HB 1704 - Republicans doing the dirty work by resurrecting HassanSpeech? Part 2 - Granite Grok

HB 1704 – Republicans doing the dirty work by resurrecting HassanSpeech? Part 2

OK, Part 1 is here – which simply pulled out a couple of nuggets from the proposed HB 1704 as found at  NH.GOV. While there was enough uproar to have the NH Senate table it last week, it is supposedly coming back from the dead.  I have already made the pitch that the bill needs to be amended so that donors / contributors / supporters no longer be listed.  The reason for that as the Progressives have pushed politics into ever more parts of Society at large (instead of keeping it simply in the Governmental / Political sphere), they are coming up against The Law of Diminishing Returns which states that the next incremental “gain” for them (which I consider a loss when compared to traditional Western Liberalism / Constitutionalism) costs more and requires more.  Thus, the new tactic now in wide deploy of finding and deliberately creating damage to their political opposition; no, not just in the political realm but in and to their personal lives and families.  Their scorched earth mentality is to so punish ordinary citizens (often, whose only “political crime” is to defend traditional American values) that these folks will either remain silent or destitute on the street (after all, they are just following Obama’s lead in intending to bankrupt the coal industry and from EPA Regional Administrator whose “leadership style concerning energy companies was to “crucify the first five to pacify the rest” and by that, silence dissent.

I have to admit, the person that titled this amendment to HB 1704 is out to:

  • Protect the Political Class (and yes, Establishment Republicans are certainly often part of this Class)
  • Silence the opposition to their rule

I hate to have to keep repeating it, but when our Political Class is either seemingly incapable of remembering this or willfully wish to disregard it, I feel like I have to be an elementary school teacher and repeat, repeat, and repeat some more:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

So, here be the beginning of the fisking of the “Protect the Politicans’ Ass Amendment” (full text later in this post).

First thing to note is that no one that I know either doesn’t know or is refusing to “give up” the name of the absolute craven person that create Section 12 whose title (“12 New Section; Reports of Spending on Information Critical of General Court Members“) is a blatant scream of “We who are already elected are gonna make it HARDER for people to criticize us!”  It is my understanding that this particular amendment is coming out of, as I am told, the NH Senate Public and Municipal Affairs Committee, whose members are:

  • John Barnes, Chair (Republican)
  • Jeanne Forrester, Vice-Chair (Republican)
  • David Boutin (Republican)
  • Amanda Merrill (Democrat)
  • Nancy Stiles (Republican)

Here is that Section (and then I will return to top down fisking of the entire Amendment; emphasis here is mine):

12 New Section; Reports of Spending on Information Critical of General Court Members. Amend RSA 664 by inserting after section 6 the following new section:

664:6-a Reports of Spending on Information Critical of General Court Members. Any political committee whose spending on distribution of information critical of a member of the general court who has not filed for office, in aggregate, exceeds $500 shall file an itemized statement with the secretary of state not later than 24 hours after such spending, and thereafter each time a further $500 is spent. Such itemized statements shall cover the period during which a total of $500 was spent. Each statement shall contain each date when such money was spent; the name and address of the person paid; the name of the member of the general court mentioned in the information distributed; the amount of each payment; the purpose of each payment; and the aggregate amount of all previous payments. If the payment is made for information critical of more than one member of the general court, the statement made under this paragraph shall allocate the way in which the payment was made among the members on a reasonable basis. For the purposes of this paragraph, “reasonable basis” means a statement which reflects the burden reasonably expected to be suffered by each member. The filing requirements of this paragraph shall be in addition to all other filing requirements, and shall not be limited to the filing periods during which expenditures must otherwise be reported.

This is out of the order of the Amendment, but it is the most irritating section of all – the fact that this Committee would actually use that fall into using that hateful Democrat tactic of identity politics (by setting yourselves up as a special protected Politically Correct group) and invoking “Victim!” for yourselves.

12 New Section; Reports of Spending on Information Critical of General Court Members. Amend RSA 664 by inserting after section 6 the following new section:

I sit here thinking to myself – Republicans did this?  Really?  HassanSpeech – sure, I expect it from Democrat Socialists. This is the major reason why the electorate on the Right is so upset – don’t they even think “Gee, is thing even close to being Constitutional?”  Or have they worked themselves into the meme “Hey, we have to be doing something to look like we’re earning our titles!” so much that they’ve worked themselves into Constitutional cluelessness?

