How to Access Remote NH House Committees

19 feb 2013

Another View: How's that right-to-work opposition working out for NH?

A right-to-work law is back in the news in New Hampshire. The Democrat-led House of Representatives defeated it Wednesday.

BY CHARLES GRUBBS

A right-to-work law is back in the news in New Hampshire. The Democrat-led House of Representatives defeated it Wednesday. The Democrats asserted that citizens with the right to choose whether to pay union dues or fees for employment only have a right to a lower standard of living and lower wages; that the very idea of a right to work is driven by radical ideology. Clever? Yes. Correct? You decide.

My perspective is that of someone who is north of three score in age, politically Independent, having been registered as a Democrat for many years. I've lived in New England for more than 30 years and have lived or spent large amounts of time in all other regions of this country.

Do you remember when there was a Digital Equipment Company (DEC) facility in just about every other town in southern New Hampshire? Do you remember when Raytheon and Cisco employed lots of folks here? Do you remember Hadco/Sanmina? These and other companies (employers of large numbers of folks, paying really good wages) are all gone from here. What has taken their place here in the last 10 to 15 years? How do folks make similarly good wages as were made with those employers?

Twenty-four states have right-to-work laws. What kind of economic activity has been occurring in those over the same time we have seen so many companies leave? Can you say BMW and Boeing in South Carolina? KIA in Georgia? Mercedes-Benz, Hyundai, Honda and AirBus in Alabama? Honda in Mississippi? Toyota in Texas and Tennessee? Do you believe that anyone working there has accepted a "lower standard of living" by taking those jobs?

In a June 12, 2012, article about 22,000 people applying for about 900 new jobs at an Alabama Hyundai plant, it was noted that the average salary at Alabama's three auto assembly plants "tops $54,400, according to data from the Center for Business and Economic Research at the University of Alabama," which contrasted with the "overall annual average wage in Alabama (which) is $34,600."

And what was one of the major reasons these manufacturer's moved to these states? Right-to-work laws. Workers could choose whether to join the UAW or other union, whether to pay dues or fees; they would not be forced to give up their right to choose what they wanted to do.

Since DEC, Cisco, et al, left New Hampshire, what companies have moved in here offering large numbers of jobs at 160 percent of the average income? Who? Where? How about anywhere in New England?

Now please don't tell me that you really don't want any such manufacturing jobs to come here; please don't say that you don't want folks to be able to make 160 percent of the average wage just because they would work in a large manufacturing plant. Who would not like to get a slice of the kind of economic pie those other states got?

And what company is going to move into any New England state knowing that their employees will be forced to join a union or pay fees if their workforce has unions? Who?

So, what are the objections to right-to-work laws all about, then? Money and politics. Unions contribute large amounts of cash to the Democratic Party, which uses that in its efforts to reelect Democratic candidates to political office. Unions are a major contributor to the Democratic Party, and Democratic elected officials in turn "scratch the unions' back" while in office. That makes a nice team.

Unions have indeed played a very positive role in labor relations in the United States over the past century. But should you be forced to join one or to contribute to one because the company where you want to work is unionized? Should you not have the right, in a free society, to choose whether to join or to contribute? Since union dues and fees go to the Democratic Party war chest, should you not have the right to decide whether to contribute to that party?

I believe that the citizens of this great state can see beyond the doublespeak of Democratic Party opposition. Do you actually believe that having the right to choose is giving up your rights? When Democrats say that wanting a right to work is driven by radical ideology, that it will destroy middle-class values, do you actually believe those claims?

When one has no substance to one's argument, then one resorts to the kind of baloney that the Democratic Party is dishing out. Does real economic opportunity and growth, as seen over the past 20 years in these states with right-to-work laws, mean more to you than keeping Democrats in power means to you?

Now, those are important facts. The denial of your right to work is in fact the one thing guaranteeing you "the right" to a lower standard of living, a "right" to lower wages, a "right" to miss out on a big economic pie, a "right" to being forced to contribute to the Democratic Party.

Which right is more important to you?

