Lynch angry that lawyers got what he couldn’t….pulls hissy fit

Gov. Lynch is still peeved that he couldn’t get his sticky fingers on $110 million the Joint Underwritering Association ("JUA") that he decided was his from sheer dint that he couldn’t balance his budget.  Now that the Judiciary has smacked his knuckles with their ruling, as the actual owners of the fund decided to, you know, defend their private property, he still can’t let go:

CONCORD — Attorney General Michael Delaney is urging lawmakers to block a proposed settlement that will pay lawyers $27.5 million out of a $110 million malpractice insurance fund.

…Attorney Scott O’Connell of the Nixon Peabody law firm in Manchester said Delaney’s arguments are off the mark. Since the JUA is not part of state government, he argued, there is nothing in state law that requires the Legislature to bless the deal.

Still, Lynch and his mouthpiece (hey, remember, another member of the media that went to work for a liberal Democrat – how often does that happen??) still believe the money really belongs to them:

Lynch spokesman Colin Manning said the proposed settlement is a bad one for taxpayers.

“The people of New Hampshire will be outraged when they learn that a private law firm is being paid $27 million at a time when there have been severe budget cuts to human services. Those are services that could have been supported by these funds,” he said. “It is our hope that the Legislature will use its legal authority to reject this proposed settlement.”

Right – well, is Gov. Lynch now going to work for tort reform that would "fix" this problem?  My take is that there is no problem for Government to fix, other than Lynch got

Read more

How About We Name It After Justice Souter?

Justice David Souter secured his place in history when he voted to allow New London Connecticut to take private property and give to a private entity. This fundamental abuse of property rights, as offensive as it was, could only be compounded when the seized property was never even developed. People were forcibly removed from their homes, kicked off their land, and for what? How about The Justice David Souter Memorial….Dump.

Evil Landlords Who Pick On Tenants

“I like to think of my behavior in the sixties as a ‘learning experience.’ Then again, I like to think of anything stupid I’ve done as a ‘learning experience.’ It makes me feel less stupid. -P.J. O’Rourke

evictionNotice.jpg

I was at a housing office today dropping off some “required paperwork.” As I sat waiting to review the issues that brought me there, I was forced to listen to a couple of young women talk about how they were going to hire attorneys and, “get their landlords.” Their complaints ran the gamut of being forced to get rid of pets (they were not supposed to have in the first place)… to the landlord’s refusal to repair a door broken by a boyfriend during a quarrel. Those Landlord bastards! The nerve of them! how dare they?

It is such conversations that so amuse me. For certain, being a landlord is a difficult endeavor. Take Manchvegas, for example where the city mandates Certificate Of Compliance Inspections (COC); A process that takes place every three years for those of us ‘evil bastards‘ who own multi-family residential housing. This can be an annoying process. One year’s COC inspection I was informed of a requirement to upgrade smoke detectors to the AC type with DC battery back-up. The current smoke detectors were already hard-wired so this wasn’t a difficult task. However, upon reviewing the building code, I found myself needing to call the building department for clarification. I was unable to find that specific reference. I was subsequently told the requirement had not been adopted yet.  Guess it didn’t matter, though. I had already spent the 500 bucks to purchase the AC/DC smoke detector units and install them. For me this was an object lesson in (a) waiting for the post-inspection report to arrive in the mail, and (b) verifying the very issues cited in the report.

Window screens are yet another challenge. I mean, how stupid is that? Window Screens? But, a COC inspection cannot pass muster without the proper window screens in place. I always ensure window screens are in place for COC so that is not an issue. But, despite that, there are often tenants who are fundamentally challenged by the mere existence of window screens. They break them, lose them or destroy them. After I’ve replaced a couple and receive yet another request to do so, I demand the screen-challenged tenant “pony up” 22 dollars for an entire frame and screen replacement and 12 dollars for a screen replacement. The tenant gives me a bunch of indignant static. “It wasn’t on purpose!” he or she exclaims… Standing my ground and insisting, the tenant calls the building department to report my, “refusal to replace a missing window screen.”  The building department subsequently issues a “violation of the COC:” “failure to have the window screens in place.”  A landlord keeping proper track of expenses will quickly conclude that spending $700 per year on window screens is excessive and unreasonable.

