Elected Officials

Clearly Washington is out of control. Despite our national debt being what it is, they are considering national health care reform, a cap and trade bill and perhaps another stimulus along with an immigration reform bill. They claim that health care reform will be deficit neutral, cap and trade will create “new, green jobs” and stimulus will stimulate the economy and put people back to work. Only God and a collection of bureaucrats and politicians know what will be in the immigration reform bill. History tells us that anytime Congress passes legislation of this nature, the only thing that grows is the Government by way of more new bureaucracy which does nothing but add to our debt. The health care legislation currently consists of two bills each containing more than two thousand pages of new rules and regulations. If I remember correctly the stimulus bill was fourteen hundred pages and I don’t know how many pages the cap and trade bill is. I’m afraid to read it!. Compare this with a publication “The Colonial Williamsburg Foundation” circulates containing “The Declaration of Independence” and “The Constitution of the United States”. This publication measures six and a half inches by three and a half inches and contains 47 pages of which the Declaration takes up six pages and the Constitution with its amendments 34 pages!

My question is if Thomas Jefferson could clearly state our reasons for separation from Great Britain and our founding fathers could succinctly outline the rights of the American people with such brevity, why does it take Congress to “improve on our rights” with thousands of pages of legislation?

Clearly what we need in Congress is more fiscal conservatism. Most of us are fiscally conservative when it comes to running our households simply because we have limitations on what we can spend. We can’t print more money and/or borrow indiscriminately to finance our lifestyles like the Government is presently doing. This indicates to me that something is clearly wrong in Washington and things need to be changed.

Leading up to the 2010 elections the Hooksett Republican Town Committee has been asking the Republican candidates for the Senate and House of Representatives for the first district to appear at our monthly meetings to present their case and respond to questions put to them by the electorate. So far we have had Jim Bender, a candidate for the Senate and Bob Bestani a candidate for the House appear. This month we are featuring Ovid Lamontagne a candidate for the Senate and in future months we have Kelly Ayotte and Frank Guinta scheduled. We hope to schedule all of the other candidates for the House and Senate races during 2010 and also the Candidates for Governor, the State Senate and House. In January, we have invited Bob Bestani to return and give a non partisan lecture on economics. Mr. Bestani, a visiting scholar at Stanford University has had extensive experience in the middle and Far East and is an expert on the world energy situation.

Whether you know it or not, we, the American electorate, will be voting with our pocket books next year. 2010 will be a contest between the status quo and fiscal sanity. All of the candidates we are presenting are fiscally conservative. Mr. Lamontagne, Mr. Guinta and Ms. Ayotte are politically well known in the state but the majority of candidates come from the private sector, has run businesses and knows what it means to meet payrolls and be fiscally responsible.

We invite all registered Republicans and fiscally conservative Independents to attend our meetings at the Hooksett Town Library on the third Tuesday of each month between the hours of 6 and 8 PM. This will provide you with an opportunity to hear what the candidates have to say and in turn you will have the chance to ask “hard ball” questions on issues that are of concern to you.

It’s your money. Is it worth it to you to spend two hours a month to hear what these candidates can do for you? Just remember that change doesn’t come from Washington or Concord, it comes from towns like Hooksett.

Should you have any questions, please contact me at bbtrgt@comcast.net or call me at 669-9818.

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The Road to an Income Tax
Years from now if the citizens of New Hampshire are seeing income taxes taken out of their paychecks, they will be able look back to the week of October 19, 2009 in “tax history” as the turning point—a time when the foundation for a broad based tax was laid. House Ways & Means committee Chair Susan Almy, a Lebanon democrat who has long been a strong advocate for any tax, but especially an income tax, has put together a legislative “summit” that will convene this week to, “consider changes to the state’s tax laws.”

Rep. Almy first tried to keep this gathering of legislators a secret to avoid having the voters learn that an income tax would be included on the agenda. When the news of a “tax summit” was leaked to the media, Speaker Norelli told us not to fret because Gov. Lynch had pledged to veto an income tax. That’s comforting. Correct me if I am wrong, but isn’t he the same governor who, after telling us that marriage should be between a man and a woman, turned around and signed the gay marriage bill into law?