Charles Grubbs is a software engineer in Manchester.

The Spin Doctors Have Arrived

By Representative Joe Pitre

Posted Foster’s, 6 May , 2012

Let us take a look at Mr. Mark Fernald’s claim in his recent Commentary in Fosters. He claims that inflation was at 10%. Beginning in 2006 inflation was at 2.4%, 2007-4.1%, 2008-.1%, 2009- 2.7%, 2010- 1.5% and in 2011 inflation was a neat 1.5%.

Sorry Mr. Fernald; the facts do not support your claim of 10% inflation at any time of the period in question. Are you challenging the fact that Democrats did not leave an $895 to $1 billion deficit? Facts are facts; those are the numbers! New Hampshire cannot have a non-balanced budget. The $17 million surplus! Hmm… Then why were the sale of State properties(proposed) in the amount of approximately $70 million part of balancing the State budget in 2010/11. Please, fact check that, Sir.

Fact: the 2008/09 budget was $9.3 billion. The 2010/11 budget was $11.5 billion, a nearly 20% increase in one biennium alone. The Republican 2012/13 budget of $10.2 billion was a responsible budget expected by voters. Don’t forget the hundred or so taxes and fees your party implemented and some so radical (campground tax etc.), that made us last in the nation by charging the highest business taxes and fleecing companies with the Business Profits and Business Enterprise Taxes.

Your claim of throwing peoples under the bus must have been occurring during the 2008/09 biennium. Although possibly premature, letting dead people (since 1983) and others collect questionable benefits because a Democrat administration is steadfast in giving away working people’s money is quite disturbing.

You and the Democrat Party’s willingness to give away hard earned working people’s money are disingenuous. The 2010 census revealed our twenty to forty year olds are leaving the State and helping make New Hampshire the third grayest State in the nation. This will not sustain our economy well and encourages losing our valuable brain trust.

I look forward to the 6 November election and trust the electorate made a wise choice in the 2010 rejection of the Democrat tax and spend philosophy.

Reply to Officer Stanley 10 June 2011

Officer Stanley: In case you missed my positions, which are embedded in fact (see joepitre.com for relevant links), I suggest you study the issues and focus on the facts of the Democrat 2010-2011($11.5 billion) budget as compared to the 2008-2009 ($9.3billion) budget. There was an increase of 24% in spending and Governor Lynch campaigned on a 70 million dollar surplus, which in fact, by his proposed 2012-2013 revealed a $691 million to $1 billion deficit. New Hampshire has the highest corporate tax rate in the country. New Hampshire has the highest property tax rate as measured by percentage of income. Our electric rates are among the highest in the country. Are we going to be able attract companies to move here with good paying jobs to sustain a robust economy with these facts?

I am an advocate of a strong business climate for our communities. This cannot be accomplished if our 20 to 40 year old citizens are leaving our state. (2010 census). Farmington has been trying to expand the local economy without much success for 32 years. I believe you are on that committee. As your representative (I represent all the citizens of Strafford District 3 and yes, even Democrats and undeclared citizens) I would look forward to working with you on this and other issues.

I am not a “nanny state” advocate. Personally, I have helped care for my elderly relatives with the help of a great organization, the visiting nurses (VNA), which I attempted (in fact, check the minutes) to increase the VNA budget at the Strafford County Delegation meeting. I believe in a hand up, not a hand out. I do not want to be dependent on government and I believe, other citizens should be self-reliant.

Your Democrat policies have crippled the economy (record number of foreclosure rate of homes in Strafford County). The number of working folk in New Hampshire is significantly less (see U3 and U6 estimated unemployment rates) and we have no measure of the underemployed.

I know you or your representative was not at the polls Tuesday. How can we know your positions if you cannot take the time to state what you stand for?

Tried and Failed - 28 May 2011

Hi ex Representative Perry. Remember me? I am over in Concord to repair the damage and stop the bleeding of the wounds you helped inflict. What about the $70 million dollar surplus that has turned into a billion dollar deficit. Senate Bill 500 inadvertently releasing dangerous criminals to the streets to only victimize more law abiding citizens.

