Articles tagged as

Legislation

How about we amend HB 1704 to stifle some policial speech while we’re at it?

Will HB 1704 intimidate political speechI just shot off a quick email to my New Hampshire State Senator this morning.  I do not know his stance on this yet, but I have some questions about language added, via amendment, to HB 1704, regarding political speech.   I find the amendment language confusing.

I am not certain of the purpose, or if this amendment even achieves that purpose, whatever it is.  And most importantly, it sounds to me like an effort to stifle political speech by interjecting bureaucratic nonsense, while simultaneously encouraging speech intimidation through the implied threat of failing to comply.  This “threat” would come through the ever-present risk of third party complaints of potential violations that would keep people from speaking out for fear of having to lawyer up to defend their political speech against members of the General Court.

I was against it when Maggie ‘The Red” Hassan and Kathy ‘Lawsuit” Sullivan tried it.  I am going to simply state that I am against this becasue it looks like an effort to not just regulate but to complicate free speech, and I do not much care who is trying to do it.  I will do what I can to stop it.

(I will post an update when I have clarification from my State Senator on his position, and or explanation of this new language.)

Senator White,

I have a few questions about the amendment to HB 1704-FN.  It appears to me to include language that would make it difficult to engage in political speech about members or candidates to the General Court.

Read more

Leftist-Progressives: Always The Dependable Deniers

“An individual, in promoting his own interest, may injure the public interest; a nation, in promoting the general welfare, may check the interest of a part of its members.” —Friedrich List

Last week the Union Leader’s Gary Rayno reported on a check made of electronic databases searching for potential welfare fraud. House Speaker Bill O’Brien is sponsoring legislation that would require Health and Human Services to cross-check recipients in an effort to save taxpayer money to root out potential welfare fraud.

Naturally, any astute observer who has long followed the conversation on public entitlements can nearly guess, as if looking into a crystal ball, what the push-back is going to look like. And true to their principles of class warfare and legalized theft, opponents of this effort are dependable.

Read more

The latest RLCNH Report shows great legislative strides within reach in Concord

 

The latest RLCNH Report is out. It shows that New Hampshire is in many ways leading the entire United States in rejecting the “Blue State” European-socialist model. Just look at some of the issues being voted upon by the State House of Representatives this week, starting at 9:00 a.m. tomorrow (Wednesday) in regular session:

  • A bill to enforce Article 2(a) of the New Hampshire State Constitution, allowing any lawful citizen to carry a sidearm either concealed or openly “wherever they have the right to be, with or without a license., a right protected in the U.S. and N.H. Constitutions.” (Statists hate and fear the inalienable right to self-defense. They don’t think normal citizens are capable or “authorized” to exercise their 2nd Amendment rights.)
  • A bill to help break the stranglehold that public employee union monopolies have created, because “public sector unionization has become unsustainable to the point that many public sector employees now make more in pay and benefits than their private-sector counterparts. (Union monopolies should not exist in government employment. That’s simple, straightforward, and true.)
  • More!

Read more

Emerson’s Boo-Hoo Towel Bill Goes Down in Flames

HB 1533 - The Boo hoo Towel Bill - Goes down in flamesConsider it settled.  Debating at the grown-ups table, at least for the remainder of the 2012 session of the New Hampshire House, will not be misconstrued as “bullying.”  HB 1533, an Act to turn heated State House debate you disagree with into a crime punishable with up to a $2500.00 fine, was killed 224-78. (That’s right cry-babies, I said Killed!)

While the biggest goof with the Boo-Hoo Towel bill should have been Rep. Susan Emerson (:-( – Rindge) using the legislative process to get even after “somewun hurt her feewings,” there are two greater embarrassments that I believe must take precedence.

Read more

HB 1711 Where’s The Fire?

Campfires still need permits - HB 1711 would not require themIf you want to rub two sticks together around here, you have to go get a burn permit. So I leave my house in a 4000 pound (ish) SUV, drive 5 miles to the nearest Fire Station, and then hand the Fire-Fighter my ID. (If I was just doing something as unimportant as, say voting, they could just check my name off a list.)