It is curious that one of the main speakers being brought to the table by Rep. Almy is Jeff McLynch, the Northeast Regional Director for the Institute for Taxation and Economic Policy--an advocate for an income tax. In fact, in March he appeared before the House Ways & Means committee to testify in support of a bill that would establish an income tax. “I am here today to offer testimony on House Bill 642, which would improve New Hampshire’s tax system, both by generating additional revenue and by shifting greater responsibility for such revenue onto those state residents with a greater ability to pay,” he told the committee.

This “summit” should come as no surprise. Democrats actually been “laying the groundwork for an income tax” the moment they took control of the State House three years ago. Rather than controlling spending and forcing the state to live within its means, they chose instead to create the first $10B budget based on over zealous revenue figures. When the state’s income failed to meet their lofty projections to pay for their 25% increase in general fund spending over two budgets, they chose instead to create, or increase, more than 40 taxes and fees, and used more than $400 million in one-time money while downshifting millions of dollars to the local property tax payer.

In response to their fiscal missteps over the past three years, the Democrats’ answer is to hold a “tax summit” to try and find more sources of revenue to match their out-of-control spending. In fact, it was House Democratic Majority Leader Dan Eaton of Stoddard who best explained the Democrats’ position on the floor of the House last session when he told his colleagues “…it makes sense to know how much you’re spending before you decide how much money to raise.”

The beloved poet Robert Frost, in his poem The Road Not Taken, urged us all to ignore the “safe,” risk-free options and to make choices that offer greater risk and greater rewards. The State of New Hampshire has reached that fork in the road. The question remains, do we take the easy way out and follow other states by enacting broad based taxes to cover the over-spending, or do we continue to take the road less traveled and strive to become more fiscally responsible with our spending? The Democrats have spent the state into a huge deficit and now they are asking us to “study” an income tax. Hopefully the voters of this state are paying attention.

James E. Rivers
House Republican Office
107 North Main St.
Concord, NH 03301
603-271-6277
www.nhhousegop.com

Budget Storm Clouds Looming
The ink is barely dry on the New Hampshire budget signed into law by Governor Lynch on June 30. Only 2 months have elapsed in the 24 month spending blueprint, but problems Republicans warned about are intensifying like a hurricane ready to make landfall. More ominously, a Plan B strategy dealing with budget problems is not even discussed in the polite company of Democratic legislative leaders. In fact the chair of the House Finance Committee said publically a Budget Plan B is not even necessary.

Here is why Budget Plan B is more urgent every day. Tax revenues are well below expectations. When the budget was negotiated among House and Senate Democratic leaders, a funding gap between desired spending and available revenue was papered over when budget negotiators inflated revenue expectations by $75 million in the dark of night. Observers warned this $75 million was optimistic. Two months into the budget, those warnings are reality. Action needs to be taken now but Democratic leaders seem smug with happy talk that the budget will magically balance.

Here are the facts: July�s revenue was $4.7 million below expectations. August was even worse with total revenues $17.6 million below expectations. Rooms and meals was $3.7 million under estimates � even after the tax was increased from 8% to 9%. Tobacco taxes were $2 million less than predicted � even after a huge 45 cent increase on a pack of cigarettes. Business revenues were off by nearly $3 million.

To be fair, the July and August $22.3 million revenue hole needs to be taken in the context of not being historically large revenue months. However, September�s revenue figures will be a bell-weather as many businesses and individuals make estimated quarterly payments. If September underperforms and continues the July / August trend, New Hampshire is staring down the gun barrel of a very large revenue deficit. And no one should forget that the $22.3 million hole comes despite 38 new or increased taxes or fees in this budget.

Revenue deficits are only one part of the problem. The state is in a losing streak in court cases. Superior Court Justice Diane Nicolosi ruled in favor of the New Hampshire Health Care Association and blocked the State from keeping $9 million that nursing homes claim they are entitled to. Belknap County Superior Court Justice Kathleen McGuire ruled that a budget provision, which transferred $110 million from a fund controlled by the Joint Underwriting Association to the State�s General Fund to balance the budget, is unconstitutional.