HB 595, a homeschooling rights bill, has been retained in the House Education Committee so that we may define the rights of over 5113 homeschoolers in this state. The NH Department of Education is 76% funded by Washington and have adopted many failed ideas like No Child Left Behind & Common Core. Who do you think they are beholden? Remember De Tocqueville? He said: “The American Republic will endure, until politicians realize they can bribe the people with their own money.” Don’t you think it would be appropriate to get the money back we send to Washington?

HB 542 is also an excellent bill for parents to defend their values and what is being taught to their children (they are not the government’s children). A school in New Hampshire recently experienced a controversy over the use of a personal finance textbook, “Nickel and Dime”. This book had many pornographic phrases which were objectionable to some parents. This bill allows parents to use discretion and give parents an alternative and choice in their child’s curriculum.

Ex Representative Perry, your own Democrat Governor is ready to downshift $150 million dollars to cities and towns and slated many layoffs of state workers. Are you going to raise 100 more taxes and fees?

Your vision of a nanny state was rejected last November. Please vote Republican, Honey Putterbaugh in the special election on June 7.

OP/ED FOSTER'S DAILY DEMOCRAT

A FLORIDA TRAGEDY

link to NY Times Article (here)

How much has Obama learned?

Thursday, March 29, 2012

Discuss this Editorial - 11 comments

In July 2009, a newly-minted President Barack Obama showed no compunction about jumping into the national fray over the arrest of Harvard University professor Henry Louis Gates, Jr., by a Cambridge police officer.

Obama was quick to find the white officer guilty of wrongly arresting a black professor. To make amends he later held a "Beer Summit" with Gates and Officer James Crowley.

Obama eventually said he regretted his comments and hoped the situation could become a "teachable moment."

Fast forward to 2012 and the death in February of a 17-year-old black teen, Tayvon Martin.

"I'm the head of the executive branch, and the attorney general reports to me," Obama told The New York Times. "So I've got to be careful about my statements to make sure that we're not impairing any investigation that's taking place right now."

Foster's Daily Democrat would like to think the president's on-the-job training has paid off since he embarrassed himself in 2009. But we are not sure.

Martin, a black, was allegedly shot and killed by George Zimmermann, a Hispanic. Given the racial difference between the two cases, it is hard not to believe something more may have motivated the president's calm demeanor when talking to The Times.

One reason for this belief is Obama's apparent failure to make the Martin killing a "teachable moment."

As furor in the black community has risen, along with calls for Zimmerman's arrest, black activists Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton (of Tawana Brawley false rape case fame) have descended on Sanford, Fla., where the killing took place.

Meanwhile Zimmerman has gone into hiding for fear of his life. All this public anger and fear offers President Obama an ideal opportunity for a teachable moment. Rather than sit back and watch potential violence ferment, he should seize the opportunity to call for calm, to promise justice for all concerned.

Such lack of action on behalf of the president raises doubts about how much a now more experienced President Obama has really learned since taking office in 2009.

11 COMMENTS

11th post----------------------------------------------let's get real here

Lisa - you most definitely have jumped to conclusion over the Trayvon

Martin case...no one knows what happened...if you want to believe (and the

evidence proves it) that Zimmerman murdered this kid, it doesn't make the

law flawed...in any case, "stand your ground" or the Castle Doctrine is not

just about guns...I can beat someone to death in self defense and be

protected by these laws...it's also important to understand that VT has some

of the most liberal gun laws in the country and we never hear about how

wild, wild west it is over there...

State Requirements

Rifles and Shotguns

- Permit to purchase rifles and shotguns? No.

- Registration of rifles and shotguns? No.

- Licensing of owners of rifles and shotguns? No.

- Permit to carry rifles and shotguns? No.

Handguns

- Permit to purchase handgun? No.

- Registration of handguns? No.

- Licensing of owners of handguns? No.

- Permit to carry handguns? No.

Other Requirements

- Is there a State waiting period? No.