He fills out a form, hands it to me, and reminds me not to burn before 5pm.  I get back in my SUV, drive home and, at the appointed time, burn.  There are very few variables to this formula, and almost any fire requires  a permit.  But unless you lose control of it, no one ever stops by to check on you, even if you use the permit to start the fire.

HB 1711 makes the bold assertion that some camp and cook fires, that you start on your property, should be permissible without all the four-play.  And yet for some reason, it appears to have come out of committee as inexpedient to legislate?  Why?

Read more

RINO OF THE WEEK REPORT

This Week's RINO of the Week

“A government big enough to give you everything you need, is a government big enough to take away everything that you have….”—Sen. Barry Goldwater

Representative Marshall E. “Lee” Quandt, Rockingham District 13 is this week’s RINO OF THE WEEK.  Representative Quandt tends to be “Clintonista” with his navigation of the New Hampshire political Fabric and based on his New Hampshire House Republican Alliance Scorecard, he enjoys some modicum of success doing that.

Read more

NH Legislature: Who is the RINO of the Year?

During the course of 2011, we featured legislators who ran as Republicans but cast votes demonstrating a fealty with the house liberals. Cast your vote on “who” should be the RINO of the Year. [poll id=”3″]

New Hampshire Wire Tap Laws and the Wheedling Legislature

“All men profess honesty as long as they can. To believe all men honest would be folly. To believe none so is something worse.” —John Quincy Adams

Yesterday, a Union Leader Editorial featured commentary about the flaws of New Hampshire’s Wire Tapping and Eavesdropping laws currently in place. The commentary came on the heels of the Supreme Court upholding the Conviction of the now-deceased and infamous Kristin (McDonald) Ruggiero, an evil shrew who sought to use the courts as a cudgel and see her ex-husband locked away, ruined and broken.

The nexus of Kristin’s appeal asserted that the lower court incorrectly admitted photographic evidence of her committing her crime. The problem for Kristin was evidence established she placed the calls from California to South Carolina, jurisdictions that lack the criminally enabling restrictions codified in New Hampshire statutes. Summarily, she lost her appeal. Following notification by her lawyer, Mark Sisti, the grim reaper came for a visit shortly thereafter.

Read more

Obama’s Keep Americans From Having Jobs Act

I was torn on the title.  "Obama’s Tax American Job Creators Act" almost got the gig.  But while this is a massive tax on job creators, one provision in particular won the day when it comes to keeping people unemployed, something you might think counter-productive in a Jobs bill.

Investors Business Daily Explains…

How do you get jittery businesses to hire? Threaten to sue them if they hire someone who already has a job! At least, that’s how the White House thinks. It stuffed in a provision to make it illegal to "discriminate" against the unemployed when hiring.

So the beautiful people in Obamaville are making it a crime if you do not hire someone who is not currently employed.  And this intimidation is supposed to incentivize them into hiring workers?

Read more

Pass The American Jobs Act Now!!!

Congressman Louis Gohmert (R-TX) took care of business. He has filed the American Jobs Act, HR2911. it is anorexic by Democrat standards, weighing in at an awe inspiring two pages. And all it does is repeal the corporate income tax.

HOUSE JOINS SENATE, OVERRIDES SENATE BILL 88 VETO

“A moment’s reflection shows that Liberalism is entirely negative. It is not a formative force, but always and only a disintegrating force.” —Francis Parker Yockey

Armed%20Senior.JPG

The House voted today to override the Governors’ veto of Senate Bill 88 on the heels of the Senate voting to override last week. The vote was 251 to 111. It should be important to note that the Governor and his faithful went into overdrive to build support for sustaining the veto, to include a walking tour of Lincoln street area of Manchester in the vicinity of Hayward and Somerville Streets. It was there where Attorney General stated, “And we will be providing drug dealers and street gangsters with a new right to respond using more violence in public places…”

At the Governor’s press conference the morning before the house leaders’ press conference, Chief Robert Wharem, President of the New Hampshire Association of Chiefs of Police, told WMUR, “Senate Bill 88 is one of the most dangerous bills we’ve had come before us in our time…” while he had roughly a dozen other police chiefs gathered around him, seeming to imply he speaks for all New Hampshire Chiefs. The difference here is many likely opted to stay home and not politicize this bill, remaining within the confines of their sworn oaths.

