it was repealed by referendum before it had the chance to take effect. Every other state that has it got it by a judicial ruling.
John Lynch is the only executive in this country who has ever signed a law that granted marriage equality. And that deserves some serious support from the progressive community.
If you've been on this site at all for the past three and a half years, you know I haven't spent a whole lot of time promoting Governor Lynch and his re-election efforts.
And you know I am at odds with him on the Pledge. And that we on the site have had some back and forth with him during the march to marriage equality, as well as on some other issues.
But just so we're clear: Governor Lynch signed a bill into law that gives some of my tax-paying, patriotic friends in this state the same rights that I have. In the end, that's what matters a whole lot more than the way we got there.
And for that, he deserves my full support and defense from suspiciously funded, out-of-state anti-marriage groups like the National Organization for Marriage.
So bring it on, Maggie. You tried to stop freedom here in the Live Free or Die state, and lost. You tried to gin up a phony referendum, and that failed too.
Spend your money freely against a Governor that advanced the cause of civil rights in this, the greatest state in the union. I will enjoy it being wasted here in a place whose citizenry is well accustomed to outside groups coming in to astroturf on behalf of candidates and causes.
What do John Lynch and Bob Odell have in common, other than they are both elected public officials in the State of New Hampshire, a public corporation? Is it just a co-incidence that John Lynch, a Democrat, went out of his way to endorse the candidacy of Bob Odell, a Republican, in 2008 for a seat in the New Hampshire Senate, or does their serving together on the board of a private corporation, Jobs for America's Graduates,(JAG) founded in 1980 and headquartered in Alexandria, Virginia, just down the road from Odell's marketing firm, Odell, Simms and Associates in Falls Church, suggest a commonality of interest that should concern us?
When asked if he would ever run against Ayotte if she chooses to run for U.S. Senate in 2010, Lynch replied, "I will never consider running for Senate against anybody."
There's got to be better ways for the other team to raise money for their campaigns than wishful thinking.
I think I've finally figured out why state media gatekeeper Kevin Landrigan's columns are so often irritating, and therefore, why I bother to read them less and less.
In Kevin Landrigan's world, Democrats have no principles and are guided by politics in every decision.
He never states this openly. Rather, it's like a natural law in the Universe According to Kevin Landrigan, and as a result, all the ink in the column devoted to Democrats falls neatly into that assumption.
According to Kevin Landrigan, John Lynch opposes gambling because it locks up the Law and Order electoral constituency. Carol Shea-Porter gives back Charlie Rangel money because she's scared of the NHGOP press releases; and when it gets explained to him that it was returned right after the Ethics Committee made their judgment on Rangel, the NHGOP still get the last word.
According to Kevin Landrigan, Maggie Hassan is targeting skyrocketing health care costs because it's allegedly going to be a tough year for a Democrat, and this will bring out the purple shirt people:
Republicans leaders insist this was a strategic blunder for "Maggie Care,'' as it's been lampooned coming on the heels of the volatile federal health care debate in Washington.
Yet, whatever becomes of this reform effort in the 2010 session, this is sound politics on at least one level.
All signs point to fiscal conservatives as energized in this election, and that could spell trouble for the Democratic majority.
Hassan's crusade will ensure those "Health Care for All'' activists, known for their purple T-shirts, are working overtime for her re-election, and for other Senate Democrats, as well.
(And, relatedly, did you notice in the passage above how in Kevin Landrigan's world, "fiscal conservative" is automatically not aligned with the Democratic party? Despite eight years of George W. Bush and his multi-trillion dollar war of choice, PayGo rules established by Democrats, and deficit-reducing health care reform that doesn't make donut holes?
Curiously, Republicans in Kevin Landrigan's world rarely fall under this guiding principle.