Set apart from the rest of Society, with this Amendment, some of  the Political Class has decided that NO one has the RIGHT to criticize a NH legislator  without the fear of retribution.  This is all about the changing of the relationship of elected public servants to the citizens that elected them by incrementally placing the former over the latter.  This is all about making politicians (and make no mistake, this will simply rank politicians lower than used car salesmen) self defining themselves as those that walk upon political water – above the Natural Law definitions of Sovereign Citizens that they would now rule.

The Snarky Translation – Get that???? ->  Critical of General Court members! They apparently have extremely thin skins and oh so delicate psychies (yeah, I know, spelling – go with it).  THIS is a BAD thing – in effect, it is an “Incumbent Protection Racket” if this is passed.  Again, time to pound this again:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

On to the Section’s text:

664:6-a Reports of Spending on Information Critical of General Court Members. Any political committee whose spending on distribution of information critical of a member of the general court who has not filed for office, in aggregate, exceeds $500 shall file an itemized statement with the secretary of state not later than 24 hours after such spending, and thereafter each time a further $500 is spent.

Not only does this create a financial drain on the true purposes of a voluntary group of people that disagrees with any legislator, it also creates a time and paperwork sinkhole as well (er, “retribution”).  Campaigns last a while – sometimes, a long while.  And while $500 is not a vast amount of money, it adds up quickly.  It also an increment in which filing after filing after filing will be required.  This is called “wearing down the opposition” – at some point, it becomes a large burden to deal with.  This states “We in government will just wait you out – for we rule and you don’t” (gee, shades of Obama and “I won”?).  This is a thumb in the eyes of activists of all stripes and both sides of the aisle (for as much as I want the other side to lose, I want them to be able to keeping talking so that they get themselves into trouble).

In effect, this could put GraniteGrok (and Blue Hampshire, for that matter) out of business.  Look at it from an activist standpoint – why else would Politicians try to set this up?  For if you combine this Amendment with another one that has already been submitted by NH Senator Sharon Carson, that effectively broadens out the definition of what a political committee is, that could be interpreted to open anyone one or even a simple collection of friends to be a political committee (to be fisked later).

If you, or a group in which you participate, decide to launch a broadside at a politician because you hold them in ill favor for their actions (or any other reason, good or bad), and you spend more than $500, you have to file with the Secretary of State; this isn’t even a “May I see your papers“, this is a “Say a cross word against me, pay up serf“.  Yes, I used the word “serf” deliberately for that is what we will be, for then, we are no longer sovereign citizens as first claimed by our Founders.  Five hundred is the tax for speaking ill, payable within 24 hours.  Instead of holding our politicians accountable for their actions, they wish to hold us accountable for what we say against them.

Such itemized statements shall cover the period during which a total of $500 was spent. Each statement shall contain each date when such money was spent; the name and address of the person paid; the name of the member of the general court mentioned in the information distributed; the amount of each payment; the purpose of each payment; and the aggregate amount of all previous payments. If the payment is made for information critical of more than one member of the general court, the statement made under this paragraph shall allocate the way in which the payment was made among the members on a reasonable basis.

One of the general public extreme dislikes is that of paperwork – drudgery upon drudgery for no good purpose (as least as perceived by the general public).  In effect, what this is doing is having the public create a politician’s enemies list with little effort on the part of the politician.  Why not think about this – look at the above and all a pol has to do is do a cut and paste to get the names (I think that most can accomplish at least that).

Are we governed by our Consent, or is this just another nail in the house that the Political Class is creating for permanent governance? Is this a measure to suppress critical political speech the Governmental way – BURY them in paperwork?  That $500 time period can be very short indeed – I can easily spend that much in 15 minutes if that definition (and I will show that another Amendment does exactly that) includes buying equipment that allows the ‘GROK style of broadcasting information that is often critical of “General Court members” (i.e., the RINO Report, anyone?  GrokTALK, anyone?  Heck, live streaming commentary at political events, anyone?).

I spend a lot more than that on hosting charges – is this an instance of the Law of Unintended Consequences that would not allow us to criticize incumbent politicians of the NH General Court?  How about the Boo-Hoo Hampsters over at Blue Hampshire?  Will this also include unflattering editorials by for-profit corporations (the MSM among them)?  Who gets a pass, and who would get the shaft?  All I can think of at this time is the term “useful idiot” and apply it to whoever did this.  I guess that person is really scared of groups like the ‘Grok (or NOM or HRC or AFP or FreedomWorks or the Progress Now folks….and perhaps, those thinking of acting like the RLCNH as they have been very successful in RINO hunting?  Does this mean that the RLCNH and the Granite State Patriot Liberty PAC now have problems?  How about Kathy Sullivan’s PAC?