Read more

William Jasmin The Beer Hunter

“He uses statistics like a drunk uses lamp-posts, more for support than illumination…” ~Romano Prodi

Beer_Hunter_Blog_Pic.jpg

 “(Attorney B.J. Branch) acknowledged that Jasmin had been drinking on the day of the accident but said he had only consumed one 16-ounce Pabst Blue Ribbon beer and was at or below the legal limit for intoxication. He added that because of Jasmin’s serious blood loss, the blood alcohol test may not have been accurate.” -Concord Monitor, 7/20/11

 If one reads attorney Branch’s comment to the monitor at face value, you might just have the initial reaction that I had: “I think this attorney is full of crap.” The comment on its face suggests that Jasmin’s blood alcohol concentration cannot be effectively measured because he had experienced significant blood loss immediately after his fall.

Blood Alcohol Concentration measured is always the current and existing level in the blood at the time of a serological draw. BAC refers to the percent of alcohol in a person’s blood stream. For example, a BAC of .10% means that the individual’s blood supply contains one part alcohol for every 1000 parts blood.  That is the alcohol concentration existing in the blood stream at the proximal time of the draw. If a person consumed another several alcoholic beverages only minutes prior to the draw, that alcohol content has a higher probability of not being reflected in a test.

Read more

William Jasmin: A Man Without A Hunting License

“Lawyers spend a great deal of their time shoveling smoke.”  ~Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr.”

Hunting_License_09_RickGraphic.jpg

In my previous entry about a “Hunter” who was seriously injured when a tree stand that he climbed into collapsed, causing him to fall, there was a presumption that the “Hunter” was lawfully engaged in the activity of hunting upon the land of Charles Corliss. That is not the case. WILLIAM JASMIN HAD NO LICENSE TO HUNT.

On Wednesday, July 13, I went to the New Hampshire Fish & Game Licensing Division and filled out the form, N.H. FISH AND GAME DEPARTMENT INFORMATION REQUEST .  “The information requested was not found” was how the form was returned.

This morning’s, Concord Monitor featured a story entitled, “Hunter falls from tree, sues property owner” where in that story Jasmin’s attorney B.J. Branch admits that  Jasmin was drinking the day of the accident and he tells the monitor, “[w]as at or below the legal limit for intoxication. He added that because of Jasmin’s serious blood loss, the blood alcohol test may not have been accurate…”

But all of that aside, other questions arise. For example, N.H. RSA 635:2 (Criminal Trespass) states in part, “A person is guilty of criminal trespass if, knowing that he is not licensed or privileged to do so, he enters or remains in any place…”

RSA 214:1(License Required) states in part, “No person, except as hereinafter provided, shall at any time fish, hunt, trap, shoot, pursue, take or kill…[w]ild animals in this state, without first procuring a proper and valid license to do so, and then only in accordance with the terms of such license and subject to all the provisions of this title…”

When Jasmin, through his attorney filed his writ, he asserted, “On or about November 17, 2009, William Jasmin sustained serious injuries while hunting on property owned by the defendant…” Jasmin, through his attorney, made a “sworn statement that he was “hunting.”

 RSA 207:36-a (Use of Tree Stands) states in part, “No person shall erect, build or use a tree stand… [o]n land of another person that damages or destroys a tree by inserting into the tree any metallic, ceramic, or other object used as part of a ladder or observation deck, without express written permission from the property owner or designee...” Jasmin asserts he had an “invite” to use the tree stand. Chuck Corliss states he hasn’t hunted in 40 years and was not aware of the tree stand’s presence.  I believe Chuck Corliss and if the court does, then Jasmin violated yet another law. If a person hunting happens upon a tree stand and climbs into the stand…and branches have been cut, and then a Conservation Officer thereafter happens along, the C.O. is going to ask for the persons “written permission” to have a tree stand where limbs have been removed. Having no permission, a citation is inevitable.

Read more

How Much Is Enough? (And Other Problems With Left Wing Policy)

How much Is EnoughWhy can’t democrats trust their own constituents to do the right thing?  Their first response to every problem is to institutionalize it with more government, typically as far up the legislative food chain as possible.  That means as far away from you as they can manage, even to the point of giving control to unelected bureaucrats you can’t punish, just to keep you from messing with it.  They entrench it in a bureaucracy, make it impossibly inefficient and expensive and then refuse to let anyone touch it ever again, while charging you more and more to maintain it.

