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
This week, I'll be taking a look at the three upcoming special elections for state representatives. Not only are these elections an opportunity to pick up three additional House seats, but a win in each district will be seen as a repudiation of Speaker O'Brien and the Tea Party/Free State GOP.
The first special election will be August 9, 2011 for Strafford District 3. The is the seat previously held by the infamous Republican Martin Harty, who resigned after publicly expressing support for eugenics. Four Democrats are vying for the seat and will face a primary election on June 7, 2011. The winner will face a Republican who moved to the New Hampshire with the Free State Project.
Candidates
Bob Perry, Strafford, will be familiar to many here as a two-term former state rep. As a member of the House Election Law Committee, he co-authored a bill to facilitate the design of a secure electronic ballot-counting device. He also co-sponsored a bill, which was signed into law by Gov. Lynch last year, that established a legal preference for New Hampshire vendors in the awarding of state service contracts.
Others on the Democratic primary ballot are Dennis Malloy (Barrington), Janet M. Kalar (Middleton) and Richard Stanley, Farmington.
Reeling from his devastating and public setback in a House Special Election last week and his inability to find enough votes to support his extreme anti-worker agenda this week, NH House Speaker Bill O'Brien may be relying on another tactic: secrecy.
The House calendar released yesterday has a curious listing for a committee meeting on Thursday. The Redress of Grievances - a favored committee of Speaker O'Brien and one chaired by his most ardent supporters - scheduled a work session for "10:00 am Or fifteen minutes after the House session, should there be any." [Bold included in House calendar.]
Nowhere else in the House Calendar does it reference the possibility of a House Session on Thursday, though it does note that the last day for the House to act on Senate bills is Thursday, June 2nd. The phrase was not included in the Redress listings last week, so it is obvious it was not a simple error of reposting an old committee announcement.
This raises questions about whether Speaker Bill O'Brien is plotting for a surprise - and low turnout - House session on Thursday in an attempt to pass anti-worker legislation HB 474, the right to work for less bill.
Last week on the same day the NH House Republican Leadership was defending SB 129, a photo ID bill, a sign that required voters to show a photo ID 'per pending legislation' was placed at the entrance of a New Boston polling location.
That sign was quickly removed after a complaint was filed, but the questions it raised led a few of us to review our tapes of the House Finance Committee hearing on SB 129 from that day, and we were absolutely stunned by what we saw.
During the public hearing, Rep. Sharon Nordgren (D-Hanover) poses questions about the true intent of the legislation to supporters Representatives David Bates (R-Windham) and Shawn Jasper (R-Hudson). In her final question, Rep. Nordgren brings up the sign that has been placed at the polling location in New Boston - and Bates' reaction is incredible:
Bates, with a smirk and a deceptive raise of his eyebrows, turns to Jasper and whispers,"It's working."
Of course, Bates made this comment thinking no one would hear him -- and he's almost right since it's quite difficult to hear. But, unfortunately for him, we got it on tape. And so we ask: what's working?
Is it working when voters go home, thinking they couldn't vote? Or when an illegal sign is posted directing them to do so? Just what is "working" that got Rep. Bates so excited?
The House Finance Committee will vote on this legislation tomorrow. We should call them and remind them that it's not working when New Hampshire voters are turned away at the polls.
I don't know how many times I have heard Democrats criticized by Republican voters who claim that the Democratic member of Congress just could not have "read the bill" (usually the ACA). Well, it turns out that the NH House has members who apparently really don't read bills.
Let's set the scene:
Yesterday, the House Finance Committee voted to attach an amendment to a bill that would, in their words, eliminate NH's participation in the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI). The move was designed to give the House leverage in negotiations to repeal the program with the Senate. House leadership has made no secret that repeal of RGGI is an ideological crusade for them this legislative session.
Vote totals and referendum talk aside, another question of interest for tomorrow's special election for State Representative is whether or not the son of the Speaker of the House will vote in it.
