Tag: New Hampshire

Posted on

New Hampshire: Scott Brown announces run for NH Senate seat

Former Massachusetts Senator Scott Brown is announced today he’s running for the US Senate again. Only this time, in New Hampshire.

The term “carpetbagger” comes from the 1860s after the Civil War left the South with many deaths in the political world. Northerners relocated to the South for political opportunity. (A carpetbag was a type of luggage). Sometimes, when a politician fails in one race, they move to another state to try their luck there. It’s often frowned upon because the pol may or may not understand the local political climate.

It will be interesting to see if the “carpetbagger” term sticks to Brown in this race. The Real Clear Politics poll average shows Jeanne Shaheen, the Democratic incumbent, at a nine point lead.

Posted on

New Hampshire: Candidate for Sheriff says he would “consider deadly force” to prevent an abortion

A Republican – with no prior law enforcement experience – running for county sheriff in New Hampshire is facing calls to leave the race after he suggested it is acceptable to use deadly force to stop a doctor from performing an abortion.

While he has now recanted his comments, saying they are “unacceptable,” he has made no indication that he will drop out.

In a local television interview, Hillsborough County sheriff candidate Frank Szabo said that he values the life of an unborn fetus so much that, when it came to elective and late-term abortions, he’d be willing to kill for it:

But Szabo may have inflamed the issue further when asked if he would use deadly force to prevent an abortion.

“I would respond specifically by saying that if someone is under threat, a full-grown human being, if they’re under threat, what should the sheriff do? Everything in their power to prevent them from being harmed,” he said.

When pressed about what he would do if he learned that a doctor was about to perform an elective abortion, Szabo replied he would do what it took to prevent that from happening.

“Absolutely,” he said. “Well, I would hope that it wouldn’t come to that, as with any situation where someone is in danger, but again, specifically talking about elective abortions and late-term abortions, that is an act that needs to be stopped.”

Among those calling on Szabo to step down is New Hampshire’s Republican House Speaker Bill O’Brien. In a release, O’Brien wrote, “It is our hope that Mr. Szabo will withdraw from this race and think long and hard about grounding himself in constitutional law and principles before considering political office in the future.”

Via ThinkProgress

Posted on

Hew Hampshire House votes down attempt to repeal marriage equality

An effort to prevent recognition of same-sex marriages in the “Live Free or Die” state seems to be dead for the year after a Republican-controlled state House of Representatives failed to pass the measure, despite desperate last-minute attempts to make the bill more palatable to moderates by author Rep. David Bates.

The New Hampshire House of Representatives has defeated the bill with a vote of 133-202.

At stake first was the absurd amendment proposed by Rep. David Bates (R), which would have re-implemented civil unions and given voters a chance to weigh in on that decision in a non-binding way. That amendment failed 162-188.

Then, there was a parliamentary debate as to whether to consider a humorous amendment proposed by Rep. Seth Cohn (R) that would have prohibited marriage between people who are left-handed, but the effort to bring it forth was defeated.

During the debate on the bill as originally proposed, Bates and other opponents of equality invoked comparisons between same-sex marriage and incest while protesting when others juxtaposed the measure with the racial segregation of the past.

Three-term governor John Lynch had promised to veto the bill had it passed both majority-Republican chambers of the state legislature.
(source)

Posted on

Concord Monitor: “Don’t tamper with same-sex marriage law”

Excellent editorial in the New Hampshire Concord Monitor yesterday. Well-written and spells out why same-sex marriage should NOT be repealed in the state. In the article, the paper addresses some of the traditional arguments made against same-sex marriage.  Here are just a few:

• Marriage is between one man and one woman. This is more of a declaration than an actual argument. In fact, it’s a declaration of bigotry. After all, who gets to define marriage? Those already married? Without a compelling reason to deny marriage to gay people, a statement like this is hard to take seriously.

• But marriage has been restricted to heterosexuals for thousands of years. Many traditions outlive their usefulness. Slavery was an ancient practice too, after all. So was barring women from participation in politics. Once upon a time, people with disabilities were routinely locked away in institutions. Mercifully, times change.

• Marriage is for procreation. In many cases, yes. But infertile, straight couples marry all the time. So do those uninterested in having kids. Those past their child-bearing years aren’t forced to divorce. Having children isn’t the only thing that brings couples together.

As the GOP nominees head to New Hampshire, and the state legislature gets ready to debate repeal of marriage equality, this comes at a good time.

Read the entire editorial here.

Posted on

GOP nominees will have to face NH marriage equality issue

Republican presidential candidates are joining New Hampshire’s intensifying same-sex marriage debate — whether they like it or not.

State lawmakers plan to take up a measure to repeal the law allowing same-sex couples to wed and a vote is expected at some point in January — the same month New Hampshire holds the nation’s first Republican presidential primary contest.

The impending focus on marriage equality carries risk for several of White House contenders — including former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, Texas Gov. Rick Perry and former businessman Herman Cain — whose inconsistencies on the topic are well documented.

The Republican candidates’ increasingly vocal support for “traditional marriage” also threatens to alienate a growing number of younger Republicans and independents here who support legal recognition of same-sex couples. That note of divisiveness could bode poorly for the eventual Republican challenger to Obama in the general election.

Romney was the Massachusetts governor when his state legalized same-sex marriage. The Romney administration, as directed by the courts, granted nearly 200 same-sex marriage requests for gay and lesbian couples in 2005.

This past June, he said during a debate that he favors a federal constitutional amendment banning the practice. That’s been his position at least since the beginning of his 2008 presidential bid, when he was the only major Republican candidate to support such an amendment.

But as a Massachusetts Senate candidate back in 1994, Romney told a Boston-area newspaper that same-sex marriage is “a state issue as you know — the authorization of marriage on a same-sex basis falls under state jurisdiction.”

Herman Cain told the Christian Broadcasting Network that federal legislation is necessary to protect traditional marriage. That seemed to be a direct contradiction from his statement of just six days earlier, when he told “Meet the Press” host David Gregory that states should be allowed to make up their own minds.

“I wouldn’t seek a constitutional ban for same sex marriage, but I am pro traditional marriage,” Cain told Gregory.

In Rick Perry’s case, the Texas governor says he supports the New Hampshire repeal. But in July he said that New York’s move to legalize same-sex marriage was “fine by me.” A week later, facing social conservative criticism, he walked back the comments.

“It’s fine with me that the state is using their sovereign right to decide an issue. Obviously gay marriage is not fine with me,” he said then.

While I think most conservatives won’t worry over the flip flops, come the general election these positions could come back to haunt the eventual GOP nominee in terms of some all important independent voters.

Time will tell.

Posted on

New Hampshire committee votes to repeal marriage equality

From Instinct: The New Hampshire House Judiciary Committee has approved legislation that seeks to remove same-sex couples right to marriage, already instituted in the state.

By a vote of 11 – 6, the Committee has moved forward with the regressive legislation in hopes of replacing New Hampshire’s historic marriage equality rights with the lesser and unequal civil unions.

Even the leader of the groups fighting equality understands that his proposal will create a cluster-headache of confusion in the state, similar to California in the wake of Prop 8.

“Kevin Smith, executive director of Cornerstone Action, admitted that if the bill eventually becomes law, it will create two classes of same-sex couples in New Hampshire—those with the tax benefits of marriage, and those without. That, however, is better than trying to repeal same-sex marriage all in one shot and having the matter ultimately decided by courts, he said.”

Despite that most in New Hampshire “strongly oppose” the legislation, thanks to today’s vote, if approved by the full House in January it will become law.