At the end of the day, none of their Charlatanry, pandering or demagoguing held any political water, resulting in the veto override which now means the bill is law. Now SB 88 is law. The streets will not run red with blood and responsible, law-abiding citizens will not be prosecuted for lawfully defending themselves against violent attacks.

But to be expected, whenever there is a gun crime it will be certain that the critics of the bill will point to this law as a manifestation of that crime, ignoring the fact that criminals with guns will still commit crimes. They did so before this law and will continue to do so even after this law.

This law protects law-abiding citizens, not Criminals. On the coattails of Senate Bill 88’s passage we will likely hear be hearing next from the Brady Bunch about the enormous social costs of gun violence.  Guy Smith, Author of Gun Facts, has undertaken a most complete compilation of data. Here are just a few examples:

Myth: The social cost of gun violence is enormous

Fact: Because guns are used an estimated 2.5 million times per year to prevent crimes, the cost savings in personal losses, police work, and court and prison expenses vastly outweighs the cost of criminal gun violence and gun accidents. The net savings, under a worst-case scenario, is about $3.5 billion a year.257

Read more

New Hampshire Exceptional, Yet Again.

Stopping the spending and the out of control growth was and is exactly what you need and want from your US congress, but cannot yet achieve with a Democrat Senate and a Democrat President. And you will never get it as long as the left controls any those parts of your Federal government.

VETO OVERRIDDEN: SENATE BILL 88 NOW GOES TO THE HOUSE!

“Self-defense is the clearest of all laws, and for this reason: lawyers didn’t make it” ~Douglas William Jerrold

Despite the efforts of Governor Lynch, his Attorney General and a hand full of unelected Police Chiefs around the state, The New Hampshire Senate voted this afternoon to self%20defense%20femaile.jpg
override the Governor’s veto on a vote of 17 to 7. The Bill now goes to the House where it will become law upon concurrence with the Senate Veto override.

During his walking parade through some of the meaner streets of Manchester, several demagoguery cards were used falsely implying SB 88’s becoming law would empower gang members…Which I find rather bizarre since Local Law Enforcement here will tell you we don’t have a significant gang problem.

During his many rants, Governor Lynch challenged the need for this law, claiming supporters of the SB88, “have not been able to identify a single case in New Hampshire where someone has been wrongly prosecuted for using deadly force to protect themselves or others. In fact, current law puts the burden on the state to disprove beyond reasonable doubt claims of self-defense.”

Well Thanks to Attorney Penny Dean of Concord, who provided reference and source materials, the challenge is accepted….

STATE V. JOSEPH BROWN
Superior Court, Carroll County No. 05-S-358

Joseph Gleason, an over six-foot tall and 200-pound burley fellow with a criminal record for violence, pursued Brown off of a highway, characterized as a fit of “road rage.” The five-foot, four-inch 140-pound Brown (with no prior criminal record) now found himself trapped at a traffic light behind other vehicles, with no route of escape from Gleason, as the 280-pound Gleason exited his vehicle and began screaming, yelling, swearing and pounding on Brown’s vehicle punching on the windows of Brown’s Buick.

With no way to escape, and fearing for his safety, Joseph Brown produced a handgun, merely showing it, but never pointing it at Gleason. Brown was subsequently arrested, charged and forced to stand trial. After considerable legal expense the case was noll prosequied.

During Joseph Brown’s arrest, N.H. State Trooper Beth Keyes asserted, “Your right to self defense is your right to call 911…”.

