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
Politicos & Punditry
The Burt Cohen Show
John Gregg
Landrigan
Pindell
Primary Monitor
Scala
Schoenberg
Spiliotes
Campaigns, Et Alia.
NH-01
- Carol Shea-Porter
- Joanne Dowdell
NH-02
- Ann McLane Kuster
Special Elections
- Bob Perry
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 was published as an op-ed in the November 26, 2010 edition of the Conway Daily Sun:
Thanksgiving is the time for giving thanks, and showing compassion, or so tradition dictates. The natives helped the struggling Pilgrims so that they didn't starve to death during their first winter in New England. Their crops had failed, and they relied upon socialist Indian handouts to survive. Of course we know how the Indians were repaid for their generosity. The voters who enthusiastically supported the recent red tide are likely to have a similar experience.
Today a group of "a group of former NH prosecutors--including a number of former Assistant Attorneys General and former United States Attorneys" blasted Kelly Ayotte for her politicization of the death penalty. An excerpt (via email):
The connection between her political ambitions and the application of the death penalty is clear and unambiguous. This back and forth devalued the gravity of the death penalty decision that Ms. Ayotte made. Instead of hinging her death penalty decision on notions of justice and the law laced with concern for the victims involved and society at large, her decision turned on self-centered thoughts of political gain. The fact that her analysis of a death penalty decision included the impact that it would have on her political future is a violation of New Hampshire's proud tradition where the Office of the Attorney General is not the place for political dialogue.
The fact that she turned to political operatives such as Mr. Varsalone as a sounding board during her time as Attorney General underscores this point. In Ms. Ayotte's response to Mr Varsalone, she stated nothing of the facts of the case, the proper application of the death penalty, the loss of an officer or the suffering of the family that he left behind. Instead, she responded to his description of a political opportunity by pointing immediately to the fact that her death penalty decision would be a hallmark of her political career
The signatories are John Garvey, John Malmberg, Michael Pignatelli, William Shaheen, James Rosenberg, Mark Abramson, Lincoln Soldati, Paul Maggiotto, and Steven Gordon.
Do you think that the 200 billion dollars left over from the bank bailout should be used for a stimulus package to create jobs or should it go to reduce the federal budget deficit?
The New Hampshire Civil Liberties Union (NHCLU) will hold its annual membership meeting at the Currier Museum of Art on Sunday, October 18th at 2:00 p.m. The public is invited to attend this free event. Attendees will have the opportunity for a complementary visit to the museum prior to the NHCLU program.
John Holdridge, Executive Director of the ACLU's Capital Punishment Project, will be the guest speaker. He is recognized as one of the nation's foremost death penalty litigators, and has made frequent appearances on network news programs dealing with capital punishment.
NHCLU staff attorney Barbara Keshen will moderate the meeting, answer questions and involve Mr. Holdridge and NHCLU Executive Director Claire Ebel in a discussion with attendees.
If you need additional information, please call 225-3080. The Currier Museum of Art is located at 150 Ash Street in Manchester.
Those who support Progressive causes are in an odd position these days: we're often in the majority on issues that matter; and we're seriously talking about how to turn what, just a few years ago, was a wish list...into a "reality list".
Staying in the majority, however, requires the assistance of centrist voters--and that means, from time to time, finding philosophical compromise with voters we'd like to keep "in the fold".
In years past, the issue of the death penalty has created a considerable chasm between Progressives and centrists; with the one side concerned about the misapplication of capital punishment, and the other convinced that, for the most heinous of crimes, the only way to achieve a truly just outcome is for the guilty party to face the most severe of punishments.
What if we could bridge that gap?
In today's discussion we propose to do exactly that: to create a death penalty process that only executes those who are truly guilty and excludes those who might not deserve to be put to death...in fact, those who might not be guilty of any crime at all.
19th Century New Hampshire Governor's Words Have Currency in Today's Death Penalty Abolition Movement
By Rep. Robert "Renny" Cushing
The effort to abolish the capital punishment in the U.S. is descendant in large measure from the late 18th and early 19th century "anti-gallows" movement which opposed public hangings. One of the earliest political leaders to call for ending executions public or otherwise was New Hampshire Governor William Badger. This month marks the 175th anniversary of Governor Badger's asking the New Hampshire legislature to abolish capital punishment.
In last Sunday's column, Tom Fahey points out this interesting detail in the ongoing death penalty debate (bold mine):
WHERE'S THE DEATH CHAMBER?: No, the state doesn't have an execution chamber, and doesn't plan to build one soon. It has a draft of a plan in case it's needed, but it's not in the Department of Corrections six-year capital budget plan.