Justice McGuire�s well researched, clearly written and completely unambiguous ruling, held that the politicians who supported this proposed $110 million transfer, are in violation of both the �takings� and �contracts� clauses of the New Hampshire Constitution and the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution.

While the State has appealed Justice McGuire�s decision, nobody in Concord ---- except the Democratic cheerleaders who proposed this $110 million sleight of hand transfer ---- believe the state will win the appeal.

A third lawsuit is about to be filed by the New Hampshire Municipal Association over the budget downshifting of state expenses to towns and cities. The Municipal Association has estimated the downshift will increase local property taxes by $90 million which is why nearly 150 towns and over 50 school districts will join this lawsuit.

In the face of mounting budget problems, Democratic legislative leaders have spent the summer barn storming across New Hampshire on their �truth and responsibility� tour. These leaders are claiming that state spending has been reduced by 1%. If the assertion was true � the Democratic architects of the budget would deserve credit.

But --- it is always easier to fall for the narcotic of believing your own spin rather than focusing on facts. Again, here are the facts. Total state spending increased by nearly $1.1 billion or 10.48% according to the non-partisan Legislative Budget Assistant (LBA). Putting that spending hike in context, it is critical to recall that total state spending increased by 11.17% in the previous budget according to the LBA.

The responsibility part of the tour by Democratic legislators must be intended to remind voters they have an obligation to dig deeper into already thin wallets to pay for this explosive growth in state spending at a time people fear they will join the 50,000 unemployed New Hampshire citizens. Thus Democratic leaders plead that the 38 new or increased fees or taxes are somehow responsible.

There is scant recognition in Concord how bleak our budget picture is. Nor will it improve until the national economy starts to grow out of ruinous deficits, bad debt, bailouts, government takeover of companies, and the bloated stimulus that has actually increased the unemployment rate to 9.7%. Most experts believe the jobless rate will climb to over 10% before things begin to turn next summer. These stark conditions should compel Democratic leaders in Concord to develop Plan B immediately.
That is precisely why Republicans called upon Governor Lynch to release the results of his call nearly a year ago for agency heads to produce budget plans that spend 3% less than their department did in previous budgets. That is the responsible way to confront a growing budget deficit�with spending cuts.

Our parents always taught us to say what we mean and mean what we say. Unfortunately, the more Democratic leaders tout �truth and responsibility� in regards to their budget, the more they mean taxes. The House Speaker recently said she was open to an income tax. Perhaps that�s honest. But it should be a stark warning to everyone who wants our state to remain a low tax haven � that income tax proponents are lurking. And the only way to fight an income tax is with fiscal discipline and spending cuts.

SEAN MAHONEY: HEALTH CARE PLANS WOULD COST TAXPAYERS, DRIVE UP DEFICIT

Union Leader
August 1, 2009

During a tele-town hall meeting this week, Rep. Paul Hodes discussed his support for a trillion-plus dollar health care reform package with his constituents. �We�ve got to lower costs for everybody,� he said. Who does he think he�s kidding? If we �lower costs for everyone,� where exactly is the trillion dollars going to come from?

As the massive stimulus act has shown, a trillion dollars doesn�t suddenly appear because Congress appropriates it. It comes in the form of higher taxes on small businesses, families and, in order to cover the crippling debt, our grandchildren.

There is no doubt the existing U.S. health care system is in financial trouble and in need of significant reform. Each year, America spends over $2.4 trillion on health care, significantly more than any other nation. At the same time, more than 47 million citizens are uninsured and, as a nation, we forgo over a trillion dollars a year in productivity due to illness. This is unsustainable.

Unfortunately, the measures offered by President Barack Obama and the Democratic majority in Washington increase taxes and the federal budget deficit, diminish our control over our health care choices, fail to improve the quality of our health care and will force many Americans who are presently satisfied with their health coverage out of their private plans and into a government plan.