STATE V. PHILLIP TUFANO
Superior Court, Merrimack County 2008

Tufano of Londonderry was charged with threatening Paul DeFilippo with a handgun in August of 2008 following a road rage incident on Route 93. Tufano charged after he held up his “still-holstered” gun in an effort to diffuse the situation when DeFilippo ran him off the roadway, causing him to fear for his life.

Read more

The First Circuit Videotape Opinion and House BIll 145

“In the Halls of Justice the only justice is in the halls.” ~Lenny Bruce 

little_brother_is_watching_back_GROK.jpg

On one October 2007 evening, Boston attorney Simon Glik, was walking past Boston Common where Boston police officers John Cunniffe, Peter Savalis and Jerome Brewster were effecting an arrest. Hearing a nearby person state, “Stop! You’re hurting him!” Glik began video recording the incident from approximately ten feet away, using his cell phone. Shortly thereafter, Glik was arrested and his cell phone confiscated.

Charged with violation of the Massachusetts wiretap statute(Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 272, § 99(C)(1)), In February, 2008, the Boston Municipal Court summarily disposed of the wiretap charge, noting,  “the fact that the officers were unhappy they were being recorded during an arrest . . . does not make a lawful exercise of a First Amendment right a crime.” 

Glik filed a civil rights action against the officers and the City of Boston in the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts when his internal affairs complaints were ignored. Summarily, The People’s Republik moved to dismiss Glik’s complaint asserting that his allegations failed to adequately support his claims and that officers were entitled to qualified immunity “because it is not well-settled that he had a constitutional right to record the officers.” The court denied the motion and the commonwealth’s interlocutory appeal followed in which they did not prevail.

In its opinion, the court stated, “Gathering information about government officials in a form that can readily be disseminated to others serves a cardinal First Amendment interest in protecting and promoting ‘the free discussion of governmental affairs.’” And the court ruled “a citizen’s right to film government officials, including law enforcement officers, in the discharge of their duties in a public place is a basic, vital, and well-established liberty safeguarded by the First Amendment…”

In the wake of this opinion are the countless arrests in the Granite State for the very same activities, as detailed numerous times in the New Hampshire Union Leader.  The one incident that comes to mind is a Sheriff’s Deputy attempting to thwart Representative Gary Hopper from video-recording in the Legislative Office building back in 2010.  Finally, House Bill 145 , presently languishes in the Senate and has met with a great deal of resistance from Law Enforcement.  

Police are concerned that the bill fails to protect both their privacy and that of the public they serve. Privacy? What privacy? they are Public servants subject to the accountability to that same public they serve!

Read more

RINO OF THE WEEK REPORT

ROTW_GROK.jpg

“Remember that a government big enough to give you everything you want is also big enough to take away everything you have.” ~Barry Goldwater

A common theme heard from whiney liberals these days is that conservatives, tea-party patriots and some Republicans take absolute positions on issues and are unwilling to compromise, “for the good of the people.” There are four fundamental flaws in that logic.

First, how liberals define compromise. In final analysis, compromise means abandoning ones principles and going along with liberals, perhaps watering down some measure that renders the original principle sought after inoperable.

Second, the logic implies that the maker of the statement (the liberal) is irrefutably correct. The liberal implies all facts are on his or her side.

Third, liberals just love those who go along because that means the opposition is malleable. The opposition has weak links in their unity and party platform.

Finally, it implies a tacit acknowledgement by the “compromiser” that perhaps the liberal, “is correct” in his or her logic.

There is nothing wrong with spirited and sometimes bitter partisanship. The citizens governed should have clear unambiguous choices. Voting for most Republicans means one favors less government intrusion, reasonable and lower taxes, whereby the majority is not paying for the select few to live off the many. One favors a government that is both responsible socially, and looks to people, not government as a first resort to solve problems.

The RINO REPORT has featured those Republicans in Name Only who have distinguished themselves as the harlots of the left. Those who run on principles claiming to be an, “independent voice” in Concord without ever being held accountable to say, what that really means. Those folks could easily be on a Leftist-progressive ticket and fellow Republicans would never really know the difference, mush less miss them.