Obviously nobody is planning to execute anybody over the next six years. We still haven't gotten answers to the questions, when, where and how will executions be carried out? Will the state spend tens, if not hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars to pay for appeals, let alone the building and maintenance and staffing of a death chamber?
What programs and services will be cut to fund the death chamber and its associated costs?
Either concrete plans should be made and funding worked out for executions, or the policy should be changed.
President Barack Obama recently announced his decision to speak at the commencement ceremony for the University of Notre Dame on May 17. He will also be the ninth U.S. president to receive an honorary doctor of laws degree from the university.
Several groups have signed petitions imploring the university's president, Reverend John Jenkins, to revoke the invitation and prevent President Obama from speaking, arguing that his policies conflict with Catholic principles, particularly those regarding abortion. With Obama's decision to lift the ban on federal funding of embryonic stem cell research and his pro-choice stance, several groups have expressed their opposition, insisting that the selection is inappropriate.
New Mexico Hampshire Governor Bill Richardson John Lynch signed a bill to repeal the death penalty in the state and replace it with a sentence of life imprisonment without parole, his office said on Wednesday.
Last week, the state's Democratic-controlled Senate voted 24-18 14-10 for a bill to revoke the death penalty. It had already been passed by Mexico's New Hampshire's House of Representatives.
Richardson Lynch, a Democrat, previously supported the death penalty. The decision to repeal it marked the "end of a long personal journey on the issue," he said in a news release.
There are two is one prisoners currently on death row in the state.
New Mexico Hampshire is the 15th16th state to abandon capital punishment, according to the Death Penalty Information Center. New York and New Jersey repealed capital punishment in 2007 and bills to abolish it are pending in several states, the center said.
New Mexico Hampshire has carried out only one execution since 1939. the death penalty was reinstated by the U.S. Supreme Court in 1976. Neighboring Texas is America's most active death penalty state.
There have been more than 1,130 executions in the United States since the 1970s.
Unfortunately, we will not see that press release as Gov Lynch has promised to continue the tradition of Democratic Governors vetoing a repeal of the Death Penalty (should it get to his desk.)
The surprise 193-174 House vote marked the second time in a decade that state legislators have backed a repeal of the death penalty; in 2000, then-Gov. Jeanne Shaheen vetoed a repeal bill with a statement now echoed by Lynch: that some murders are "so heinous that the death penalty is an appropriate punishment."
Kudos to Governor Richardson for being on the progressive side of this issue.
(Cross-posted, with some reluctance, from Blue News Tribune. On one hand, it's (still) not my state. On the other hand, it felt cowardly for me not to say it here.)
In New Hampshire yesterday, the General Court passed a death penalty ban. It still has to be considered by the state Senate, but Governor John Lynch has already announced his intention to veto the bill.
He wants to reserve the death penalty for "extreme" cases.
Let's think about this.
Let's assume an extreme case means multiple murders. So, if two guys rob a bank, and the first guy kills three people but the second guy kills only one, is the second guy an extreme case?
OK, let's concede that point to a "reasonable man" definition of extreme, and assume judges and juries can agree on that. Why doesn't Governor Lynch simply ask for an "extreme" exception to the law?
Because that's not what he wants. He wants to pander to the majority (57%) in New Hampshire who support the death penalty. He thinks he's found a way do that without alienating his liberal supporters (Come on, everybody supports the death penalty in extreme cases, right?).
Ladies and gentlemen, this is "centrism" in action. And it's producing the usual result: nothing. Lynch's position defies any sort of logic -- if it's wrong to kill three, it's wrong to kill one -- and it resembles those who create abortion exceptions in cases of rape or incest, or when the life of the mother is threatened. Abortion opponents consider it murder, and you can't negotiate over the terms of a murder.
There was an interesting AP article today, saying that the death penalty makes no sense because of the cost. Now, it makes me wonder why an ueber frugal state like New Hampshire has the death penalty. Newly re-nominated Attorney General Kelly Ayotte is pursuing two death penalty cases at the moment. This at a time when the state is cutting aid to everything and everybody: the disabled, schools, the towns. Even the court system as a whole is woefully underfunded, and has been for some time, not just during this particular crisis.
To be clear, that's specifically in respect to the crime of killing a police officer. The R2K poll conducted for the Monitor found 45% Dem support for it, 71 % Republican, and 56% independent.