The only reason I can think of for that kind of knee jerk behavior is that Democrats use themselves as the template for the rest of us. The left by their very nature must be selfish, insecure, inconsiderate and un-trusting. Only people so un-giving of themselves or simply incapable of volunteering their time and energy would have to mandate volunteerism and "giving" by legalizing the taking of other peoples time or property through mandates.

Read more

Northern Pass: Still Ignoring the Overarching Reason for Opposition

“The only people who support the use of eminent domain for private development are cities that use it, developers and businesses that benefit from it and planners who plan it. Everyone else hates it.” – Dana Berliner, Senior Attorney, Institute for Justice  Yesterday’s Union Leader featured, Another View of Why New Hampshire should be open … Read more

Reverend Jackboot!?

UCCThe left always considers any comment by clergy, in the secular affairs of state, an affront to imagined Constitutional separations unless the remarks support their positions.  Such is the case with the Reverend Gary M. Schulte of the United Church of Christ (UCC).  With a fusion of left wing talking points and liturgical flair, he leapt the imagined Jeffersonian separation of State and Church, to express his objection to the budget passed by the New Hampshire House.

If taxpayers do not pony up to the government, in the form of a larger state budget, people will suffer.  The old, the weak, the children….But we’ve no idea just how much of your money Reverend Gary will need you to give to the Government to end the suffering, nor can we ever.  Distress always expands to meet the supply of publicly funded services available to reduce it. We just need more even though no amount is ever enough; just look at the failed states of California, Michigan and New York whose pursuit of social justice with taxpayer dollars has made them so bankrupt that they no longer have the money to care for much of anything at all.

But the UCC does not seem interested in that risk.  They are just another myopic Christian/Marxist fusion church that seems willing to advocate state power to achieve warm and fuzzy ends.  It is Social Justice, which is essentially communism.  And communism, being a godless secular faith all its own, has no issue with polluting and then subjugating institutions like the UCC to achieve its ends, even converting or subverting their purposes to advance the growth of statism.  They started with the language, which UCC has embraced, then moved on to policy, which they now advocate. And now we have Reverend Gary, who is probably a great guy who means well, rent seeking for the left wing agenda, with the full power and faith of the UCC behind him, asking politicians to spend more money on government, as if government is the answer.

But if you saw the UCC web site, you’d not be at all surprised.

Read more

Granite State Fair Tax Spins And Spins And Spins

Mark Fernald is pimping for the misleadingly named Granite State Fair Tax Coalition (GSFTC).  This is a group of tax and spend liberals (their fellow travelers and useful idiots) who are trying get an income tax. 

To sell you on this Utopian elixir of piss, GSFTC argues that New Hampshire’s property taxes favor the rich, and most recently have sent out a pile of nonsense with some misleading graphs, through Fernald’s email list to make the sale.  But as usual it is spun upside down and backwards and ignores one very unassailable fact.  New Hampshire has one of the lowest overall tax burdens in the nation because it relies on property taxes.  And the rich are not paying less for their share of State government.

TaxesGovernment is a necessary (preferably limited) evil, laid out like a salad bar.  There are all kinds of services your tax dollars pay for.  Some of them are for “just in case kinds of things” like public safety.  Then there are roads and schools and clerks and so on.  And then there are unemployment, welfare, heating aid, and a host of social support services, and the cost of the bureaucracy itself. 

By law these services are made available to everyone equally based on need so the folks most likely to consume government services are lower income residents.  Statistically, the less you earn, the more of the salad bar you are likely to need or eat from and the more trips you are likley to make in a given year.   But no matter what you earn, or where you live, or how well you live, you still only get one plate–and you pay for that plate in the form of taxes.  

The GSFTC would like you to believe that the rich are paying less for that plate.  To perpetrate this deception they use "taxes paid as a percentage of income" to make their case.   Their argument is that the rich only pay about 2% of their income as taxes while the poorer folks pay over 8% (Roughly), and that this is unfair.   But is that really the case?  Are the rich paying less money for a trip to the New and Improved State Government Salad Bar or is GSFTC just playing class warfare games?

Read more

Whose Jounal Is It?

This weeks Merrimack Journal was actually the Bedford Journal. They called it the ‘New Years’ Journal, but with a few minor exceptions, everyting in it was about Bedford. The letters to the editor were from Bedford. The news and sports…Bedford.

A “John Galt” reference….WHERE?

