Are they paying attention - do they even care?

Bud Martin is a good, kind man. He is very well liked and there is no one who can argue effectively against his years of dedication to the people of New Hampshire. Yet, as the Democratic nominee for the open District 3 State Senate race he lost, and he lost big, to the Republican nominee, former U.S. Congressman Jeb Bradley. Bradley won going away with about 63% of the vote.

Bradley won 15 of the 17 towns of the district. He won Conway with 57% of the vote - which has been supportive of Democrats in recent elections.

The issues were well defined and very clear. They were taxes, broken promises by the legislature, gay marriage and transgender bills.

The question is simple, is the House Majority paying attention - do they even care? If not, they could very well be relegated to the "cheap seats" in 2010.

All eyes are now on the State Senate. Will their heed the warning of malcontented citizens from District 3? If not they too could see their numbers dwindle.

For now it is clear the pendulum of Independent voters is swinging from left to right.

State's $24 million broken promise hurts children

"The following appeard as a column in the Conway Daily Sun this past Saturday, April 18, 2009.

FYI - The Sun endorsed Jeb Bradley today."

The house democrats have sent their budget (HB 1) to the Senate. Included in that bill is a provision which, if passed by the upper chamber and signed by the Governor, will eliminate state school building aid. The financial impact of this modification of an existing state program is first unconstitutional, second it is an unabashed shifting of state cost onto the local property tax payer, thirdly it is not equitable (shades of Claremont II) and finally it hurts children. The fact that the democratic leadership would do such a thing is unconscionable, especially in light of these desperate economic times.
For the communities who send their students to Conway schools the cost-shifting by the state is a broken promise, one which will cost the people of Albany, Bartlett, Conway, Eaton, Freedom, Hart's Location, Jackson, Madison and Tamworth at least $24 million over the next 15 years.
The hardest hit of these communities will be Conway who will need to include an additional $1,614,414 to the next bond payment. This money must come from the 2009 - 2010 budget. Since this amount was not known by the Conway School district or the voters in a timely manner it was not included in that budget. As a result, our schools will have to make significant cuts in many programs in order to meet our obligation to the institutions who fronted the bond. Another option available to Conway would be to petition the Superior Court in order for the Conway School District to raise and appropriate an additional $1.6 million. Either way this impact is severe.
In the first year the tax rate in Conway will increase by $1.19 per thousand. This means that a house assessed at $150 thousand will pay $179 more this year alone, and a similar amount each of the remaining years of the bond. The total disregard of this impact is, once again, unconscionable.
In their haste to make the state operating budget balanced the proponents of this action shifted $42 million of their obligation upon local communities. In light of the fact that Article 26 was passed by Conway voters on April 14th, it is clear that the champions of cutting state building aid are out of touch with their constituency. This warrant article (which passed by a huge margin; 902 in favor and 263 opposed) clearly declares, “...the state is currently facing a deficit of at least (a) $200 million and may resort to relying upon the property taxpayers of the state as a means to cover either the deficit or the expansion, modification or newly established state programs. Therefore, be it resolved that the people of the town of Conway, by a vote of the 2009 town meeting, do express to the Governor, the members of the Honorable House and Senate, our objection to any legislation or provision of the state's operating budget that would result in the increase of local property taxes...”
The elimination of State Building aid is an indisputable cost-shifting on the part of the N.H. House of Representatives.
The elimination of building aid is a modification of an existing program, as such it is in clear violation of Article 28-A of the NH Constitution. Sometimes I am amazed how cavalier and/or ignorant certain public office holders are when it comes to their sworn oath to uphold our constitution.
By eliminating building aid the state has created an inequitable policy. For example, the loss of building aid eliminates $2.5 million from Nashua, $1.8 million from Manchester, and the afore-mentioned $1.6 million from Conway. When you take into account student populations, Manchester loses $150 per pupil, Nashua loses $158 per pupil, and Conway loses an astronomical $841 per pupil. Here is yet another example of how the higher populated communities of southern NH fare better then the smaller northern communities such as Conway. Although the figures are not yet available to the Kingswood Regional towns, their recent approval of a bond of $65 million will be devastating to them as well (should they proceed in constructing their new high school).
It takes a great deal of effort, gathering and presenting facts to the voters in order to succeed in getting their super-majority support for a bonded project. The $52 million dollar approval in the town of Conway passed the 60% barrier with only 23 votes to spare. If Conway's voters knew that the state would renege on their obligation and their promise to provide $24 million in building aid there would be no way we would have ever agreed to construct the new high school and renovating the middle school - to the hurt of our children.
There-in is the pitiful reality that the action by the House hurts children. The NH House has lost trust with the people to such a degree it will be a long, long time before any community will build a new school facility anywhere in the state – even if the Senate reinstates building aid back into the budget.
The damage has been done, as a result future school projects all across the state will not be constructed, simply because now the people realize how easily the state can break their promises. This will most assuredly relegate our children to rundown facilities. What a shame – what a crying shame.
There is one thing voters can do immediately – we can send Jeb Bradley to Concord to represent us in the Senate. At the very least this will show our displeasure to those wayward legislators who must be held responsible. It will also show them that the people of this state, working from the voting booths, are very capable of cleaning House. So please, please do not allow the weather to hinder you when it comes to voting next Tuesday.