As the RINO report moves forward, ROTW now segues into a considerably more ambiguous analysis. For example, This weeks RINO  REPORT took a hard look at Rep. Lawrence B. “KOKO” Perkins, Rockingham 14 to be featured. When one drills down into his voting record, however, it is easy to see that Perkins voted predominantly with Conservatives on Guns, Liberty and Families.  While he took a walk on Right to work and voted for spending measures that favor Unions over regular working class folks, being a firefighter gave us no illusions about what he would or would not support. Morover, he gave the PFFNH cover. Their campaign contributions to Perkins allows Davind Lang and his ilk to say they are, “non-partisan” when in fact, they overwhelmingly support Democrats. And that is… when he showed up. While he might have voted on issues important to me, the fact is he still voted for Unions. Does it make him a RINO? Readers must judge that for themselves.

Read more

545 People Are Responsible For The Mess, But They Unite In A Common Con

“Those who are too smart to engage in politics are punished by being governed by those who are dumber.”~Plato, Ancient Greek Philosopher

Charley_Reese_Grok.jpg

Charley Reese retired July 29, 2001. Who was Charley Reese? He was a columnist, serving 30 of those years at the Orlando Sentinel.  Characterized best by his plainspoken manner and conservative views,  he was with the Sentinel from 1971–2001, serving as  a writer and other such editorial capacities. King Features Syndicate distributed Charley’s column, which published up to three times a week.

 On February 3, 1984 Charley originally published the column below. This column additionally republished as his final column. Rightfully so and despite being 27 years removed from its orignal publish date, it is no less relevant. 

Politicians are the only people in the world who create problems and then campaign against them.

Have you ever wondered, if both the Democrats and the Republicans are against deficits, WHY do we have deficits?

Have you ever wondered, if all the politicians are against inflation and high taxes, WHY do we have inflation and high taxes?

You and I don’t propose a federal budget. The President does.

You and I don’t have the Constitutional authority to vote on appropriations. The House of Representatives does.

You and I don’t write the tax code, Congress does.

You and I don’t set fiscal policy, Congress does.

You and I don’t control monetary policy, the Federal Reserve Bank does.

One hundred senators, 435 congressmen, one President, and nine Supreme Court justices equates to 545 human beings out of the 300 million are directly, legally, morally, and individually responsible for the domestic problems that plague this country.

I excluded the members of the Federal Reserve Board because that problem was created by the Congress. In 1913, Congress delegated its Constitutional duty to provide a sound currency to a federally chartered, but private, central bank.

I excluded all the special interests and lobbyists for a sound reason. They have no legal authority. They have no ability to coerce a senator, a congressman, or a President to do one cotton-picking thing. I don’t care if they offer a politician $1 million dollars in cash. The politician has the power to accept or reject it. No matter what the lobbyist promises, it is the legislator’s responsibility to determine how he votes.

Those 545 human beings spend much of their energy convincing you that what they did is not their fault. They cooperate in this common con regardless of party.

Read more

Florida Adopts Drug Testing For Recipients Of Public Assistance

“One of the consequences of such notions as “entitlements” is that people who have contributed nothing to society feel that society owes them something, apparently just for being nice enough to grace us with their presence.”~Thomas Sowell

welfare_money_Grok.jpg

Florida is the first state to pass a law requiring those receiving state benefits to submit to drug testing. Florida Governor Rick Scott told CNN that the law was passed to provide personal accountability of those who would receive public assistance. Governor Scott believes that taxpayers should not be subsidizing the illegal drug use of those who are on the public dole. Under this law, those seeking to receive aid would be responsible to bear the up-front cost for drug testing, but the law provides for reimbursement.

And as predictably as could be anticipated, the rank-and-file liberal establishment lined right up to fight and advocate for status quo unaccountability. The perjuring impeached former Federal Judge and current State Representative Alcee Hastings made a whole bunch of noise about this bill being, “downright unconstitutional.” There is somebody we should listen to.  