Whoever added this in did so in having it  play a role in the upcoming election on the national level PACs?  How about the Gay money PACs like HRC (Human Rights Coalition – wouldn’t that be homophobic)?  Or are is this meant to stop NOM (National Organization of Marriage – wouldn’t that be putting down traditional marriage and values)? Or Cornerstone?  Or even the (old name) Granite State Fair Tax group?

Certainly, somebody wishes to effect a change that warms the cockles of Maggie “The Red” Hassan and Kathy Sullivan – they must be giggling to themselves “Heh!  A REPUBLICAN (guessing here) is doing our dirty work in getting HassanSpeech / DISCLOSE act ready for us!”  If this is true – Good going, sport!

For the purposes of this paragraph, “reasonable basis” means a statement which reflects the burden reasonably expected to be suffered by each member. The filing requirements of this paragraph shall be in addition to all other filing requirements, and shall not be limited to the filing periods during which expenditures must otherwise be reported.

A reasonable basis“- you have got to be kidding or the author has a warped sense of humor that exceeds all of us Groksters combined!   No, this is NOT a reasonable amendment section when you look at “ abridging the freedom of speech” and the philosophy that the Founders was to protect the very speech that these chuckleheads are abridging by simple dint of making it HARD.    Death by a thousand bureaucratic reams of paper…

To be suffered by each members” – oh, the poor dears!  Gentle souls, tossed to and fro by the vicissitudes into which they have voluntarily placed themselves.  And I thought the purpose of these nitwits was to do as little harm to the rest of us instead of making sure that we do as little harm as possible to them!  And of course, ANY one that feels bullied has to be listed by the bully.  Or, at least those folks that politicians consider to be bullies.  Like us at the ‘Grok.

***********************************************

 Back to the rest of this amendment – Full test of this Amendment to HB 1704, 2012-1968s:

Public and Municipal Affairs

May 2, 2012

2012-1968s

03/10

Amendment to HB 1704-FN

Amend the title of the bill by replacing it with the following:

AN ACT relative to political contributions and expenditures, relative to reporting by political committees, and relatives to nomination of political organizations.

Amend the bill by replacing all after the enacting clause with the following:

1 Declaration of Intent; Political Organization. Amend RSA 655:17-c to read as follows:

655:17-c Declaration of Intent; Political Organization.

I. Declarations of intent for political organizations shall be in the following form and signed by the chairman of the political organization:

I, __________, chairman of the __________ organization hereby declare that the __________ organization intends to file nomination papers by the deadline established under RSA 655:43, I. [I further declare that the __________ organization intends to file the names of candidates for the following offices with the nomination papers.]

II. At the time of filing the declaration of intent, the chairman of the political organization shall submit a list of the offices for which it intends to file candidates and the names of the candidates for those offices. In addition, each candidate shall file a declaration of candidacy. The declaration of candidacy shall be in the form provided by RSA 655:17 with the understanding that, where the form says primary election, it shall be construed to mean general election. If the political organization does not obtain enough nomination papers to have its name placed on the ballot, any declarations of candidacy filed for that political organization shall be void.

2 Definitions; Political Committee. RSA 664:2, III is repealed and reenacted to read as follows:

III. “Political committee“ means any organization that has as its major purpose promoting, defeating, or influencing a candidate election, campaign, or measure and that makes expenditures aggregating more than $2,500 in a calendar year for that purpose; or that does not have as its major purpose promoting, defeating, or influencing a candidate election, campaign, or measure but whose independent expenditures, as defined in paragraph XI, and spending on electioneering communication, as defined in paragraph XVIII, when combined, total more than $5,000 in a calendar year. As used in this paragraph, “organization” includes, but is not limited to, for-profit and nonprofit corporations, associations, partnerships, and the political committee of a political party, as defined in paragraph V.

Loosely construed, that would include GraniteGrok – between hosting charges and purchasing equipment, we spend more than that $2,500 limit.  Does ANYONE think that we Groksters are a Political Committee?  We certainly do opine on a lot of stuff and all of us are political activists to boot (though, not always all at the same time on the same issue).  Heck, all we DO is communicate!

3 Definitions; Expenditure. Amend RSA 664:2, IX to read as follows:

IX. “Expenditure” shall mean the disbursement of money or thing of value or the making of a legally binding commitment to make such a disbursement in the future for the purpose of influencing the nomination for election or election of any candidate or candidates or the success or defeat of a measure or measures. It does not include the candidate’s filing fee or his or her expenses for personal travel and subsistence.

4 Definitions; Independent Expenditures. Amend RSA 664:2, XI to read as follows:

XI. “Independent expenditures” means expenditures by a person, political committee, or other entity expressly advocating the election or defeat of a clearly identified candidate or candidates or the success or defeat of a measure or measures which are made without cooperation or consultation with any candidate, or any authorized committee or agent of such candidate, and which are not made in concert with, or at the request or suggestion of, any candidate, or any authorized committee or agent of such candidate. As used in this paragraph, “clearly identified” means that the name of the candidate involved appears; a photograph or drawing of the candidate appears; or the identity of the candidate is apparent by unambiguous reference.

We see, again, protecting politicians (“any candidate, or any authorized committee or agent of such candidate“).  And it can be by “a person“, too.  Effectively, if you wish to engage in speech about “candidates or the success or defeat of a measure or measures“, you have been sucked into the Political Class radar and your Right to Free Speech (after all, do you see any modifiers in the First Amendment that would lead you to believe that Political Speech, as a subset of just Speech, must or should be handled differently?) is curtailed simply to stop them from being criticized.

5 New Paragraph; Definitions; Electioneering Communication. Amend RSA 664:2 by inserting after paragraph XVII the following new paragraph:

XVIII. “Electioneering communication” means any broadcast, publication, mailer, or cable or satellite communication that fulfills each of the following conditions:

Yup, this would mean us – we broadcast, we (Internet) publish, been on cable (but no satellite yet).  As they say in hunting circles, we’ve just been painte.

(a) The communication refers to a clearly identified candidate for state office or measure without a call to action.

Oh, very rarely do we try to hide what we do – we clearly identify who or what we are for – and what we’re not.  Like this pile of crapola.

(b) The communication is publicly distributed within 60 days prior to a general election or 30 days prior to a primary election for the office a candidate is seeking.

All the time (30, 60, that day – doesn’t matter to us) – just wish it was full time…..

(c) The communication is targeted to the relevant electorate.

Let’s see, I believe that would be the politically active Conservative / Libertarian electorate – yeah, that works.

6 Registration of Political Committees. Amend RSA 664:3, I to read as follows:

I. Any political committee, except the political committee of a political party, shall register with the secretary of state as provided in this section. The committee shall register with the secretary of state not later than 24 hours after receiving any contribution in excess of [$500] $2,500 or before making any expenditure in excess of [$500] $2,500 in the aggregate, but in no event later than 14 days after the formation of the committee. The registration shall be accompanied by a fee of $50, which shall be deposited by the secretary of state into the general fund; provided, however, that the political committee of a candidate which registers under this section shall not be required to pay the $50 fee. Each political committee shall designate a treasurer or agent who is a citizen of this state and who is authorized to receive all process and other legal documents on behalf of the political committee, and through whom may be obtained access to all books and records of the political committee. The political committee shall file with the secretary of state a statement of the purpose of the committee and shall indicate whether the committee will be making independent expenditures in support of or in opposition to any candidate including a statement of the name, address, occupation, and principal place of business of its chairperson and treasurer or agent, and the names and addresses of other officers. The committee shall file an amendment to its registration within 14 days of any change in the officers or purpose of the committee.

This is a problematic paragraph – as this changes radically in another Amendment.

7 Prohibited Political Contributions; Amount. Amend RSA 664:4, V to read as follows:

V. By any person (1) if in excess of [$5,000] $7,000 in value, except for contributions made by a candidate in behalf of his or her own candidacy, or if in excess of [$1,000] $3,500 in value by any person or by any political committee to a candidate or a political committee working on behalf of a candidate who does not voluntarily agree to limit his campaign expenditures and those expenditures made on his behalf as provided in RSA 664:5-a, provided that a person may contribute up to $7,000 for the state primary election and up to $7,000 for the general election to a candidate who has agreed to voluntary spending limits; or up to $3,500 for the state primary election and up to $3,500 for the general election to a candidate who has not agreed to voluntary spending limits, to a political committee, or to a political party; and may contribute an additional $5,000 during an exploratory period to a political committee working on behalf of a person prior to his or her public declaration of candidacy, (2) if made anonymously or under a name not that of the donor, (3) if made in the guise of a loan, (4) if any other manner concealed, (5) if made without the knowledge and written consent of the candidate or his or her fiscal agent, a political committee or its treasurer, or not to any one of the same.