(Also fascinating to see such a gender split overall, with 66% of men supporting capital punishment, while only a plurality of women do at 48%.)
Important to take note of this in light of the poll's timeliness:
Death penalty experts said that polls taken during the course of high profile death penalty prosecutions tend to show greater support for the death penalty than similar polls taken in the absence of such crimes.
Adding: In 2000, then Democratic Governor Jeanne Shaheen vetoed a bill sponsored by our own Jim Splaine that would have abolished the death penalty, despite a similar poll showing 55% overall in favor of doing so. Eight years later, Democratic Governor John Lynch recently vowed to do the same to any future bill. And in the same link, Rep. Splaine is reported to be deciding whether to offer again such a bill.
As the jury listens to background material about Michael Addison's childhood and the pain he caused the Briggs family, we are only weeks away from having watched another jury make the same careful judgment of Jack Brooks' life.
Each man had been convicted of one of the special forms of murder that can bring the death penalty in New Hampshire: Addison for killing a police officer, Brooks for paying to have a murder committed. After those convictions each jury then looked at the fabric of each criminal's life to see whether there were circumstances or conditions that made the crime... well, not forgivable, but somehow less foreign and extreme.
The jury chose to sentence Brooks to life imprisonment rather than execution. A different jury will decide Addison's fate.
The thought experiment is simple: am I wise enough to judge such different men fairly? (Maybe the jury pool will be better or worse at the task than me, but that's a starting place.)
Legislation to abolish the New Hampshire death penalty will be up for a vote in the NH House of Representatives this coming week. Here it is:
HB 607-FN
AN ACT relative to the death penalty.
SPONSORS: Representative Jim Splaine, Rockingham #16; Representative Gail Morrison, Belknap #2; Representative James Pilliod, Belknap #5; Representative Anthony DiFruscia, Rockingham #4; Representative Paul McEachern, Rockingham #16
COMMITTEE: Criminal Justice and Public Safety
ANALYSIS
This bill removes the death sentence from the capital murder statute and replaces it with life imprisonment, until death, without the possibility of parole.
Be it Enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives in General Court convened:
1 Homicide; Capital Murder. Amend RSA 630:1, III to read as follows:
III. A person convicted of a capital murder [words eliminated from current statute: "may be punished by death"] shall be sentenced to life imprisonment, until death, without the possibility of parole.
2 Repeal. RSA 630:5, relative to procedure in capital murder, is repealed.
3 Applicability. This act shall only apply to those persons charged with capital murder on or after the effective date of this act.
4 Effective Date. This act shall take effect January 1, 2008.
Put very simply, this legislation provides for a death penalty.
It says "A person convicted of a capital murder shall be sentenced to life imprisonment, until death, without the possibility of parole." While our state has not had an execution since 1939, it remains an option, and should not be part of our New Hampshire society.
European countries, and many of the nations of this hemisphere, have abolished the death penalty. Currently we are in league with Iran, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, North Korea, and China with the death penalty. We should be better than that.
The House Criminal Justice and Public Safety Committee held a public hearing on the bill, and the majority are recommending that the bill be defeated, while a minority support passage. The Committee vote was 10-7. Here are their reports:
Some newspapers recently ran an interesting story a few days ago about the punishment that is life-in-prison without any chance of parole. It isn't a picnic.
It's harsh. Each and every day, prisoners with that sentence wake up behind bars, knowing that is where they will go asleep that night.
Every day, they hear the sounds and feel the discipline of the jailblock.
At night, they hear the noises and smell the odors of the jail house, all night, every night.
They don't see another sunset. They don't see another sunrise. They never go to the beach again, or drive a car, or visit their family home. This is it.
Life in prison without any chance of parole until death IS a death sentence. It is the ultimate death penalty.
To fight crime and to be tough on crime means to support our law enforcement offices in ways that will prevent crime: support them with the best of training, the best of equipment, and the best of laws. Then support them with the excellent pay that their service deserves, and with a quality retirement plan, as well as quality health care.
But to blindly say that having a death penalty of execution means anything more than taking another life isn't being tough on crime. It recreates the cycle of violence, affecting yet another family, And it does no good.
Right now, New Hampshire is in league with Iraq, Iran, Saudi Arabia, China, and North Korea in having a death penalty by execution.
Instead, we should join most of the world, including most of the nations of this hemisphere and all of Europe, in having a death penalty of life in prison without any chance of parole until death, in God's time. Most religions oppose execution for that very reason.