Brendan O'Brien is a college senior at Bates College in Lewiston, Maine and chair of the Maine College Republicans. Last year, Brendan was also a State Representative candidate for Maine House District 73 - just months before he voted in the New Hampshire General Election.
According to the New Hampshire voter file, Brendan O'Brien voted in the New Hampshire Primary and General Election in 2008 from a home address in Mont Vernon, NH. He voted in the Maine General Election in 2009 from his college address in Lewiston, ME. In 2010 he secured a nomination as a State Representative primary candidate in Maine, then withdrew his name shortly after to allow the Republican Party to replace him with a more senior Republican. (Maine has a straw poll system that allows the Party to place a name on the ballot then replace it at a later date.)
Brendan went on to vote in New Hampshire's General Election in 2010 - in his father's district.
Now before the trolls go wild, I'll be quick to note that Brendan has every right to vote in Maine or New Hampshire or anywhere else he is living at the time. There does seem to be a significant question around whether he should have submitted his name for office - and the Maine State Constitution states a candidate must be resident of the state for 1 year - but we'll leave that to Maine pols to discuss.
But curiosity remains - will he vote in the New Hampshire special election this week, in the district he grew up in? Based on his voting history, it seems young O'Brien goes wherever he thinks he will have the most impact. I heard James Pindell was on the news this morning saying that if the vote is even close it'll be a blow to O'Brien; Fergus Cullen just posted on Red Hampshire that we need to "keep special elections in perspective."
Given this hype, will all of the O'Briens be making their way home to vote?
(I wonder just exactly WHAT the Teaparty Tribunal believes rises to "conflict of interest"? - promoted by elwood)
The NH House Committee on Redress of Grievances had a petition hearing this past week for a "father who is asking the Legislature to give him custody of his daughter, impeach four judges and two marital masters and remove the authority of the Supreme Court chief justice over the judicial system."
This is an incredible story, but not for the reasons you may be thinking. Because the real story here is not the committee or the hearing itself, but the man who chaired it.
Hours into the committee hearing, and after the receipt of a formal complaint, Chair Paul Ingbretson (R-Pike) finally saw fit to inform his committee that during the period that the petitioner, David Johnson (currently legally barred from having any contact with his daughter, custody of whom is at the heart of his petition) was allowed to have supervised visits with his daughter, the person that Mr. Johnson chose as the third person to be present at those visits -- four hours long, once every week, for a period of one year -- was ... Chairman Paul Ingbretson.
(Once again NH is in the National News for all the wrong reasons. HuffPo has pick up the story. Link in the comments. - promoted by Mike Hoefer)
Conservative State Rep. Lynne Blankenbeker (R-Concord) appeared on WMUR's Close Up this morning as part of a "meet the rep" series. Early on in the program, the state rep and career naval officer was asked about her reaction to the recent death of Osama bin Laden.
Blankenbeker responded that she was excited about the "possibility" that Bin Laden was dead.
Possibility?
Blankenbeker stated that she had received correspondence from her commanders about heightened security needs or support expectations during major initiatives in the past, including the disasters in New Orleans, Haiti and Japan. But since she, personally, has not received an email from her commanders about the death of Osama bin Laden, it gives her "pause".
The show aired the same day as top officials appeared on national Sunday political talk shows praising the work of the armed services and intelligence community and refuting any challenges.
Blankenbeker is a commander in the Navy Reserve who will deploy for her third tour of duty in July. She will be "boots on the ground" for 210 days in Afghanistan. Someone from her command post should probably brief her on reality before that time.
On the day we honor mothers, it's worth noting that 71% of women with children under 18 years of age are in the labor force. And as the New Hampshire GOP continues its assault on workers and unions, it's particularly meaningful to note the advantage these unions provide for working mothers.
A report by the Center for Economic and Policy Research (CEPR) documents the dramatic advantage unions provide women workers in pay and benefits.