8 Political Expenditure Limitation Amounts. Amend RSA 664:5-b to read as follows:

664:5-b Political Expenditure Limitation Amounts. Total expenditures by a candidate who voluntarily agrees to limit campaign expenditures as provided in RSA 664:5-a shall be as follows:

I. For governor:

(a) [$625,000] $1,000,000 in a state primary election.

(b) [$625,000] $1,000,000 in a state general election.

I-a. For United States senator:

(a) [$625,000] $1,000,000 in a state primary election.

(b) [$625,000] $1,000,000 in a state general election.

II. For representative to Congress:

(a) [$350,000] $500,000 in a state primary election.

(b) [$350,000] $500,000 in a state general election.

III. For executive council:

(a) [$50,000] $75,000 in a state primary election.

(b) [$50,000] &75,000 in a state general election.

IV. For state senate:

(a) [$20,000] $50,000 in a state primary election.

(b) [$20,000] $50,000 in a state general election.

V. For representative to the general court and all county offices, based upon the latest figures filed with the secretary of state:

(a) [$.50] $1.00 per registered voter in the district or the county in a state primary election.

(b) [$.50] $1.00 per registered voter in the district or the county in a state general election.

VI. For the purposes of this section, RSA 664:5-a, and the enforcement provisions of this chapter, “total expenditures” shall mean the sum of all expenditures made to influence either a state primary or a state general election made by a candidate and those made on the candidate’s behalf by the candidate’s committee or committees, the candidate’s party, and the candidate’s immediate family. For candidates for governor, United States senator, representative to Congress, state senate, state representative, and executive council, “total expenditures” shall include any such expenditures made after January 1 of the election year, regardless of when the person actually declares his or her candidacy. Each campaign expenditure limitation amount shall apply solely and independently to either the state primary election or the state general election.

9 Reporting by Political Committee. Amend RSA 664:6, I to read as follows:

I. Any political committee whose receipts or expenditures in support of a candidate, measure, or political party exceed [$500] $2,500 except, for the purposes of this paragraph only, the political committee of a political party, [or] the political committee of a candidate, or a corporation that is tax exempt under section 501(c)(4), 501(c)(5), and 501(c)(6) of the United States Internal Revenue Code,

The bold italicized phrases just above will be addressed in another post – but the effect is to put HassanSpeech.  This effectively does what the Democrats want to do – legislatively undo the US Supreme Court’s decision on Citizens United.  This is extremely important to note – and is extremely bad legislation in curtailing Free Political Speech.

shall file with the secretary of state an itemized statement, signed by its chairman and treasurer showing each of its receipts exceeding $25 with the full name and home post office address of the contributor in alphabetical order and the amount of the contribution, the date it was received, and the aggregate total for each election for each contributor of over $100. The statement shall be filed not later than the Wednesday 12 weeks immediately preceding a primary election, before 5 o’clock in the afternoon, and shall cover the period from the day of the committee registration up to and including the Monday before the statement is due. All receipts of $25 or under shall appear on the statements as unitemized receipts. Any listing which exceeds an individual’s aggregate total of $100 for each election shall be accompanied by the contributor’s occupation including official job title, the name of the contributor’s employer, and the city or town of the contributor’s principal place of business, if any. The statement shall also show each committee expenditure with the full name and city or town of persons, corporations, committees, or to whomever paid or to be paid, the date paid, and the election for which the expenditure was made, with the specific nature and amount of each expenditure since the date of the registration.

10 Reporting by Political Committee. Amend RSA 664:6, II-a to read as follows:

II-a. A political committee shall file a statement in the same form as in paragraph I with the secretary of state not later than the Wednesday immediately preceding a primary and a general election, before 5 o’clock in the afternoon. The statement shall summarize the statements under paragraphs I and II if such statements are filed and itemize all receipts and expenditures since the cutoff of the statement under paragraph II up until the Monday preceding the filing of the statement under this paragraph. In addition to the reporting requirements contained in this section, the secretary of state shall be notified by the fiscal agent within 24 hours of any contribution exceeding [$500] $2,500 which is received after the statement under this paragraph is filed and prior to the day of election.