The ACLU does what it usually does and filed a suit to block the law. Howard Simon, executive director of the ACLU of Florida told CNN, “What (the Governor) is doing is giving ugly legitimacy to an unfortunate stereotype that has been in this country for a couple of decades – that all welfare recipients are a bunch of drug abusers,” pure demagoguery…But okay…let us look at what Howie confabulates.

It is a fair statement to say that not all people on welfare use illegal drugs. Fact is, we don’t really know how many people on welfare use drugs. Nobody wants to talk about it for obvious political reasons. However, lets take a look at what the National Poverty Center says about drug use:

“Citing (April 2004) estimates of the extent of substance abuse among welfare recipients, the authors suggest that policymakers and analysts have likely overstated the contribution of substance dependence to welfare receipt. The authors note that while substance use, abuse, and dependence are barriers to self-sufficiency, so are poor education, lack of transportation, physical and mental health problems, and other difficulties that are more common than substance dependence among welfare recipients. The authors stress the need for comprehensive services to address the multiple barriers faced by the most disadvantaged welfare recipients.”

NPC steers clear of making any concrete determination by simply directing attention away from drug use, to the whole host of other problems endemic in the welfare community. Their underlying thesis is to modestly acknowledge drug use but redirect the focus away from it and advocate for a more broader expansion on services. In other words, “Taxpayers, don’t ask us for details, you simply must pay more…”

The NPC has a graphic on their website that would suggest only 21% of welfare recipients use illegal drugs. Lets accept that at face value for the sake of discussion. In the Granite state roughly 53,000 households or 112,000  people use food stamps. That is roughly 1% of the total state population. According to the Henry Kaiser Family foundation, New Hampshire’s per capita food stamp benefit is $121.21. That is $13,575,520. So according to the National poverty center, the Granite State pays a public benefit in the amount of $2,850,859 to people who use illegal drugs. And with our liberal friends that is just aye-okay.

Read more

The Little Governor Who Couldn’t

Those were some funny tating browniesGovernor Lynch, in a fit of impotence and self contradiction, has confused his role as the states chief executive, as reported in a Union Leader column today by Tom Fahey. 

In regard to the passage into law of New Hampshire HB 601 and SB 148, Governor Lynch remarked on one hand that…

He allowed the bill (HB 601) to become law, he said, “because I did not want New Hampshire to default into federal oversight.”

and then claimed that…

…SB 148 has no practical effect on New Hampshire residents because there is no way to enforce it.

“ The assessments for not obtaining health insurance will not be administered through the state but through the Internal Revenue Service. Legislators and the public should understand that this legislation would have no impact on the capacity of the state of New Hampshire to block the individual health insurance mandate or the federal assessments for not obtaining insurance,” he said.

 

HB 601 (in short-hand) prohibits accepting pump-priming federal dollars for Obama Care–which must be returned to lower the federal deficit) and gives the NH legislature oversight of all state agencies on the matter before any part of it can be implemented.   SB 148 simply states that we will not enforce any purchase mandate fine or imprisonment related to the Health Care law.

As a matter of semantics Lynch is not wrong to suggest that if the IRS barges in and arrests us for failing to comply that no state agency is interposed to prevent that.  But that is exactly the point of SB 148.  It deems to interpose the law enforcing branch of the New Hampshire government–the executive and his Attorney General–between (in this case) the IRS and the people on the matter of  the Patient affordable care act.  SB 148 draws a line over which our chief executive is meant to stand in defense of his state and it’s people.  The same line, by the way, that he draws (at least rhetorically) with regard to HB601.

So according to Lynch, while he does not want to default to federal oversight, the IRS can just reach over the Governors office and snatch whomever they please. 

Read more

Share to...
BufferCopyFlipboardHacker NewsLineLinkedInMastodonMessengerMixPinterestPrintRedditSMSTelegramTumblrVKWhatsAppXingYummly