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
What do you think NH's House Leadership would do if they happened to pass by a large group of young adults in New Hampshire feeling completely disenfranchised by the proposed trampling of their rights?
Apparently, ignore them and close the door on their active participation in our state:
(If the new Republican majority thinks the proceeds from a bake sale will pay for cancer treatment, what does this say about its ability to generate a realistic state budget? - promoted by Jennifer Daler)
Do we have our very own Sue Lowden in the New Hampshire legislature?
During yesterday's hearing on HB 440 - which seeks to remove New Hampshire from the new health law and bar the NH Insurance Department from enforcing consumer protections - Representative Jeanine Notter of Merrimack told a member of the public that health reform is not needed because she is sure, just sure, that communities will rally around cancer patients and help them cover their costs.
Did you hear that, cancer patients? Representative Notter wants you to hold a bake sale while your fight for life. According to her, this is the American way. So don't worry about trying to get access to health insurance so you can pay your fair share and have real faith in your ability to provide care for you and your family, follow the lead of Girl Scouts and PTA functions. You should be able to raise enough for half a doctor's visit - no medical procedures - and you'll get a brownie to boot!
"When my daughter told me she was a lesbian, I didn't know what to think. All I knew was that I loved her and wanted what was best for her."
"I was so excited when my husband proposed to me, but I was embarrassed to tell my gay and lesbian friends that I was going to get married - when I knew they couldn't."
"I knew I was gay in high school. My first thought was that I can't let anyone know. But after a while, you just need to tell someone, anyone."
These are words that were spoken at today's Granite State Camp Courage - Keene, which taught people how to use their own unique reasons for supporting marriage equality ("Story of Self") to win over hearts and minds and more.
Will marriage equality in New Hampshire be on the chopping block in the next month? Honestly, who knows. The NH House Majority Office said no during a damage control press conference last week (even though the bills are already filed), NOM said yes with immediate mailers targeting those leaders, and now that mailer has pushed the Majority Office to call for the bill to be retained in committee - a position they committed to providing testimony on.
What?!
But putting all of that aside - and that's not easy, I admit - the reality is that this issue is going to continue to come up until we reach a critical mass of supporters, and we have to be more vocal that equality isn't important only when it's under immediate attack.
(Powerful. Thank you for documenting. - promoted by William Tucker)
The U.S. House of Representatives' vote to repeal the new health law may have simply been a symbolic gesture for those taking the vote, but to real people in New Hampshire and elsewhere it means a threat to the new consumer protections people are already benefiting from.
People like Hillary StPierre, who testified at the NH State House last week against HB 89. That's the bill which seeks to (unconstitutionally) direct the NH Attorney General to join a lawsuit with the ultimate goal of repealing the new health law.
Hillary is a symbol of just what this new law means for families, and why it needs to stay:
This is what is happening in America. After traveling to Concord in the bitter cold just days after a chemo session, and then waiting patiently for her turn to testify, Hillary's energy was spent. What was left was brutal honesty: speaking truth to power. It was about saying this isn't about politics, it's about people.
You can read the full testimony on Hillary's own corner of the web, Baldies Blog. Encouraged: there is a comments section there, too.
P.S. A big thank-you to TimC who is collaborating with us on the State House Video Monitoring Project. We look forward to sharing more highlights throughout the session.
(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?
Deciding who to vote for today will not be hard for many of us on Blue Hampshire, but for your progressive-leaning but non-political junkie friends and family, we offer this Election Day special ... our first attempt at a NH Progressive Voters Guide.
Today's election is critically important for protecting and advancing the values that matter most to us. We thought it would be handy if there were an easy way to vote smart on all the races on the ballot, taking into account the endorsements and recommendations of some of New Hampshire's leading progressive organizations.
Nine organizations are reflected in the NH Progressive Voter's Guide, with participation varying from recommendations to endorsements to a sort-of "endorsement of the endorsements". There is a weblink to each organization for more information.
Since this is the first-ever Progressive Voter Guide we've put together we wholly anticipate some bugs. In fact, we'll be updating a bit more this morning in hopes of ironing them out - mapping this many house districts and endorsements has proved quite challenging!
What we suggest is that people download their sample ballot from the NH Secretary of State, then use the Progressive Voter Guide to fill-in the sample ballot and bring it to the polls with them. (That also helps in case there is an errant candidate listed on the page.)
What's really exciting about this effort is that even the more political of us may find recommendations for races or candidates that we knew little about before - some groups even have county races listed.
So, take a peek and see what it has for your district, then share it around with friends and family who would make good use of it today. We'd also love your feedback via the form on the site - we would really like to make this bigger and better the next time around. (And leave a note if you'd be interested in helping!)