The data suggest that even after controlling for systematic differences between union and non-union workers, union representation substantially improves the pay and benefits that women receive. On average, unionization raised women’s wages by 11.2 percent — about $2.00 per hour — compared to non-union women with similar characteristics.
For the average woman, joining a union has a much larger effect on her probability of having health insurance (an 18.8 percentage-point increase) than finishing a four-year college degree would (an 8.4 percentage-point increase, compared to a woman with similar characteristics who has only a high school diploma). Similarly, unionization raises the probability of a woman having a pension by 24.7 percentage points, compared to only a 13.1 percent increase for completing a four-year college degree (relative to a high school degree).
So, by all means, take Mom out for lunch. But to honor working moms all over the state, call your legislators and demand they stop the assault on unions and put an end to the so-called "Right to Work" charade.
There was an extraordinary letter-to-the-editor in the Nashua Telegraph yesterday. Peggy McCarthy is a member of the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers in Nashua. After over 20 years as a Republican, where she found common ground on issues ranging from taxes to seat belt laws, she publicly said goodbye to the GOP.
In the five short months since Dec. 1, I've been called a thug, a criminal, an animal and a goon. My intelligence has been called into question, as well as my morality.
I've been accused of violence and intimidation, and the responsibility for the financial woes of this state has been laid on my shoulders....
You tell me not to take it personally, but it could not be more personal. This goes way beyond ideology.
Republican Rep. Lee Quandt provides anecdotal evidence that McCarthy isn't alone.
I was talking to a supervisor of the check list and was advised that the R's are going back to I's by the truckload; that was only for one town, I haven't called around to see if this is a trend or not; but, I have a feeling that it is happening.
And the destruction of the New Hampshire Republican party by Bully O'Brien and the radical Free Stater/Tea Party extremists continues.
(Because I'm sick and tired of pretending there isn't a class war going on, with the spoiled brats who never worked a real job screwing us over. - promoted by elwood)
As a diary earlier this week highlighted, the gas tax rhetoric in Concord doesn't get anywhere close to reality. But that didn't stop Speaker Bill O'Brien from introducing it - or, as Lucy Weber pointed out, from circumventing a public hearing to get it.
For at least the second time this month, Speaker O'Brien himself has introduced an amendment to strip the language and intent of a bill in full and replace it with his own version of reality. The gas tax mayhem amendment was introduced during the public hearing on Tuesday morning and passed through executive session of the House Finance Committee just a few hours later. Again, no public hearing was held on this bill - only those who were there in the room would have even had a chance to respond to it, and they would have been there to testify on a completely different (and largely settled) issue altogether.
Less than twenty-four hours after Speaker O'Brien introduced this cowboy amendment, it passed the floor of the House. How's that for the open and transparent process in Concord.
But I digress, because the topic we really want to highlight is one statement in particular that Speaker O'Brien made when defending the legislation. When pressed that the bill will amount to little savings for individuals while producing a $7 million deficit to the highway fund (and boon to big oil companies), O'Brien said:
"Perhaps they (opponents to the bill) are not living up against financial limits the way some of us do."
Interesting, because according to Granite State Progress research, Speaker O'Brien isn't exactly hurting. In fact, last year he was able to afford an addition to his home, and his vehicle of choice for the daily commute to Concord? A Mercedes-Benz:
If Speaker O'Brien really knew anything about "financial limits" he would know that this reckless measure will cause more trouble for New Hampshire families, not less.
With his Republican party imploding in the wake of the D.J. Bettencourt "pedophile pimp" scandal, GOP Chairman Jack Kimball stepped in and tried to rein in the wayward lawmakers.
“Many of our State Representatives seem to have lost sight of the bigger picture and what Republicans were elected to do.
Speaker Bill O'Brien, perhaps stung by the implicit criticism, refused to even acknowledge that Kimball was referring to his Republican charges.
