The New Hampshire House RINO Caucus

by Steve MacDonald

RINOsHow a representative votes can tell you a lot about their priorities.  The folks who just  voted against HB 89, who happen to run around with an (R) next to their name, think that state-crushing federal mandates like Obamacare should not be resisted by every means possible. 

They seem willing to accept that the Federal government has the right to require citizens to buy something, though I can almost guarantee they would never force you to buy and own a gun for your own self-defense.

A handful of elected "republicans" always seem willing to give up a little more State sovereignty and local control to a distance central power. (A dwindling handful, if you take my meaning).

They are what we lovingly refer to as RINO’s.  Republicans In Name Only.

Now some will argue, RINOs and Democrats mostly, that these folks voted against HB 89, and ACT requiring the NH Attorney General to join the challenge against the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, because it was (insert left wing rhetoric here.)  It really does not matter, but I think my favorite is separation of powers which is a silly argument.  How do you legislate anything affecting any department under the governors leadership under those terms.  You can’t.  But I digress. The point is that for most of them this is not their first visit to the RINO rodeo.

These folks are the kind of republicans who might support John Lynch for Governor, or go to a No Labels meeting, or join a left wing run ‘bi-partisan’ House caucus.  Of course that is the only way the democrats will have them.  As democrats they would have no voice in that party at all unless they went all in on the socialist progressive agenda.  They are old school democrats, and unless their only hope is to either form an independent/moderate caucus, or take back the democrat party from the extremist liberals.  There is no longer any room for big government politicians in a small government party.

So without further delay, and to ensure their continued glorification by the left as victims, here are those ‘republicans’ who voted against HB 89 …on the jump!

House Rep Party County District Vote
Case, Frank  Republican Rockingham 1 Nay
Drisko, Richard  Republican Hillsborough 5 Nay
Gargasz, Carolyn  Republican Hillsborough 5 Nay
Gould, Kenneth  Republican Rockingham 5 Nay
Harty, Martin  Republican Strafford 3 Nay
Hess, David  Republican Merrimack 9 Nay
Kidder, David  Republican Merrimack 1 Nay
Lockwood, Priscilla  Republican Merrimack 6 Nay
Millham, Alida  Republican Belknap 5 Nay
Pilliod, James  Republican Belknap 5 Nay

Like it? Share it!

Leave a Comment

  • http://www.timothyhorrigan.com Timothy Horrigan

    Actually, it is amazing so few Republicans crossed over. Aside from the fact the Affordable Care Act does some good things, HB 89 has some massive flaws. Ordering the AG to do something in a bill is constitutionally questionable; ordering him to join a specific lawsuit is just plain silly. Indeed, assuming the bill passes the Senate and gets vetoed by the Governor, then by the time the veto is overridden, the Florida vs. HHS lawsuit might be settled.

  • Tim

    Reprising the points that Mr. Horrigan raises about House Bill #89:
    1. If ordering the state attorney general to do something is “constitutionally questionable,” isn’t the way to discover the answer to the question to take the action and see what the courts then say?
    2. Since the lawsuit itself—joined by 26 or so other state attorneys general—is based upon a violation of the U.S. Constitution, one may wonder what makes it “silly” (unless of course violations by Constitution by Congress have become unexceptionable by their very frequency).
    3. Whether the bill gets vetoed by the governor, and whether that veto is overridden in time to join the lawsuit with the other states, has nothing to do with whether it’s the right thing to do. It is never wrong to challenge unconstitutional actions by Congress, irrespective of “timing.” Besides, under the able leadership of Speaker O’Brien, overrides of vetoes by our “Governor No” may be prompt, if not instantaneous (which is all to the good).

  • Tom Flaherty

    Drisko and Gargasz are absolute monstrosities to the Republican party. They have never voted Republican, mush less anything close to Conservative, despite their party label. Brookline/Hollis needs to do something to get rid of these 2 disasters. Drisko is on just one committee (Election Law). I saw him driving in Hollis last week. It’s a wonder he can still srive. Also, his license plate shows that he is and “assistant majority leader”??? Talk about WTF. I suppose this is a payback for him being a legislator for so many years (decades?).
    Bettencourt should wise up after this vote. Drisko and Gargasz are no better than Lasky and DeVries.
    http://www.wirenh.com/news-mainmenu-4/11-news-general/4614-front-door-politics-house-leadership-announced.html
    This is something the new GOP ladership MUST do something about – they need to start forcing these RINOs out.

  • Bob

    Mr. Horrigan must live on Venus, where the crushing atmospheric pressure and constant global warming have bifurcated his few remaining brain cells. I shall pray for what few cells remain….

  • doug

    Millham and Pilliod– OF COURSE! To think– the party celebrated when Millham came onto the ballot in the 11th hour. When you combine her voting record and the damage she continually does on the County Convention, tell me again why she was better than having a Democrat? Guaranteed you won’t see her name OR baby-Doc Pilliod’s in the affirmative column when it comes to over riding any Lynch vetoes. Jack Kimball, I HOPE you take notice…

  • Mike Rogers

    If our (NH) constitution gives the AG independence from the legislature, then simply ordering the AG to do something won’t help.

    On the other hand, it is constitutional, and our article 7 lends support, to resist federal laws which encroach on our citizens’ rights.

    Thus, it is entirely right and proper to pass a bill declaring the PPACA null and void in NH, and for it to be illegal for any state agencies or officers to implement any part of it. (Citing Judge Vinson’s declaratory judgement as further backing.)

    Such a bill could then remind the AG that his job is to represent NH’s interests in this matter.

    For more on nullification, please see Dr Thomas Woods’ excellent book on the subject, and/or join us for a discussion of states’ rights on March 19th.

    http://www.nullifynow.com/newhampshire/

Previous post:

Next post: