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
Way, way back in the dim recesses of time... in January, Boss O'Brien changed House rules to allow committees to 'exec' (i.e. vote) on bills without providing specific advance notice to the public. All they had to do was put a notice in the house jounal that Executive session may follow. There was a hue and cry from all sides about this lack of transparency, and rightfully so. Even his underling, Bettencourt, criticized O'Brien for this, claiming he'd never heard of the change and saying we need to
ensure that we conduct ourselves with the greatest degree of openness, transparency, fairness and are in accordance with our constitutional rights.
Under pressure, O'Brien walked his rule change back, explaining he was misunderstood and exec sessions without a specific notice would only be done in unusual circumstances.
For example, a bill in which the sponsor has asked that his or her legislation be killed or a memorial bridge naming or a motion to simply retain a bill in the committee for further work will be permitted immediately following a public hearing.
I took a look at this week's House calendar and guess what? There are more than 45 committee meeting listed with the dreaded words Executive session may follow. No other details about what bills or why. So in effect, any of more than 150 bill can be voted on with no one watching, because 'notice' has been given. And surprising, none of these bills is for naming a bridge.
Thanks for the transparency, Mr. Speaker. Thanks for keeping your word.
NH is setting up a health insurance exchange for folks who cannot get private health insurance. Seems like a pretty good idea, no? Especially when the entire $600,000 cost for creating the program is being borne by the federal government. That's a win-win where I come from. Once the program is in place, Granite Staters who otherwise are uninsured can start to get access to healthcare with a program we created and we control.
To get the ball rolling the Executive Council has to first accept federal money that will be used to set up the program. Not, god forbid, actually spend money to help people who are struggling. Just accept the money from Washington and set it up. As the insurance commissioner said:
If this [$600K] contract is approved, it does not commit the state in any way to establish a state-based exchange. But it does permit us to minimize federal involvement in our health insurance market. It preserves New Hampshire's options, from my perspective.
Think local control, something NH voters have always been in favor of.
But the O'Brienistas heard the words "healthcare" and "federal" in the same sentence and went berserk. They have been lobbying the all-GOP Executive Council to reject the money. Saint Bettencourt the Frugal said this:
At a time when we are looking at historic budget deficits in Washington and Concord, we need to be more careful with taxpayers' money than to move forward on this contract.
And King O'Brien the Terrible added:
It would be frivolous to spend taxpayer dollars on implementing a law that could very well be thrown out.
So that settles it. Plan withdrawn.
Got that? $600 grand to help the poor get insurance. Frivolous. $75 grand to not look so damn foolish to Joe McQuaid? Priceless.
This is scorched-earth politics at its most destructive.
This was published as an op-ed in the Jan. 21 edition of the Conway Daily Sun. I know that all this is not news to political junkies, but it is to my readers up north.
The new, GOP dominated NH legislature has been sworn in, and begun to act. As you will recall, they campaigned on "cut spending, cut taxes, jobs, jobs, jobs." These newly minted legislators intended to focus "like a laser" on spending cuts and job creation. A look at the priorities thus far could give one the impression that they need a new laser. For those readers who are musically inclined, it would not be inappropriate to sing, "Send in the Clowns" as you read.
Today the New Hampshire Young Democrats released to the press our statement in response to the disturbing comments made by Speaker O'Brien to a 9-12 group last week.
College students spend about 3/4 of the year at school and are likely more invested in their domiciled community than the town where their parents live. The assumption that students don't take voting seriously is frankly insulting.
Feel free to join us at our state committee meeting on Saturday (3 pm at the NHDP headquarters) where we will discuss actions we can take to protect the rights of young people.
(Patronizing, anti-democratic, and nakedly partisan all in one fell swoop. Incredible. - promoted by Dean Barker)
Speaking to the Rochester 912 crowd last night, Speaker O'Brien slipped up on his talking points and voiced what's really happening when conservatives trump up charges of voter fraud: they are trying to suppress votes.
Turning to the issue of voter fraud prevention, O'Brien said his party will "tighten up the definition of a New Hampshire resident." He said that Plymouth, a college town, experiences 900 same-day voter registrations.
"They are kids voting liberal, voting their feelings, with no life experience," he said. He then discussed the need for voters to have a photo I.D., to prove who they are, just as they must do when cashing a check.
Speaker O'Brien, just what age do you deem appropriate for people to have voting rights? And more to the point - why are you trying to undermine democratic participation just to please your own political interests?
With the pace of outrage seeming to accelerate each day, I'm thinking that we need to take some action that is more direct in addition to writing letters to editors that may or may not get printed and, if they do, may be late in the game. What would the effect be of having a group of citizens (e.g.us) appear at the State House every day for the next month to witness the goings on. Be there to speak to the press as primary sources.
Would we be able to get in? Could we speak at any time other than in a public hearing? Could we do something to attract the attention of the press? Could we have any positive effect on the proceedings? Are there people willing to attend in shifts? How many would we need to make a show of it? Could we picket? Demonstrate against the already-evident outrages?
Tom Fahey's latest column in the UL provides a number of tasty nuggets to chew on. The most obvious is that Gene Chandler has been handed the rather peculiar sash and tiara designating him "Speaker Pro Tem" from newly minted Speaker O'Brien. As I stated in last week's op-ed:
It's an interesting day in NH, when far right Chandler is considered too liberal by his colleagues. O'Brien is a rabid nutcase, who spent the summer sucking up to the new Teabaglicans who now comprise most of the freshman class in the NH House.
It seems someone higher up in the GOP food chain had similar thoughts, and perhaps fretted a bit about the possibility of the state house turning into a lunatic asylum as we head into the next first in the nation primary, complete with national press coverage. Sununu, perhaps?
A press release came over the transom this evening outlining Bill O'Brien's Transition Team. See the list below the fold. O'Brien also plans to hold an election for Majority Leader rather than appointing one. So far Paul Mirski and Al Baldassaro are announced candidates.
(So Bill O'Brien's a Democrat now, huh? Riiiight. - promoted by Dean Barker)
So, today... in the mail, I received a post card from "my" representative, William O'Brien (R, Mt Vernon) asking for me, to write him in on the Democratic ticket in the primary on Tuesday.
Outrage, cannot begin to explain my feelings over receiving this mailing.
We're a large district in terms of the area we cover, but a small district in terms of resources and voters. We need help.
Is there precedence for this? What happens if he ends up on both tickets for the general election? What he if garners the 1st and 2nd most votes (we have 4 seats)?
We have our own write in candidate, Kary Jencks, and neeed help in New Boston, Mont Vernon, Wilton, Lyndenborough, and Temple to keep this most assuredly UN-Democratic candidate off our ticket.
(Trying to post scanned postcard, but can't remember how to do that)
