AROUND NEW HAMPSHIRE
1. State Revenues Up
State revenues up $3.5 million in August
by Garry Rayno, unionleader.com, September 2, 2015
CONCORD — A strong tourism season and booming home sales helped fill the state’s coffers in August, with revenues 3.1 percent more than a year ago.
The state took in $116.2 million compared to $112.7 million last August and is $13.9 million above last year’s figures for the first two months of the 2016 fiscal year.
A revenue plan for the year has not been developed without an approved budget. Instead, state government is operating under a six-month continuing resolution after Gov. Maggie Hassan vetoed the $11.35 billion budget approved by Republican lawmakers.
The rooms and meals tax produced $32.5 million for the month, up $2.6 million from a year ago, while the tobacco tax produced $22 million, down $400,000.
The hot real estate market produced $15.2 million, up $3.2 million over last year, while business taxes produced $12.2 million, up $1.7 million.
Business tax cuts – the biggest issues separating Hassan and GOP legislative leaders – are not included in August revenue reports because the rate reduction would not begin until the 2017 fiscal year.
State budget officials note that July and August are not historically indicative of business tax trends for the fiscal year and that September and October figures are better barometers.
For the first two months of the fiscal year, business tax revenues are $200,000 above last year, at $28.2 million.
Although tourism is up this summer, liquor revenue is down from a year ago, returning $12.6 million compared to $14.6 million.
Liquor commission officials note that last year, Labor Day weekend sales occurred in August, while this year they will be in September.
Lottery sales are nearly identical to last year at $6.3 million, as is the beer tax.
The communications tax is down $400,000 from a year ago, at $4.7 million.
Lawmakers return to Concord Sept. 16 to act on Hassan’s vetoes, including the two budget bills.
The state took in $116.2 million compared to $112.7 million last August and is $13.9 million above last year’s figures for the first two months of the 2016 fiscal year.
A revenue plan for the year has not been developed without an approved budget. Instead, state government is operating under a six-month continuing resolution after Gov. Maggie Hassan vetoed the $11.35 billion budget approved by Republican lawmakers.
The rooms and meals tax produced $32.5 million for the month, up $2.6 million from a year ago, while the tobacco tax produced $22 million, down $400,000.
The hot real estate market produced $15.2 million, up $3.2 million over last year, while business taxes produced $12.2 million, up $1.7 million.
Business tax cuts – the biggest issues separating Hassan and GOP legislative leaders – are not included in August revenue reports because the rate reduction would not begin until the 2017 fiscal year.
State budget officials note that July and August are not historically indicative of business tax trends for the fiscal year and that September and October figures are better barometers.
For the first two months of the fiscal year, business tax revenues are $200,000 above last year, at $28.2 million.
Although tourism is up this summer, liquor revenue is down from a year ago, returning $12.6 million compared to $14.6 million.
Liquor commission officials note that last year, Labor Day weekend sales occurred in August, while this year they will be in September.
Lottery sales are nearly identical to last year at $6.3 million, as is the beer tax.
The communications tax is down $400,000 from a year ago, at $4.7 million.
Lawmakers return to Concord Sept. 16 to act on Hassan’s vetoes, including the two budget bills.
2. "No" Is Not a Counteroffer
Don’t make Concord like Washington, D.C.
by Sen. Andrew Hosmer, thecitizen.villagesoup.com, September 1, 2015
With special interests like the Koch Brothers pouring millions of dollars into our state to try to prolong the budget gridlock, outside forces seem bent on turning New Hampshire into Washington, D.C.
Combine massive outside spending with hyper-partisan attacks on Governor Hassan’s fiscally responsible leadership, and it’s easy to grow disheartened with the level of discourse in Concord these days.
While it may be in the best political interest of some national organizations to keep us at a stalemate, we cannot let Concord be turned into Washington. We need to serve the people of New Hampshire. They sent us to Concord to solve problems – and that’s exactly what we must do.
Last month, Gov. Hassan presented a fiscally responsible compromise budget proposal that sought to address the concerns of both parties.