Addinger: Note, by contrast, Pindell's take, who gives Hassan an "UP" mention in his political standing for the week for pushing something for the public good that might be politically bad for her:
The Senate Majority foreshadowed her huge policy gamble of S.B. 505 and some predicted/vowed that this would be the week when the Hassan for Governor 2012 campaign would be derailed. But that didn't happen, did it? Setting aside the policy idea itself and focusing purely on the politics, Hassan was setting the agenda with a bold plan on the dominant issue in American politics. Could she have rolled it out better? Yes. Will there need to be floor amendments to get this thing passed in the Senate? Yes, though it passed committee days after being introduced. Could next week be a disaster for her bill and her politically? Yes, it could.
I hope someone out there will be able to tell me what John Stephen said on WMUR's CloseUp program this Sunday.
There was something wrong with my reception, and all I got was an endless loop of the same minute of play -- he was introduced for 45 seconds and then he was asked about his pending candidacy for Governor, and he said John Lynch was a nice man and that we have a spending problem not a revenue problem, but he offered no solutions.
Then he was asked about his pending candidacy for Governor, and he said John Lynch was a nice man and that we have a spending problem not a revenue problem, but he offered no solutions.
Then he was asked about his pending candidacy for Governor, and he said John Lynch was a nice man and that we have a spending problem not a revenue problem, but he offered no solutions.
Then he was asked about his pending candidacy for Governor, and he said John Lynch was a nice man and that we have a spending problem not a revenue problem, but he offered no solutions.
Then he was asked about his pending candidacy for Governor, and he said John Lynch was a nice man and that we have a spending problem not a revenue problem, but he offered no solutions.
Then he was asked about his pending candidacy for Governor, and he said John Lynch was a nice man and that we have a spending problem not a revenue problem, but he offered no solutions.
Then he was asked about his pending candidacy for Governor, and he said John Lynch was a nice man and that we have a spending problem not a revenue problem, but he offered no solutions.
Gundersen said the leak of radioactive tritium at Vermont Yankee may soon be followed by releases of other, more dangerous materials if the plant keeps operating.
(Gundersen) Tritium moves like water in a stream. And the other isotopes move like stones tumbling down the river. They move at a slower rate through the soil than the tritium. So the tritium is the first warning, but it's not clear until they get close to the leak that it's the only thing in the soil.
...Gundersen says he's concerned about other radioactive materials such as Cobalt 60 leaking into the ground. He said if the plant stops operating, tritium and these other materials will no longer escape into the environment.
Of course, Entergy claims just the opposite - that they have to keep the plant running, "and keep water pressure in the underground pipes," to find the leak.
I find that to be a remarkable statement, given this paragraph from Governor Lynch's call for an investigation of Vermont Yankee:
Last month New Hampshire was made aware of elevated levels of tritium discovered in groundwater monitoring wells at the plant. Entergy had previously told Vermont officials that there was no underground piping carrying water that could contain radioactivity. However, in the search for the source of contamination, we learned that, in fact, a leak of underground piping containing tritiated water could be involved.
Lynch's (uncharacteristically forceful, but most welcome) release below the fold.
(That UNH polled Stephen, who is not running, and Testerman, who is, speaks volumes about UNH polling. - promoted by Dean Barker)
According to the latest UNH poll,John Lynch remains wicked popular in New Hampshire. He is viewed favorably by 63%, and 60% approve of his performance as governor.
John H. Sununu will publicly babble that the Governor's popularity is down, but in private he will be heard muttering, "Curses! Foiled again!" The governor's poll numbers have remained remarkably steady over the last eight months, despite John H. Sununu's "I hate New Hampshire" tour. In July, Governor Lynch's favorables were at 62%, and his job approval was at 63%. In other words, not much change.
He does not receive the support he once did from the Republican base, but even there, his approval/disapproval is at 42/42, leading John H. to wonder what is a Sununu to do to reduce that 42 approval among his party? The "San Francisco agenda" rant bombed, as did the "worst governor ever" pronouncements.
Democratic Governor John Lynch will make a rare appearance on the web...
... on the new non-partisan site, the Live Free or Die Alliance.