Not exactly what I thought I’d find!  Our friend Chan over at Weekend Pundit has this observation in his Christmas Eve version of his usual "Thoughts on a Sunday" type posts: Something I saw that got me smiling on my way home from last minute Christmas shopping this morning: Out in front of Funspot, a … Read more

Destroying The Future Of America

Image Credit: Mattox Firearms school.comDemocrats continue to insist that they created jobs.  To do this they extracted trillions from our economic future in an effort to create jobs that did not yet exist–that perhaps were  not needed yet.  Looking at similar exercises, cash for clunkers–which moved car sales forward a few months but has since resulted in a collapse in the market; the home mortgage bail outs, supports, credits, and the "home affordable" programs which improved home sales briefly but which have since collapsed (also to historic lows); and then there’s the stimulus, several public sector employee bailouts, bank lending infusions, small business bills, and everything in between including health care reform–many trillions spent, all made with claims that they would create, save, or incentivize job creation.

Lets concede the possibility that some jobs were saved or created with money from the future.  Let’s also, for academic purposes,  concede the number of 1.4 million-3.3 million jobs saved or created ( quote from Paul Hodes campaign if that matters).  What happens now?  Even if we can agree to these figures the mathematical reality is that despite these efforts, and at great expense, we still lost more jobs than we saved or created.  Millions are still unemployed with hundreds of thousands more people working less, working shorter hours, or who have given up looking altogether just in the 12 months since someone declared the recession over.  We got a net sum loss with the price of admission, and that debt is now looming over our ability to sustain or improve the job picture moving forward because of the Faustian fiscal political calculation the democrats made in what now appears to be a series of vote getting scams gone horribly wrong.

Read more

The Congresswoman From EMILY’s List

I guess when Carol Shea-Porter took office she swore to defend her special interest donors before the constitution and the people. That’s how she’s legislated. That’s how she’s voted. That’s who she is.

So, where’s YOUR income coming from?

Government Dependency?  Sure looks like it – which means more and more wealth is being taken out of the productive class and given to those dependent upon government. (H/T: Clusterstock)

The Lynch Budget Lie

Credit: Brookhaven National Laboratory 

A balanced budget is a technical term for making the numbers add up.  The amount you say you have to spend simply matches what you claim to have spent.  So if you borrowed some millions that you would later have to pay back, and you found a few hundred million more on the sidewalk (maybe in Washington DC), if it added up far enough to cover how much you spent, you could claim to have a balanced budget.

The difference is that being at zero, and owing tens of millions you never had is not balanced.  Add to that the reality that you now have a larger bill to pay every year but can’t expect to just find a few hundred million laying around every year, and you have what is called a structural deficit.  Your political lifestyle vastly exceeds your expected revenue.  Call it a state wide mortgage that exceeds our ability to pay it by hundreds of millions annually.

This is called incompetent.  It is also the Lynch budget.  And even though an account or two may have pulled in more revenue than expected, there is still a massive debt due in the next budget, created by democrats, and signed off on by John Lynch, with no money to pay for it..

Why else proceed in contradiction to the supreme court, on the politically poisonous path of robbing $110 million in private property unless you really need that 110 million to start stuffing the sink hole of a massive structural deficit.  And even if you get this one time money, where’s the line of suckers you plan to screw after you are done with them?

If we had a real surplus they wouldn’t need to rob the JUA fund.  They would drop the idea of selling off 60 million in state land.  In fact, they’d stop all the hand-wringing about the budget.  They have not.  The deficit is real.  And the democrats are to blame, and John Lynch and it is one more reason why John Lynch has been the governor for too long.

 

Read more

Tax Cuts For The “Insert name here”

Don’t expect ShaHodeSheaPorter to wrestle with this conundrum; while running for office in 2008 they insisted that the Bush Tax cuts were "for the rich," or "the wealthiest Americans."  The class warfare rhetoric made the case that Republicans didn’t provide tax relief for anyone else, and the democrats promised to remedy this the moment they were elected.  The result was to embark on a multi-trillion dollar spending binge that cannot possibly be paid for without taxes on everyone and everything–though they still insist otherwise.

Read more

Housing Bubble Comes Home To Roost

I’m not sure why there is still any debate about who is responsible for the housing bubble and the ensuing crisis–which includes the recession that followed and the stagnation we are in now.  The Democrats new bill of rights, going all the way back to FDR, includes the right to own a home.  Since that … Read more

Share to...