The governor’s proposal represents a true compromise. It addresses Republicans’ top concern – business tax cuts – while offsetting those tax cuts to preserve our ability to invest in critical economic priorities like combating the heroin crisis, holding down the cost of college tuition, maintaining our roads and bridges, and ensuring access to quality, affordable health coverage.
Establishing and maintaining that delicate balance is imperative. Unfortunately, we are still waiting for a meaningful counteroffer, not just “No.”
As my Democratic colleagues have made clear throughout the budget process, we believe that any business tax cuts must be paid for in order to protect the state’s long-term fiscal outlook and ability to support critical economic priorities. Ironically, the unpaid tax cuts Republicans are demanding are by their own admission more symbolic than substantive.
I appreciate Republicans’ offer to fund the state employee’s contract and I believe it’s an important step toward compromise, but this alone does not resolve our primary concern with the state budget.
We simply cannot support a shortsighted budget that would undermine our ability to invest in critical economic priorities both now and for years to come.
Granite Staters deserve better and future generations deserve better.
To pass a compromise budget plan that truly meets the needs of New Hampshire’s people, businesses, and economy, both sides must not imitate the narrow-minded political battles played out each day in Washington. True compromise requires both sides to negotiate in good faith and elevate the needs of our state above toxic partisan politics.
The Koch-funded budget stalemate has gone on long enough.
Andrew Hosmer is serving his second term as the State Senator from District 7 serving Andover, Belmont, Boscawen, Canterbury, Franklin, Gilford, Northfield, Salisbury, Webster and his home town of Laconia.
3. Protecting Meals on Wheels
Governor Hassan And Senator Shaheen Call For Full Funding Of Meals On Wheels
from NH Labor News, nhlabornews.com, September 2, 2015
(SALEM, NH) – New Hampshire Governor Maggie Hassan and U.S. Senator Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH) today called for bipartisan support for full funding of the state’s Meals on Wheels Program, which faces inadequate funding at the federal level and is threatened by unpaid-for corporate tax cuts at the state level. The two participated in a roundtable discussion about the effects of inadequate funding with staff, volunteers and clients of the Rockingham County Meals on Wheels Program at the Ingram Senior Center in Salem this afternoon.
“Our older citizens have made significant contributions to our communities, our economy, and our high quality of life, and we must maintain our commitment to providing the support that they deserve in order to maximize their ability to continue engagement in our society and economy,” Governor Hassan said. “I have presented a fiscally responsible, compromise budget proposal that protects our ability to support critical priorities like Meals on Wheels now and into the future, and I continue to urge Republicans in the legislature to negotiate in good faith and offer a true counter-proposal that addresses the central issue of our disagreement – unpaid-for corporate tax cuts that create a $90 million hole in future budgets – so that we can reach a fiscally responsible, bipartisan budget agreement as soon as possible.”
“In New Hampshire, Meals on Wheels delivers food to more than 30,000 seniors, and the demand is only growing, with our state’s over-65 population expected to nearly double by the end of the decade,” said Shaheen. “Meals on Wheels can deliver nutritious meals to a senior for an entire year for less than it would cost for that senior to spend one day in the hospital, potentially saving us billions in Medicare and Medicaid costs. We need bipartisan cooperation in Washington and Concord to keep this program funded and benefiting our seniors. I’m asking my Republican colleagues in the Senate to work with Democrats to adequately fund Meals on Wheels moving forward.”
In June, Governor Hassan vetoed the Republican budget because it was unbalanced and fiscally irresponsible, including unpaid-for business tax cuts that would create a $90 million hole in future budgets at the expense of critical priorities like Meals on Wheels. The Governor has since presented a fiscally responsible compromise budget proposal that provides Republican legislators with what they have indicated is their highest priority – cutting corporate taxes – in a faster timeframe while addressing concerns about long-term fiscal responsibility and protecting our ability to support critical economic priorities.
In the United States Senate, nearly every Republican Senator voted for a budget that is going to result in drastic cuts to funding for Meals on Wheels over the next decade. In the Senate Appropriations Committee, the Labor-Health-Education Appropriations Bill for Fiscal Year 2016 fails to provide enough funding to Meals on Wheels’ growing needs in New Hampshire and across the country. Shaheen strongly opposed the Republican budget as well as the Appropriations bill.
