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
Just a reminder, the last chance to get a full slate of state rep candidates, if you don't already have it, is to recruit write-in candidates for the primary. Only 35 votes in most places will get an uncontested write-in candidate on the ballot in November.
(This would be a lot easier to do if working people could server,of course, but we'll have to do what we can.)
I ran across this link recently (probably here actually) where Steve Marchand describes, among other things, which democratically leaning towns are fielding fewer Democratic candidates than positions. Can't win without a ticket.
(I addressed this systemic flaw in our "citizen" legislature here as well. Part put below the fold. - promoted by Dean Barker)
My last 3 or 4 comments have consisted mostly of asking people to just shut up, so I felt like it was time to contribute at least a little something. So, we all know the NH state house is the fourth biggest representative body since the dinosaurs, or whatever it is, and I was rereading an old blog about how many democratic slots will go without any candidate at all in the upcoming election. This is a cross-party problem actually, though it might affect dems a little more. But really, a problem for state government as a whole.
(I remain undecided, but I hope by promoting it wiser minds than I will add to the discussion here on it. - promoted by Dean Barker)
There is still a lot of wrong information being given out about HB 1459, the effort to promote corporate democracy in election advertising, and to require a modest amount of disclosure from organizations that engage in election advertising - like simply requiring corporations to put their names on political ads.
It flummoxes me that a couple of editorial boards, as well as some well intentioned, and some not so well intentioned, activists on both sides of the aisle are opposed to some small steps in favor of corporate democracy and election disclosure.
Corporate shareholders elect a board of directors to oversee general corporate governance and policy. The board in turn elects the officers, who carry out day to day management.
Under current law, a president of a corporation could decide to spend corporate money on election advertising without the prior approval of the directors, whose job is to represent the real owners - the shareholders. This bill does not require shareholder approval, which would be an even bigger step toward corporate democracy. But this small step of board approval means that the directors, who answer directly to the shareholders, will participate in the decision making process, and will prevent corporations from a loophole in our laws created by Citizens United that would allow anonynous political advertising by corporations and llc's (but not by individuals).
(Thanks for explaining this, Kathy. Link added by me. - promoted by Dean Barker)
The legislature failed to agree on legislation today to insure ballot fairness. For years Republicans kept their majority by manipulating the ballot laws to give the majority party an advantage, such as straight ticket voting, having the majority party always go first, and always listing candidates alphabetically. Then, in 2006, Paul Twomey and Cliff Below successfully spearheaded litigation to give every candidate an equal chance to be first on the ballot to reduce the "primacy" effect. Studies have shown that candidates who appear first automatically have an advantage of several percentage points.
Oh, what the hell. It's a new year in a few hours. I'll defend our system.
"The proof of the pudding is in the tasting." We rejected REAL ID, we enacted civil unions. Gonna beat that record, GooGoos? (GooGoo is a disparaging term for "good government" types.)
What problem are we trying to solve? If it's "I can't run for that job," I agree completely. I can't either. If it's "we'd be so much better off with a differently-composed legislature," that needs some evidence.
Nobody is kept off T-Ball! 424 slots means we elect a lot of people who wouldn't make the cut in a smaller league. That spreads interest in baseball public service. That interest is a very healthy thing.
The groups that get favored are good for us. Well, for the most part. And it changes over time. We have more women than the average state - that's probably declining along with the single-income family. We have more crazies colorful advocates because of the T-Ball rule. Who else gets favored? Older people, richer people, people with non-traditional jobs - but only, in each case, if they decide to take up public service as a hobby.
Everybody gets heard. The ratios of representative to citizen, and the broad range of representative profiles, means anybody really has a good shot at having an advocate in the legislature. Most of these folks are gregarious; some are lonely! If you have an issue, you can probably find a champion.
Okay, I'm playing devil's advocate. That usually means "And you'll never get me to say what I really think!" But I think the current system actually works pretty well.
(Thanks Scoonie! There's so much going on we're missing quite a few important bills. These are important. - promoted by Mike)
Today was a great day in the NH legislature. Besides the civil unions bill passing, a number of worker-friendly bills passed. These bills dealt with a minimum wage increase, guaranteed hours paid, nurse overtime, and mandatory workplace meetings.
Bills like these speak to the core values of the Democratic party: standing up for middle class workers and giving everyone a fair shake in the economy. It's a great feeling to finally be able to guide the direction of the NH economy after so many years in the minority. I am extremely proud to be a Democrat today.
(It's time to push back, folks. A majority of Granite Staters oppose escalating this war (see my comment), so we need to make sure the committee understands that. And thanks as always, Representative Splaine. - promoted by Dean)
House Resolution 10 was voted on in the House State-Federal Relations and Veterans Affairs Committee Thursday. By a vote of 10-7, the majority of the Committee amended the Resolution to essentially change it into a support-of-the-mission call.
Introduced by Portsmouth State Representative Paul McEachern and myself three weeks ago, HR 10 originally opposed President George W. Bush's Iraq policy and urged the President and Congress to take actions relative to veterans' benefits and the war in Iraq. It also called for "timely withdrawal," and asked for conferences with the neighboring countries.
The Committee amendment took out references from our Resolution that opposed President Bush's surge of 20,000+ troops, which was part of the Congressional Resolution opposing the surge that was approved in Washington last month. The amendment also calls for remaining in Iraq until the mission or the "task" is accomplished, whatever that means.
But, all this isn't a lost cause for us. Paul McEachern and I introduced the Resolution to generate the discussion, and that discussion will continue. A "minority report" has been written by those on the Committee who are opposed to the amendment. The issue will be discussed next week on the floor of the House, and we will make an effort to defeat the amendment, and pass HR 10 as originally drafted. If we're successful, we will have made our point stronger than ever.
House members need to hear from readers who would like to express their feelings. Again, thanks to nhcollegedem and other Bloggers on www.BlueHampshire.com for promoting this issue. We're going to try to win this one.
(This is what it's all about, folks. - promoted by Dean)
The Resolution in the NH Legislature supporting our troops in Iraq, and calling on Congress to support an orderly withdrawal, to fully fund veterans health care and benefits, and to encourage talks among the neighbors of Iraq, has a public hearing on Monday, March 19th, the 4th anniversary of the Iraq War.
I expect a number of opponents to the Resolution to speak, and House members have been receiving comments in opposition. It would be helpful for those supporting the Resolution, which is essentially based on the Congressional resolution of several weeks go, to make their views known.
The Resolution is cosponsored by Rep. Paul McEachern and myself, and will be voted on by the House State-Federal Relations & Veterans Affairs Committee on Tuesday at 1:00 PM. A list of the Committee members appears in a previous Blog post under my name. The initiative for the Resolution came from discussion on www.BlueHampshire.com.
The Resolution appears in full below, and will likely be voted on by the full House next week.