The NH Progressive Voter Guide is a collaboration by America Votes NH, Granite State Progress, NARAL Pro-Choice NH, NEA-NH, NH AFL-CIO, NH Citizens Alliance for Action, NH Sierra Club, Planned Parenthood of Northern New England, and SEA/SEIU Local 1984.
Those are some great groups, and this is a great way to encourage people to vote smarter this Election Day.
It must be getting close to Election Day because, like clockwork, conservatives are turning to claims of voter fraud to lay the groundwork to "explain" away any progressive victories. In New Hampshire, conservatives are even using voter suppression tactics by their own side to claim rampant voter fraud.
As highlighted in a blog earlier this week, the Attorney General in New Hampshire has issued a warning about an organization circulating misinformation to voters in New Hampshire via mailers and phone calls, urging them to "vote from the comfort of their own home."
What the AG's alert doesn't say is that the mailers came from conservative group Alliance for America's Future, which has been in trouble in Nevada and elsewhere already this year for its illegal practices. The Nevada New Bureau has some revealing background on the group:
GOP operative Barry Bennett (Ohio) recently left his position as chief of staff to Rep. Jean Schmidt, R-Loveland, to help launch the organization. The mission is to help Republicans in key races in key states such as Ohio, Arkansas and Nevada. Bennet's partner is Mary Cheney, daughter of former Vice President Dick Cheney.
This week New Hampshire became a target of the Alliance's efforts to mislead and suppress voter turnout for November 2nd. Over the past several days people across the state have received phone calls and at least two mailers - one on Thursday and one on Friday - directing them to a personalized website that promises to help them vote early.
More below the fold, including an image of the mailer.
Most people might consider Maine a great place to vacation, but for New Hampshire Republican consultant and former McCain adviser Michael Dennehy, apparently it's a great place to draw the ire of the Ethics Commission and your own campaign client.
The Kennebec Journal has a piece today about Dennehy releasing a last-minute attack robocall before the state's primary - in violation of state law and without consulting the campaign, itself:
Michael Dennehy said he did not ask [Republican Gubernatorial candidate Les] Otten or Campaign Manager Edie Smith for permission before recording the message and sending it to 7,289 Maine households the night before the June 8 primary.
The phone call became an issue last month when the Maine Commission on Governmental Ethics and Election Practices launched an investigation because the call contained no disclosure, as required by law.
The attack? It targeted primary rival Paul LePage for his position on civil unions (and he even got that wrong).
In a press conference this afternoon, NH's attorney general officially objected to a proposed merger between Manchester's Catholic Medical Center and Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center.
The planned acquisition had raised red flags for a number of patients and advocates on all sides of the issue. The hospitals cited cost-savings for merging governance and consolidating services, but some DHMC patients, along with organizations like NH ACLU and Planned Parenthood of Northern New England, raised concerns that the merger would risk depriving women and families access to the reproductive health services, support and education currently provided by Dartmouth. This is because, pursuant to the affiliation agreements, Dartmouth OB/GYNs must comply with religious directives in the provision of clinical care in their offices, facilities and hospital.
In the strange bedfellows of opposition to this bill, Catholic laity also came out strong against the merger in concern that DHMC wouldn't adhere to these same directives.
The interested parties teamed up in support of a House Concurrent Resolution, HCR 30, which urged the AG to fully investigate the proposed transaction. Though HCR 30 passed just last week, NH's Charitable Trusts unit had already started looking into the merger and today the AG's office released its findings.
As more and more New Hampshire communities clearly reject discrimination and instead voice support for marriage equality, our attention turns to how federal discrimination harms married gay and lesbian couples in New Hampshire:
Tonight in Concord, Gay & Lesbian Advocates & Defenders (GLAD) will host a workshop about "DOMA and Your Marriage" and outline what federal discrimination means for newly married couples in New Hampshire.
Janson Wu, a staff attorney with GLAD will provide legal information regarding Section 3 of the federal Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) and how it affects the marriages of same-sex couples in New Hampshire.
Section 3 of DOMA specifically defines marriage as between one man and one woman for purposes of all federal law, effectively denying all married same-sex couples the federal rights and responsibilities that typically accompany marriage, despite New Hampshire's decision to treat those couples as legally married at the state level. In light of Section 3 of DOMA, many questions and problems arise for New Hampshire's married same-sex couples. How should same-sex married couples file their 2011 federal tax returns in light of DOMA? Can a same-sex married couple access Social Security spousal and survivor benefits? What if one spouse is a federal employee - how does DOMA affect their health benefits and retirement pensions? What if one spouse gets sick - can the other spouse take time off to take care of the sick spouse? What if one spouse is not a citizen - what is the best way to deal with these immigration issues?