President Obama has said he will not sign a bill that increases the deficit. Therefore, every new cent of spending in the health reform bill must be paid for with new taxes. Good luck. We are in the worst economic conditions since the 1930s. American small businesses can little afford the 8% payroll tax penalty the Democrats would levy against them if they can�t afford to provide insurance to their employees. Nor can the so-called rich be squeezed for any more than the Obama administration has already appropriated from them to finance his failed stimulus act. Many of the �wealthy� individuals on whose wallets the Democrats set their sights are actually small business owners and entrepreneurs; the very same job creators who need to succeed financially if we are to climb out of the recession. The last thing our struggling economy needs now is an additional trillion dollars in new taxes.

The most onerous idea in the health care debate is the �public option,� which is essentially a government insurance plan designed to compete with private insurers. Many predict the public option will crowd out private insurers and by way of a �last man standing� strategy become the nation�s sole insurer. The analysts at the Lewin Group estimate 100 million people will exercise the public option because it will charge 20% lower premiums. Of course the reason the government plan will be allowed to offer lower premiums is that it will be subsidized by taxpayers.

Think about that. The more successful the government option is at �competing� with private insurers, the more burdensome it will be on hardworking taxpayers. I suppose we can take solace in the fact that most government programs fail utterly.

What�s more, under the public plan government bureaucrats will make health care decisions for us. More than 50 new government bureaucracies will be created to manage the new plan. And contrary to Obama�s assurances, the bill in the House will add almost a quarter-of-a-trillion to the federal budget deficit over the next ten years and far more after that, according to CBO.

Here are some things the public option will not do. It won�t improve the quality of care. In fact, it doesn�t even pretend to. There is nothing in the plans in Washington that will increase life expectancy or quality of life. And the plan does nothing to loosen the strangle hold the trial lawyer lobby has on our doctors who, under constant threat of frivolous lawsuits, are forced to pass malpractice insurance costs onto the consumers.

What would a real Congressional health reform measure do? It would open up the health care marketplace by allowing small businesses and associations to purchase bulk insurance for their employees and members. I would also allow these groups to purchase insurance packages across state lines, thereby creating real choice and competition and controlling costs. And it would further reduce costs by cracking down on the trial lobby.

The more people learn about the Democrats� health care plans the less they want them to become law. A new NBC/WSJ poll shows only thirty-six percent of Americans think Obama�s plan is a good idea versus forty-two percent who think it�s a bad idea. Only forty-one percent approve of the way he is handling this issue. The politicians ought to listen to the people for a change.

Sean Mahoney is the Publisher of BusinessNH Magazine and New Hampshire�s Republican National Committeeman.

This warrant has to do with funding the upgrade of our waste water treatment plant.

If we vote yes on this article for the 6.2 million dollars, it will cost the town only a $3.1 million bond issue because we will receive matching funds from the federal government.

If we do not approve this article now we (Town of Hooksett) will still be obligated in the future for this upgrade and in two years it will cost ~ $8 million and we will need a bond issue for the entire amount that will have to be paid completely by Hooksett residents.

Common sense dictates that this Article needs to be passed based upon the cost saving to the Hooksett taxpayers.

The Norelli Effect: The effect that Speaker Norelli has on elections once the voters see the radical agenda of the New Hampshire House Democrats. Notice the bump in just 6 months in Republican votes with the same Democrat as candidate. The following table has the percentage of votes for the Republican in State Senate District 3. The first column is the town from the district. The second column is the percentage of votes for the Republican in November, 2008. The third column is the percentage of votes for the Republican in April, 2009. The last column is the difference between those columns. A positive number indicates rising Republican percentage between November and April.

The Norelli Effect
Town	November	April	Change
Brookfield	60%	58%	-2%
Chatham	59%	70%	11%
Conway	42%	57%	15%
Eaton	43%	50%	8%
Effingham	52%	57%	4%
Farmington	45%	56%	11%
Freedom	53%	60%	7%
Madison	46%	53%	7%
Middleton	50%	59%	9%
Milton	47%	64%	17%
Moultonborough	56%	70%	14%
Ossipee	55%	65%	10%
Sandwich	35%	45%	10%
Tamworth	46%	47%	1%
Tuftonboro	58%	67%	9%
Wakefield	66%	72%	6%
Wolfeboro	56%	67%	10%
Totals	51%	61%	10%

You may or may not know that there will be a Special NH Senate Election for the District 3 seat on Tuesday April 21st. The seat before becoming vacant due to a resignation was in republican hands. It is IMPERATIVE that we keep it that way as the Dems already have a 14-10 majority in the NH Senate. It is a lot easier to win over a couple of dems on any given issue causing a split (which kills the bill) than it will be to have to get three dems.