4. Housing Sales Jump
Report: NH home sales jump 25% in July
State led New England in transaction increase
by NHBR staff, nhbr.com, September 2, 2015
New Hampshire home sales skyrocketed by 25 percent in July – the fastest year-over-year growth in New England – according to a monthly report by RE/MAX Intergra.
The realty firm said there were 2,407 home sales in July compared to 1,925 a year earlier. In addition, median price rose to $240,000 from $225,000 – a 6.7 percent increase.
Pending sales, however, were down 0.9 percent year-over-year, from 1,234 a year ago this July’s 1,223.
Meanwhile, inventory increased from 16,016 a year ago to this July’s 16,308, the company reported. The average number of days a property stays on the market before a sale fell by 10, from 82 a year ago to 72.
Meanwhile, for the region, year-over-year sales increased by 17.8 percent RE/MAX Integra reported.
In Connecticut, the number of total transactions rose 16.1 percent. Massachusetts showed an increase of 17.9 percent. Maine transactions increased 19.9 percent in total transactions year-over-year. Rhode Island transactions rose 13.5 percent, Vermont home transactions rose 10.7 percent.
5. Money, Money, Money: Dark Money
Super PACS Dominate Early Campaign Advertising in N.H.
by Brian Wallstin, nhpr.org, September 2, 2015
If you have any lingering doubt that Super PACs will play an outsized role in the New Hampshire primary, consider this: More than three quarters of the television advertising aimed at first-in-the-nation primary voters this year has been reserved not by candidates, but by independent political groups.
As of August 31, nearly $15 million in primary-related advertising has aired or been reserved through primary day (tentatively scheduled for Feb. 9), according to documents filed online with the Federal Communications Commission by network broadcasters in New Hampshire and Boston. (Cable stations are not required to post their political ad files online.)
Super PACs, which are prohibited by federal regulations from coordinating their messages with candidates, account for more than $11.4 million of that commitment.
Republicans leaning hard on Super PACs
A few ads ought to be familiar.
Two Super PACs that support Republican Ohio Gov. John Kasich – running second behind Donald Trump in a recent New Hampshire poll - have spent $2.6 million and aired close to 1,000 commercials since he announced his candidacy in July.
Kasich’s campaign, meanwhile, has spent nothing on television ads in New Hampshire.
Republican Chris Christie’s campaign has spent $142,250 on TV ads – a fraction of the $2.2 million shelled out so far by America Leads, the Super PAC backing the New Jersey governor’s White House bid. The group has ads scheduled through September.
CREDIT SARA PLOURDE / NHPR
Republican Jeb Bush has struggled on the trail and in polls, but a Super PAC backing the former Florida governor is hoping that will change once more potential voters tune into the race.
That group, Right to Rise USA, will launch its first ads supporting Bush on September 15. So far, the group – which has announced plans to spend more than $11 million in New Hampshire – has reserved time for some 1,500 spots through December 28, at an estimated cost of about $3.9 million.
Florida Sen. Marco Rubio, the first candidate to book ad time in New Hampshire, has run a low-key campaign and has yet to appear on the air. But both the Republican candidate and a Super PAC supporting him expect he'll be around in the end.
According to FCC files, Rubio has reserved time for 1,383 ads, starting in November, right up through Feb. 9, at a cost of nearly $1.9 million, while the Super PAC, Conservative Solutions, has reserved $2 million in ad time for the final month of the campaign alone.
Hillary Clinton is the only Democratic candidate who has advertised in New Hampshire. Her campaign, which aired it first ad in early August, has reserved $1.4 million in time through the end of the year.
A Super PAC allied with her campaign, Priorities USA, helped re-elect President Obama in 2012, but has yet to make any ad buys in New Hampshire or other early voting states.
Banner year ahead for TV advertising
2016 is expected to be a record year for political advertising, thanks to Super PACs, which can raise and spend unlimited amounts for so-called independent expenditures. Estimates put the amount of political ad spending on broadcast television stations, which account for 80 to 90 percent of all political advertising, at $3.5 billion to 4.4 billion.