- Is there a FBI *NICS check for firearm transactions? No. State system.

- Permit to carry a concealed weapon required? No.

-- Posted by Will Iams on Sun, Apr 1, 2012, 6:00 pm EST

Report this comment for abuse

10th post--------------------------------------------- Our New Hampshire

Consttution

Part First [Art.] 10. [Right of Revolution.] Government being instituted for

the common benefit, protection, and security, of the whole community, and

not for the private interest or emolument of any one man, family, or class

of men; therefore, whenever the ends of government are perverted, and public

liberty manifestly endangered, and all other means of redress are

ineffectual, the people may, and of right ought to reform the old, or

establish a new government. The doctrine of nonresistance against arbitrary

power, and oppression, is absurd, slavish, and destructive of the good and

happiness of mankind.

June 2, 1784

-- Posted by JOE PITRE on Sun, Apr 1, 2012, 12:23 pm EST

Report this comment for abuse

9th post---------------------------------------------------------

Eloquent Jefferson!

The people cannot be all, and always, well informed. The part which is

wrong will be discontented, in proportion to the importance of the facts

they misconceive. If they remain quiet under such misconceptions,

it is lethargy, the forerunner of death to the public liberty. ...

And what country can preserve its liberties, if its rulers are not

warned from time to time, that this people preserve the spirit of

resistance? Let them take arms. The remedy is to set them right as

to the facts, pardon and pacify them. What signify a few lives lost

in a century or two? The tree of liberty must be refreshed from

time to time, with the blood of patriots and tyrants.

It is its natural manure."

Joe Pitre

-- Posted by JOE PITRE on Sun, Apr 1, 2012, 11:55 am EST

Report this comment for abuse

8th post-------------------------------------------------------------------

True Believers?

"Please do your own thinking and respect those who think and act for

themselves."

As a gun owner, "Joe Pete" won't find anything in my writing to oppose gun

ownership or the rights of citizens under the Second Amendment. That said, I

do find it difficult to respect those slackers in our legislature who have

allowed outside lobby groups such as ALEC and NRA to step in and guide their

hand when composing legislation for the people of New Hampshire. How is

doing that "thinking for yourself"?

-- Posted by Rick Littlefield on Sat, Mar 31, 2012, 10:52 am EST

Report this comment for abuse

7th

post-----------------------------------------------------------------------fantasy

world

I would contend that those who believe that "our constitutions are very

clear that you have a right to bear arms" are "living in a fantasy world" of

their own.

I'm sure I am not alone in believing that when our Founders wrote that "A

well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the

right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed." they did

not intend this to be a guarantee that anyone had the right to carry

concealed weapons at any and all times.

Tell me what "well regulated militia" George Zimmerman was participating in

when he shot Trayvon Martin.

-- Posted by estelle HRABAK.ESTELLE on Sat, Mar 31, 2012, 12:12 am EST

Report this comment for abuse

6th post-------------------------------------------------------------

Guns and Roses

I hope getting Joe Pete's gun is more difficult than getting his goat!

-- Posted by Rick Littlefield on Fri, Mar 30, 2012, 6:05 pm EST

Report this comment for abuse

5th post----------------------------------------------------------------

RE: All About Guns

Mr. Littlefield,

Our Constitutions are very clear that you have a right to bear arms. Natural

law of being able to defend oneself, your property and your family should

not even be questioned.

I challenge you Mr. Littlefield to have the courage to be a candidate for

state representative and overturn the right to stand your ground. Should

responsible people cut and run? I respect the right of law abiding

responsible citizens to legally carry a weapon for protection.

Of course, you would be fighting against the Constitutions and that is

bothersome. I am fearful of people like you who live in a fantasy world.

Please do your own thinking and respect those who think and act for

themselves. Many souls prior to WWII were lost because they relied on

someone else for their well being. Welcome to the real world Mr.

Littlefield.

-- Posted by JOE PITRE on Fri, Mar 30, 2012, 2:03 pm EST

Report this comment for abuse

4th post----------------------------------------------------- RE: All

About Guns