11 Reporting by Political Committee. Amend RSA 664:6, IV-IV-a to read as follows:

IV. Any political committee whose receipts or expenditures do not exceed [$500] $2,500 for a reporting period need not file. However, when a committee’s accumulated receipts or expenditures for an election exceed [$500] $2,500 the committee shall file a statement at the next reporting deadline, unless the committee is a corporation that is tax exempt under section 501(c)(4), 501(c)(5), and 501(c)(6) of the United States Internal Revenue Code.

IV-a. Any political committee whose independent expenditures or spending on electioneering communications, in aggregate, exceed [$500] $2,500 shall file an itemized statement with the secretary of state not later than 24 hours after such expenditures are made, and thereafter each time a further [$500] $2,500 is expended. Such itemized statements shall cover the period during which independent expenditures and spending on electioneering communications totaling [$500] $2,500 were made. Each statement shall include a certification by the political committee that the independent expenditure or electioneering communication meets the definition in RSA 664:2, XI or RSA 664:2, XVIII. Each statement shall contain the date of each independent expenditure or spending on electioneering communications; the name and address of the person to whom the expenditure was made; the name of the candidate on whose behalf or against whom each independent expenditure was made or referenced in each electioneering communication; the amount of each expenditure; the purpose of each expenditure, and the aggregate amount of all previous independent expenditures and spending on electioneering communications. If [the independent expenditure is] expenditures are made in support of or to oppose more than one candidate, the statement made under this paragraph shall allocate the way in which the expenditure was made among the candidates on a reasonable basis. For the purposes of this paragraph, “reasonable basis” means a statement which reflects the benefit or the burden reasonably expected to be derived or suffered by each candidate. The filing requirements of this paragraph shall be in addition to all other filing requirements under this section, and shall not be limited to the filing periods during which expenditures must otherwise be reported.

12 New Section; Reports of Spending on Information Critical of General Court Members. Amend RSA 664 by inserting after section 6 the following new section:

664:6-a Reports of Spending on Information Critical of General Court Members. Any political committee whose spending on distribution of information critical of a member of the general court who has not filed for office, in aggregate, exceeds $500 shall file an itemized statement with the secretary of state not later than 24 hours after such spending, and thereafter each time a further $500 is spent. Such itemized statements shall cover the period during which a total of $500 was spent. Each statement shall contain each date when such money was spent; the name and address of the person paid; the name of the member of the general court mentioned in the information distributed; the amount of each payment; the purpose of each payment; and the aggregate amount of all previous payments. If the payment is made for information critical of more than one member of the general court, the statement made under this paragraph shall allocate the way in which the payment was made among the members on a reasonable basis. For the purposes of this paragraph, “reasonable basis” means a statement which reflects the burden reasonably expected to be suffered by each member. The filing requirements of this paragraph shall be in addition to all other filing requirements, and shall not be limited to the filing periods during which expenditures must otherwise be reported.

13 New Paragraph; Penalties. Amend RSA 664:21 by inserting after paragraph VI the following new paragraph:

VII.(a) A political committee that fails to register in accordance with RSA 664:3 shall be subject to a fine equal to 25 percent of the electioneering communication and independent expenditures made during the period from the date the political committee was required to register to the date the political committee registered.

(b) A political committee that fails to report independent expenditures or spending on electioneering communications in accordance with RSA 664:6, IV-a shall be subject to a fine equal to 25 percent of the electioneering communication and independent expenditures not reported or reported late.

14 Repeal. RSA 655:40-b, relative to filing names of candidates, is repealed.

15 Effective Date.

I. Sections 3-6, 9-11, and 13 of this act shall take effect August 1, 2012.

II. The remainder of this act shall take effect upon its passage.

2012-1968s

AMENDED ANALYSIS

This bill:

I. Modifies the procedure for nominating a political organization.

II. Modifies the definition of “political committee.”

III. Increases the limit on campaign contributions.

IV. Authorizes contributions of up to $5,000 each during the exploratory period of a campaign.

V. Increases voluntary campaign expenditure limits.

VI. Requires reporting by political committees of spending on electioneering communications, as defined in the bill.

VII. Raises from $500 to $2,500 the amount of contributions or expenditures triggering registration and reporting requirements for political committees.

VIII. Requires reporting by a political committee of spending on distribution of information critical of a member of the general court.

>