Wu will also discuss GLAD's federal court case, Gill v. OPM, challenging Section 3 of DOMA and what a potential victory in that case would mean for New Hampshire residents.
As I mentioned, the first workshop is tonight, followed by a second on the Seacoast. To RSVP or, if you are unable to attend, get notes, email info@granitestateprogress.org. (Workshops are cosponsored by Granite State Progress, PFLAG - New Hampshire, and SEIU 1984's Lavender Caucus.)
Concord
Wednesday, May 12, 2010
6:00 - 7:30 PM
State Employees Association, 207 N. Main Street
Portsmouth
Thursday, May 20, 2010
6:00 - 7:30 PM
South Church, 292 State Street
Turns out, it wasn't the Tea Party. The small rally was organized by the Massachusetts-based white supremacist group North East White Pride.
"The Citizens Alliance seems like they were in error," said former Democratic Party chairwoman Kathleen Sullivan, who had called on local Tea Party-affiliated candidates to denounce the rally.
END UPDATE.
Shouting down the health care reform vote that will benefit working class families and small businesses all across the country isn't the only teabagger activity of choice today. Here in New Hampshire, people passing by the State House earlier today were treated to the "Don't Tread on Me Flag" flag flying proudly beside a "White Pride" banner.
While I won't bother to link to this racist material here, I did a quick search and it is, indeed, White Pride Day. Given the activities in DC over the weekend, how fitting that members of the group in New Hampshire should expose some of the real basis for their opposition to our country's leadership.
Staffers from NH Citizens Alliance caught this story today when they looked out their office window and saw the signs on display. Director Sarah Chaisson Warner issued an immediate rebuke, calling the behavior "disturbing" and "unpatriotic". She also stated:
"The elected officials and candidates in New Hampshire who have frequently spoken at Tea Party events and curried favor with them should quickly condemn this growing and disrespectful behavior before more damage is done."
For the second time in as many weeks, the Union Leader tried to spin the anti-marriage petition effort's massive fail in a misleading direction. Their effort today was so one-sided it felt like I was reading a Cornerstone release verbatim.
Cornerstone/LetNHVote The UL would have you believe that there is almost a 2/3rds majority support for writing discrimination into our constitution. Instead of dignifying that misleading spin with a verbal response, here's a map that Granite State Progress put together. The towns that rejected the article, as well as those where the anti-marriagers couldn't even scratch up the requisite petition signatures, are in blue, while those towns where it passed are in green (not passed by the 2/3rds needed for a constitutional amendment, mind you, just the sum of those passed):
And for those who prefer charts to pictures, here's webpage with a spreadsheet of the results.
Let's be clear here, since the Union Leader, and, to my dismay, plenty of other false equivalence pieces in other state media organs won't:
* The anti-marriage crowd couldn't even get on the ballot in 73 communities (and wasn't on the ballot in 13 cities, which don't have non-binding warrant resolutions).
* Where it did, it was rejected in 80 communities and adopted in 59.
As Granite State Progress' report on this details (below the fold, required reading), it is not clear to what extent the National Organization for Marriage was behind this effort in strategy and funding. What is clear, however, is that town by town, our great state said no to this obviously coordinated movement to strip the rights away from some of our tax-paying, patriotic citizens in the Live Free or Die state.
At 12:20 am this morning, my own community of Goffstown said no to the vote to discriminate.
Of the towns that Granite State Progress has organized, we're seeing a great number of wins - Rindge, Rye, Winchester, Alstead, Deerfield, Bethlehem, Goffstown, Wolfeboro, and Londonderry (town charter) all rejected the vote to discriminate.
If you're looking for the tools, folks - they are right here.
(Bumped. This is the New Hampshire I know and love. - promoted by Dean Barker)
For those keeping count at home ... Londonderry rejected the vote to discriminate tonight. WMUR:
LONDONDERRY, N.H. -- The Londonderry Town Council unanimously rejected a petition Monday night to consider challenging the new gay marriage law in New Hampshire, which took effect Jan. 1. Since then, opponents have launched an effort to challenge the law by raising the issue at town meetings around the state.
Before the public hearing, a group of about 30 students rallied in support of marriage equality outside of Town Hall. (Gotta love the next generation - they really get it.) Inside, students and other testifiers exposed the vote to discriminate for what it really is.