Legislation is going to have a public hearing shortly at the State House in Concord. It is sponsored by Representatives Jim Pilliod, Tony DiFrusia, Gail Morrison, Paul McEachern, and myself. Similar legislation passed the House and Senate in 2000, but was vetoed by then-Governor Jeanne Shaheen.
But the discussion has to continue. It's the right thing to do.
I would like to join in the discussion and offer some thoughts from time to time on BlueHampshire. I've been Blogging for a couple of years on NHInsider.com (you can visit that Site and see some of my posts under my name), and I think using Internet technology in this way is an asset to democracy.
Maybe more New Hampshire State Representatives will join in Blogging. In fact, new Speaker Terie Norelli has asked me to come up with a set of suggestions on using the Internet for improving communications and openness of the Legislative process, and one of my recommendations will be that Legislators "Blog."
I'd like to respond to a couple of the questions on my recent Blog post about Spousal Unions, about whether our Democrats in the NH Legislature will stand up for that cause, and some others.
It's a good question: will Democrats be Democrats? Will we realize that the voters were saying they want change last November 7th, or will we become so enamored and seduced by our new "perks" that we'll try to become Republicans, moderate our beliefs, and essentially do nothing or do little so we won't rock the boat?
Political "perks" are very seductive. Now that Democrats have the fancy offices, can hire staff, have the committee titles of "chair" and "vice chair," have the best parking spots, can go on paid nationwide conferences, and be in position to do favors for lobbyists and special interests, thus getting the larger political contributions that come with those favors -- well, it's hard to put all that at risk in 2008.
Personally, I told all the potential candidates for House Speaker that I did not want any "title," nor would I accept any chairship or vice chairship. I've been in the House and Senate a total of 28 years and I'm there to participate in the process and the dialogue, not to run meetings or control agendas.
I think if Democrats are Democrats, voters will remember us positively in November of 2008. They'll see that we have some political courage.
We all know that polls tell us things. Whether or not we should be led by them, polls tell us what to do to win voters' favor, and when not to rock the boat and potentially lose support. Politicians often become milky and fuzzy because they want to walk the middle ground, and become very cautious on anything controversial.
Politicians usually don't like to be controversial - - when you are, you "win some" and you "lose some." Politicians like to be liked by as many voters as possible.
So in answering the questions about what to expect in the NH Legislature with Democrats in the majority, I've been saying that it's up to you. It's up to YOU to tell your Legislators what you want them to do.
I for one won't be forgetting the things I've fought for through the years, and while I know we won't succeed this year getting tax reform, I'll keep talking about the need for an income tax based on ability to pay and fully dedicated to education. I'm introducing a Spousal Union bill because it's time we take that step toward more equality for gays and lesbians. I'm introducing another bill to abolish the death penalty because I have long believed we should abolish the death penalty. I'm sponsoring legislation for a third time to adopt "Granny D's" clean elections public financing concept, because democracy would be the better with it. I've written a new ethics bill, because we need more ethics.
The dialogue on these issues, and others, must continue. It would continue in 2007 if Democrats were in the minority. Now that we're in the majority, the dialogue on those principles needs to continue.
It's up to you, because you can force Legislators to deal honestly and up front on all those issues, and more that you are concerned about.
It's up to you, because you can participate in the discussion - - here in BlueHampshire, on NHInsider.com and other Blogs, at the State House in public hearings, and in your communities with your own House and Senate members.
It is up to you. Most House and Senate members also have E-Mail addresses, and you can find those on the NH State WEBSITE, www.nh.gov.
Give 'em hell. Give us hell. We need to hear from you. Howard Dean said it: YOU HAVE THE POWER.
Saddam Hussein's execution is a "triumph of the democratic process" in Iraq, according to U.S. Sen. Judd Gregg.
idea of triumph.
The zoolike scenes in that dank, filthy shed... were more like a lynching than an execution.
...How could it have come to this? Did U.S. officials know that the designated "executioners" would be the unwashed goons of Muqtada Sadr's "Mahdi Army"-the same sort of thugs who killed Abdul Majid al-Khoei in Najaf just after the liberation and who indulge in extra-judicial murder of Iraqis every night and day?
...far from bringing anything like "closure," the hanging ensures that the poison of Saddamism will stay in the Iraqi bloodstream, mingling with other related infections such as confessional fanaticism and the sort of video sadism that has until now been the prerogative of al-Qaida's dehumanized ghouls. We have helped to officiate at a human sacrifice. For shame.