There are dreams

There are dreams
there is hope
there remains indescribable beauty

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wnmbJzH93NU

Hit the road Jack

and don't yah come back no more, no more....

During the last election cycle  both Democrats and Republicans worked hard to elect members of their respective parties to seats in the New Hampshire House. Well nothing wrong with that - its the nature of this business.

After working as hard as they did why did the Democratic leadership instruct their members who did not support the Transgender bill to take a hike?

In our Constitutional Republic representative government is a cornerstome. Those who play footloose with it need to sit in a Civics 101 class.

Not only does the Democratic Leadership need to explain themselves about instructing their members to take a hike and unless those reps who did so do not each come up with a good reason why they walked away from the chamber the voters in their districst should not vote again for them and tell them all to "Hit the road Jack."

Where does it go

...the good Lord only knows. It seems just like the other day, I was down at the legion shooting them tables and generally not worrying much about what people had to say. The cue ball of late has been rolling good and for me at this point in time there is no other, other way to be. I was hanging with some lovable losers and no account boozers and worn-out politicians like me.

That is where I was when I first learned about President Obama's plan to “force” all American citizens into community service, without pay and without civil rights – such as the freedom of speech. It seemed so implausible that at first I gave it little thought. That is until I happened upon the legislation (H.R. 1388) that has passed the United States House of Representatives and who on March 31, 2009 concurred with the Senate amendments of a bill entitled, “THE EDWARD M. KENNEDY SERVE AMERICA ACT.” aka , “SERVE AMERICA ACT, or “GENERATIONS INVIGORATING VOLUNTEERISM and EDUCATION ACT” (G.I.V.E) .

As of April 2nd the bill is in a joint committee of conference to work out certain differences between the House and Senate. Chances of enactment of H.R. 1388 is about 99 to 1.

Deep in the marrow of this act is section 6104 (b) (6) “Whether a workable, fair, and reasonable mandatory service requirement for all able young people could be developed, and how such a requirement could be implemented in a manner that would strengthen the social fabric of the Nation and overcome civic challenges by bringing together people from diverse economic, ethnic, and educational backgrounds.”

Mandatory Service Requirement! Mandatory Service Requirement! If this is the inculcation direction of the United States of America, then Lord have mercy. It is very difficult to reconcile liberty with Mandatory Service Requirement.

The margin of support for this Obama Youth program is alarming. The members of Congress must have surmised the American people do not mind being forced into "voluntary" community service. They must sense the American people are no longer resolved to defend their civil liberties. Congress must know that Americans would rather be kept safe from danger then to live lives of free men and women.

This bill is referred to as G.I.V.E., as in “give and take” It seems to me there is a great deal more taking then there is giving in this legislation.

As this pertains to freedom, I for one am left wondering, “Where does it go?”