(Not at all meant as a knock on LFDA, which I actually think is kind of neat, to the extent that it will mean more coverage of state legislative issues. Best of luck on the site!
Just felt absolutely within character that the Governor would rush to go on there within days of the launch, while studiously ignoring a Democratic blog for three years. I laughed so hard I almost snorted out my morning coffee.)
At the risk of having Kevin Landrigan think he had anything to do with this post, this from Pindell is just about the only news more absurd than spending union members' money on lobbyist fees for Bob Abolish the Dept. of Ed, the IRS, and S-CHIP Clegg:
State Employees Association president Gary Smith said in an interview there was "a pretty good chance" that his union would endorse a Republican for governor in 2010 if Democratic Gov. John Lynch seeks re-election.
If the SEA wants a future beyond John Lynch, they're not going to find it at the GOP's doorstep.
I can't believe I even had to type that last line. It's like typing: in order to live, I need to eat and drink.
It's great timing, and courageous leadership, that United States Attorney John Kacavas has said that his office won't prosecute people who are using small amounts of marijuana for medical purposes. He referred to the limited resources in his department in light of many significant priorities, and his announcement follows a declaration by U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder that federal agents should deal with medical use of marijuana according to state laws.
Next week the New Hampshire House and Senate will be voting on whether to override the veto of Governor John Lynch on House Bill 648, which allows medical use of marijuana under very strict guidelines. A dozen other states have such laws now, and perhaps the decision by John Kacavas has given us a little more momentum in our effort to override.
Good for him. John Kacavas is showing both compassion and logic, and is helping a lot of people in the process. People seeking relief from pain and illness by medically using marijuana shouldn't be considered criminals.
I thought we elected a Democrat. I thought we had turned a corner as a state.
Apparently, I was mistaken.
Instead of someone who bargains in good faith, we have a governor who is more concerned with preening, posturing, and placating a small cadre of influential "moderate" Republican opinion leaders.
Instead of a governor who spends his political capital electing smart and talented Democrats like Jay Phinizy, we have one who turns his back on the best damn legislator in the House in favor of a mediocre Republican.
If I wanted to see SEA members tossed out on the street so that health and human services dollars could go to non-profits with lots of Hopkinton silk-stocking swells on their boards of directors, I would have voted for Bruce Keough.
By a vote of 2708 to 1875 the SEA rejected a contract that would have preserved jobs but implemented furloughs.
As a result, Governor Lynch will begin laying off state workers:
"Over the last few weeks, agencies have been developing plans for layoffs in the event the union rejected the contract. I will be meeting with department heads tomorrow morning to begin implementing those plans, which include notifying impacted employees this week and completing most layoffs by the end of October."
How did we get here?
I suspect that in the court of public opinion, and in the midst of a "jobless recovery" from the recession, more will side with the Governor than the SEA on this. Whether it is fair to do so, I have no idea.
Yet, the former Attorney General, who was appointed by a Republican and re-appointed twice by a Democrat, is concerned about retrospectively "politicizing" her tenure in that position. For that reason, she would not say in an interview who she voted for in the past two elections for New Hampshire's governor.
I know the former AG has to run into the arms of birthers and deathers and teabaggers and nullificationists to win the primary, but this is pretty silly.
It's also dumb campaign strategy. Saying she voted for Lynch would probably earn her more support from Republicans, not less. But I don't work for the NRSC; what do I know?
And moreover, later on in the piece she basically admits that even though she is anti-choice, she has no interest in working to overturn Roe v. Wade. That news will be a much bigger problem for her in the primary than whether she voted for her boss a couple of times.
With a resounding thud, Senator Max Baucus (D-United Health Group) shared with us the results of months and months of toil in the bipartisan vineyards. And what did he come up with for his troubles? A plan that evidently no one - including so-called GOP "moderates" - can support. So what does this plan that only Sen. Baucus, his loved ones, and staff will support actually accomplish? "Cost savings" that are, in effect, a federal subsidy to private insurers while he foists more costs on the states through expanded Medicaid.