By the end of it, the Town Council had unanimously rejected Rep. Al Baldasaro's attempt to have Londonderry challenge marriage equality. Baldasaro had submitted a petition with 1% of registered voters in the town, the percentage required in order to have the matter considered by the town council. Londonderry Town Council had the option to accept or deny the petition; if someone collects signatures from 5% of registered voters in the town the petition is automatically added to the town ballot
Citing a variety of reasons - not the least of which is that if Baldasaro really wants a vote on the definition of marriage then he should be willing and able to collect the required 5% signatures - the council decided that he should have to follow the established town charter requirements instead of circumventing them.
In agreement with the council's position is Londonderry Protects Marriage Equality, a group of concerned community members who have come together to take a stand against discrimination. You can visit them here on the web or here on Facebook if you want to send a congratulations.
Londonderry will be on watch for the next couple of weeks as they wait to hear whether Al got the other signatures.
I don't know what to say, other than the recent blow to campaign finance reform has little to do with free speech and one hell of a lot to do with money:
* Note the discrepancy between how much was spent by unions collectively - whose members largely have health care benefits and have been working tirelessly to ensure others have adequate coverage, too - and the Chamber of Commerce's attempts to kill health care reform, clean energy legislation, the right to organize, etc. It's amazing to think how far we've come on issues in the face of this - that real people with boots on the ground have held ground against the bottomless corporate coffers. But the recent ruling opens the door to even greater inequalities.
Consider this an open thread for State of the Union Watch Parties.
Manchester Watch Party:
Co-hosted by Drinking Liberally Manchester and NH Change That Works
When: Wednesday, January 27 from 8:00-9:00 PM
Where: A Caribbean Affair, 915 Elm Street (next to Shaskeen)
RSVP: Facebook
Today, New Hampshire legislators are being asked to vote to discriminate.
As Rep. Jim Splaine has already explained, HB 1590 is an attempt to repeal marriage equality and CACR 28 is a ploy to define marriage in a way that discriminates against same-sex couples.
But the homophobic contingent that wants to take away rights from families and overturn marriage equality doesn't just want the legislature to vote to discriminate - it wants to give its own followers an opportunity to do so as well.
"Let NH Vote" - a town meeting strategy designed to pressure the legislature to pass CACR 28, a constitutional amendment defining marriage as between one man and one woman - will pop up in many towns this spring.
This campaign is about taking away rights from families and overturning marriage equality, pure and simple. Even though the bigot bills at the State House today will be voted down, it's important that we educate people about the real intent of the town meeting vote to discriminate.
(This is deeply disturbing. How can a political party or partisan group have influence over a town's voting rolls? - promoted by Jennifer Daler)
One might have cause to question the intent of the Seacoast Republican Women's event scheduled for this morning, which advertises showing you how to "clean up voter lists for 2010":
Ed Naile, Chairman of The Coalition of NH Taxpayers will speak to the Seacoast Republican Women on the subject of 'Cleaning up NH's Elections - Voting Process Fraud: What You Can Do Now for 2010' on Wednesday, January 13th 2010 from 9:00 - 11:00 AM. Learn about a process that you can use in your own town to help clean up voter lists for 2010 in order to prevent some types of fraud before they occur. This will be the launch of an initiative for SRW members to use in their own towns.
Ah, the old Republican tagline about rampant voter fraud. That must be what's behind the election of progressives like Rep. Carol Shea-Porter in New Hampshire. Now, if we could only clean up the voter lists and kick off all of those folks voting for working family issues ... This "initiative" should be closely investigated by the members of our media.
(It took me a while to figure it out, but I think I finally get it: this final session for Gregg is one long audition for a future FOX News permanent gig. - promoted by Dean Barker)
Or something like that.
In one of the more ridiculous holiday-themed statements I've seen, Sen. Judd Gregg equivocated voting to open debate on how to fix the nation's health care crisis with putting pilgrims "on a leaky ship back to Europe."
"As we near the celebration of the Pilgrims who crossed the Atlantic for a new life in the Americas, tonight, the Senate Democrats have ironically put our country on a backward course towards a European-style, government-run health care system. Regardless of opinion polls, the will of their constituents, or just plain common sense, my Democratic colleagues are fully committed to the government controlling your health care and charging your children and your grandchildren trillions for it. This is not the reform Americans want, and it puts our country's future prosperity on a leaky ship back to Europe.
I didn't realize that the pilgrims were fleeing comprehensive health care coverage when they boarded the Mayflower. For some strange historical reason, I thought they were seeking more religious freedom and choice ... I could, however, see a comparison between resisting a monopoly on religion and resisting a monopoly of a private insurance industry that routinely and discriminately dictates who will get coverage and at what cost, to the detriment of families everywhere.