“Well I think the Democrat are distracted from the legislative accomplishment that we’ve achieved, and I take the press release as speaking to them.”
Well, that sounded good to Majority Leader D.J. Bettencourt.
“I think you got your answer. I think you got your answer.”
Kimball was not amused.
“I am talking about all state reps and that it is clear. There is nothing in there that says Republican state reps or Democrat state reps, I said them all.”
"We’ve got to get back to the business of governing and I think that right now a lot of that focus has been deterred, if you will, by all of the discussion of the Catholic Church and what have you.”
This was noted as a comment in another diary, but I think it deserves a diary of its own. When I ran for state rep last fall from Rockingham 1, my town, Northwood, which had been represented for years by Bob Johnson, the ultimate moderate Republican, actually had two candidates who live in town (our district has been Candia, Deerfield, Nottingham and Northwood since the redistricting by the court after the 2000 census). One was me, a former selectman, planning board member, and member of many of the committees whose volunteers make a small NH town run.
As most of you know, I am running for state representative for Hillsborough District 4, home district of Speaker Bill O'Brien. The reason I am running is that a special election was called to fill the seat vacated by Robert Mead when he resigned to become O'Brien's chief of staff.
Town meeting day is over and it is time for me to start working on my campaign. Because of this, I will be taking a hiatus from my responsibilities at Blue Hampshire from now until the election, which is May 17th.
If you'd like to support my effort, I have an Act Blue page where you can make a donation. There is also a Facebook fan page for my campaign.
Well, the House Republican leadership held a press conference in Concord yesterday to congratulate themselves on the great job they are doing. Never mind the fact that they've been criticized from the get-go by the editorial pages of the Union Leader, the Nashua Telegraph, and the Concord Monitor. Being referred to as an asylum can't be a good thing.
The House is priding itself on its fiscal conservatism, but many of the bills that are going through (or are they? Are they being retained? recommitted?)will cost the state millions of dollars. Just where that money is supposed to come from is a question we should all be asking, especially since services for the elderly, disabled, young children, the mentally ill are being eviscerated.
But we do have money to end our participation in the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative, which will not lower anybody's electric bill, but would cost the state $12 million in revenue.
The new parental notification bill will cost the state $200,000 a year in judicial by-pass hearings according to NHCLU executive director Clare Ebel. That doesn't count the cost to the state of defending the bill in court when the inevitable lawsuit comes. The last one cost the state $300k in a payout to Planned Parenthood, not counting the hours the AG's office spent defending it all the way to the US Supreme Court.
The bill to demand food stamp recipients be urine tested will cost between $3,526,380 and $7,411,140 annually according to the fiscal note on the bill. The fiscal note also says "catching" people will not save the state one penny because food stamps are a federally funded program.
Then we have to bill to force Attorney General Michael Delaney to join a lawsuit against the Affordable Care Act. That will also wind up in court if it passes, as will the case against Manchester Democratic State Rep Michael Brunelle.
HB176, the bill to disenfranchise student voters will also wind up in court if it passes, as will many, many more.
HB590 is a study bill, however, it would say the NH House declares federal grants to be unconstitutional and a committee would be set up to study this and make further recommendations. I suppose it doesn't occur to the new majority that NH taxpayers are also US taxpayers and are due some benefits from that.
The irony is that while Speaker O'Brien is saying we have to cut $50 million immediately from the budget, all these expenditures are okay with him. As long as no public money goes to the health, education or welfare of citizens, no amount is too much for the new majority.
(Thank you for this report on today's session, Lucy. It seems there are some cracks in the majority veneer.
"ITL" means Inexpedient to Legislate or kill the bill.
(Part put below the fold by me) - promoted by Jennifer Daler)
For those keeping score, I thought I'd give a summary of how the House session went today. We had eleven bills on the regular calendar, plus four bills removed from the consent calendar.
