In reporting on New Hampshire House Bill HB 514 –An Act relating to giving legislators a free ride–WMUR reports that it a) came out of committee with instructions to kill it (this is good) but b) that supporters of the bill claim that Members skiing for free at Canon Mountain–the Bill’s real purpose–doesn’t add costs to the Ski areas.
Supporters argue that lawmakers have open access to state parks which promotes awareness of the locations.
They say skiing at Cannon doesn’t add costs to the ski area and encourages members to experience that part of New Hampshire culture.
Yes, of course. And that is, after all, why we elected them. Though I do have some lingering questions…
1) If using the ski area doesn’t add costs for legislators how or why does it add costs–requiring payment for use under penalty of law–by everyone else?
2) How does it look for elected officials to be voting themselves free stuff?
3) Is this a reflection of legislators who desire to experience other parts of New Hampshire like commuter rail boondoggles..another thing they want that they expect everyone else to pay for?
4) As a follow up to item 3, the very existence of some legislators, with or without voting themselves free stuff, adds costs…to everything else and everyone else, so why not Canon Mountain?
5) If equality of outcome really does matter of what possible benefit is this to legislators who can’t or don’t ski?
6) If use of the ski area by any other anthropomorphic being does add costs, what exactly could the self proclaimed zero impact presence of House members at Canon Mountain say about the efficacy of those same state legislators as regards anything else they do? (see item 4)
7) How about we put a bit more focus on legislator awareness of the economy and the creeping tax burden and the weight of Federal actions moving toward us like a fiscal avalanche as they make excuses to spend our money and nickel and dime us into poverty?