Let me give you some very real reasons for the urgency to winning this special election . I am a member of the House Ways and Means Committee (W&M) - this is the revenue committee. The dems in (W&M) have alrady passed a 10% increase in the meals and room ( 8% to 8.75%), a 15 cent increase in gas tax (5 cents a year over three years), passed a 5% capital gains tax, and they have passed a whole host of new and increased fees that will hit the taxpayers in just about every facet of their lives (stayed tuned on this as we plan to get all this info up on the Republican State Committee web site (NHGOP.org).

The dems liberal agenda also includes: 1.) gender neutral bathrooms known as the "bathroom bill"; 2.) permit use of marijuana for medicinal use; 3.) said no to parental notification; and 4.) same sex marriage (came out of Judiciary with a split vote 10-10).

JEB BRADLEY IS OPPOSED TO ALL THE TAXES AND FEES AND LIBERAL AGENDA OF THE DEMS. THAT IS WHY WE NEED HIM IN THE SENATE AND WHY WE SO DESPERATELY NEED YOUR HELP.

You may be saying how can I help it is not my district? Well, here is how you can help. First, you can make calls from your home. Jeb ask that you commit to make 120 calls - that four call sheets. You can let me know if you are willing to do this to stop "Live Free or Die" New Hampshire to be changed to "Taxahampshire". (The debate might become which State is more Liberal: New Hampshire or California - think Nancy Pelosi and San Francisco).

There will be lit drops going on every Saturday and Sunday for the next several weekends until the election in the 17 towns of the District. You can e-mail me for info, or go onto NHGOP.org for details. We will need about 100 people on election day. If you can help out, give me a call and I will forward your information to Jeb's staff so they can plug you in.

Lastly, the Dems have already brought in an outsider paid for by the National Democratic Party to manage the campaign for Jeb's opponent. Money will be no object for the Dems. So, if you can send Jeb a contribution, please make it out to Friends of Jeb Bradley for Senate and mail it to Jeb bradley 630 South Main Street Wolfeboro 03894.

Please feel free to get in touch with me if you wish to get involved. You can e-mail me at dboutin1465@comcast.net.

Fifty-four percent of New Hampshire voted for "change" in the recent presidential election, but is this the kind of �change they believe in �? �Civil Unions� performed anywhere in the world now recognized in New Hampshire. Must we accept polygamy (multiple wives), which is legal in many Muslim countries, or Tibetan fraternal polyandry in which multiple sons in a family all marry the same wife? How about �Civil Unions� now termed as Marriage in New Hampshire. How do you feel about �Genderless" marriage officially being recognized, or about �Transvestites� now being free to choose either bathroom based upon their current �Gender specific� feeling, and with the right to bring objectors before the Human Rights Commission on charges of discrimination. And oh yes, how about strengthening the Human Rights Commission, eliminating the right to trial by jury for defendants, but keeping that right for the complainants who may not agree with the decision. Other changes you might not want to believe in are legalizing �Assisted Suicide�, denying parental rights of notification prior to performing abortions on their minor daughters, or refusing the requirement for signed proof of counseling prior to abortion for these same children. Those are just a few of the social engineering bills pushed through the Judiciary Committee last week by the Democratic majority. Other �Changes� being pushed are increases in toll fees, and an 18-cent increase in gas taxes, a new tax on beer, another cigarette tax increase, casino gambling, and the list goes on and on. Whether you were one of the 54% who voted for �change� or not, you are certainly getting it. If this is not the kind of change in New Hampshire you believe in, then tape the above list of �changes� to the door of your refrigerator and refer to it along with the voting records of your Legislators before the next election. Voting records for all legislators can be found on the New Hampshire government web site at http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/ie/ , by looking up your specific Representative and Senator, and clicking on their voting record.

Discussion/Opinions (find more on our blog)