In hindsight, it is a good thing that we started with the bill naming a bridge in Merrimack in honor of Corporal Timothy Gibson, U.S.M.C, who was killed in action in Iraq in 2005. That was an accomplishment.
The proceedings quickly got more difficult. All three bills on the regular calendar from Criminal Justice were recommitted. This means they were sent back to the committee for more work. By way of explanation, recommittal used to be a relatively rare occurrence, used when new information was brought to the committee's attention after the bill had been sent to the floor, or when an "unintended consequence" was suddenly discovered to the dismay of the committee. Three in one day is unusual.
Sitting here waiting for the Election Law Committee hearing on HB 176. Right now they are holding a hearing on HB 223, also sponsored by Rep. Greg Sorg (R-Easton). Strangely enough. most of the speakers do not seem to know which bill they are speaking to. They are confusing the subject matter of the bills. HB 223 would get rid of same day registration.
From HB 176
I. Every inhabitant of the state 18 years of age and upwards who is a citizen of the United States shall have a right to vote at any meeting and in any election in the town, city, ward, or unincorporated place where he or she has his or her domicile.
II. An inhabitant's domicile for voting purposes shall be the most recent place where he or she as an adult or where his or her parents or legal guardians with whom he or she resided as a minor established a physical presence manifesting an intention to maintain that place as his, her, or their principal and continuous place of physical presence for domestic, social, and civic purposes.
III. No person who prior to matriculation at any institution of learning in this state, and no person employed in the service of the United States who prior to being stationed in this state, had been domiciled in another place shall lose or change that domicile by reason of his or her presence in this state, but shall be presumed to have departed from such other place for a temporary purpose with the intention of returning.
Tom Fahey on a few of the Reps O'Brien replaced for the vote to get rid of the NH Rail Transit Authority:
It's not like O'Brien gave the hook to Republicans who disagreed with him. Three of the missing, Rep. Sean Coughlin of Amherst, Rep. Timothy Hogan, R-Nashua, and Rep. Bruce Marcus, R-Peterborough, missed the House session Wednesday. In fact, they've yet to show for a vote on a single bill this year.
I hope the good folks of Amherst, Nashua and Peterborough know that the people they voted to represent them are AWOL.
(This is technical, but we have to be aware of what is going on. - promoted by Jennifer Daler)
After the House sessions on Tuesday and Wednesday, February 15 and 16, a steady stream of committee Chairs marched up to the Well to announce executive sessions to be held immediately following the House session. Executive sessions are where the vote is taken on what action the committee will recommend to the full House. The announcements totaled over fifty bills which were to be acted on in this manner.
House Rules allow this. The problem is that the procedure, as used this week, violates both the spirit and the letter of the state's Right-to-Know law, which requires a minimum of 24 hours notice before any public meeting. The Legislature requires every town, city and county board or council to comply with this requirement. Indeed, as recently as last year, the Speaker himself introduced legislation which would require a court to invalidate any action taken by each and every one of those boards in violation of the Right-to-Know law. For him now to permit the House to ignore the Right-to-Know law as a matter of routine is an about-face of staggering proportions.
In the Judiciary Committee, procedural irregularities were compounded, because of the division system instituted by the Speaker this term. Under the current system, bills are heard in one of two divisions, and the division that heard the bill is supposed to vote on a recommendation to the full committee. If memory serves correctly, seven of the eight bills which were to be heard by the full Judiciary committee yesterday had not yet had votes in the divisions. As an aside, the division system is proving cumbersome, and certainly does not speed up the process, but the remedy for that would be to acknowledge the problem and change the process, as opposed to ignoring the process entirely.
Note One: Tim C.'s excellent live blog on the Judiciary Committee session yesterday is to be found here. My earlier diary on sunshine is here.
Note Two: Before anyone calls me on it, yes, I do know that the Hughes case means that the legislature does not have to live up to the standards it sets for others. Still, I believe we should at least make an effort to live up to our own precepts.