As in past election years, WMUR-TV is expected to be the favorite vehicle of primary-related advertising in New Hampshire. More than 70 percent of the ad time that has been reserved so far – some $11 million worth - has been with the Manchester-based station.
Meanwhile, WBIN, which launched in late 2011, appears to hold little appeal for political advertisers. The station has reserved less than $150,000 in ad time so far.
With the primary still five months away, that could change, of course.
To date, only nine of 22 declared candidates have been backed by ads. But Super PACs could allow lesser-funded campaigns to remain in the race longer, so who's around to advertise as Primary Day approaches is hard to predict.
6. Voting Against NH's Environment
Kelly Ayotte’s Actions Speak Louder Than Her Empty Words On Protecting NH’s Iconic Environment & Natural Resources
by Ajacobs, nhdp.org, September 1, 2015
Ayotte Supports GOP Budget That Cuts From The Land and Water Conservation Fund, Refuses To Co-Sponsor Bill To Protect Conservation Funding
Concord, N.H. – When it comes to protecting New Hampshire’s iconic environment and natural resources, Kelly Ayotte’s actions speak far louder than her empty words (and tweets).
While Ayotte claims to support the Land and Water
“From voting to protect subsidies for the biggest oil companies to cutting funding for critical conservation efforts, it’s no surprise that Kelly Ayotte has a lifetime score of 23% on the League of Conservation Voters scorecard,” said New Hampshire Democratic Party Chair Ray Buckley. “Ayotte’s desperate attempts to ‘greenwash’ her record as she faces a vulnerable re-election effort won’t work, and Granite Staters will elect a Senator in November 2016 who represents New Hampshire’s interests, not those of big oil.”
BACKGROUND
Senate Appropriations Interior, Environment And Related Agencies FY 2016 Appropriations Bill Cut Funding For The LWCF Below FY 2015 Levels. “Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF). This bill provides $292 million for land acquisition, conservation easements and state assistance grants, which is $14 million below the fiscal year 2015 enacted level and $108 million below the President’s requested level. LWCF is critical for improving recreational access to our federal land, protecting iconic landscapes, and providing farmers and ranchers with easements that allow them and their families to continue working their lands without pressure to develop it.” [Senate Committee on Appropriations, Press Release, 6/18/15]
- Ayotte Voted For Final Republican Senate Budget For FY 2016. [S.Con.Res. 11, Vote 171, 5/5/15]
Ayotte Was Not A Co-Sponsor Of Legislation That Would Provide Full, Dedicated And Permeant Funding To The LWCF To Combat A Lengthy History Of Funding Being Siphoned Away. As of September 1, 2015, Ayotte was not a co-sponsor of S. 890, which according to the LWCF Coalition would not only “permanently reauthorize LWCF, but provide for full, dedicated and permanent funding of the program as well. This would stop LWCF’s funding from being siphoned off each year in the appropriations process for other, unknown and unaccountable purposes. In the 50-year history of LWCF, over $18 billion intended for LWCF has been lost to the General Treasury this way.” [LWCF Coalition, Accessed 9/1/15; S. 890, Accessed 9/1/15]
- LWCF Coalition: S. 890 Would “Finally Fulfill LWCF’s True Promise To The American People.” Consistent, predictable funding at the level Congress deemed necessary in 1978 (not even indexed for inflation!) would finally fulfill LWCF’s true promise to the American people.” [LWCF Coalition, Accessed 9/1/15]
7. The Heat Must Be Interfering with the Antennas on their TinFoil Hats
by William Tucker, miascellanyblue.com, September 1, 2015
Not since former state Rep. Stella Tremblay shocked Granite Staters by declaring she believed the Boston Marathon bombing was a false flag operation perpetrated by the federal government (a story first reported andadvanced on Miscellany Blue) have New Hampshire lawmakers embraced so many irrational conspiracy theories.
A quick perusal of this afternoon’s social media postings finds lawmakers wondering if the on-air murder of two television journalists in Virginia was a hoax to build support for gun control initiatives, questioning whether the 9/11 attack was an inside job and accusing the president of being a secret Muslim who is allowing Iran to obtain nuclear weapons as payback for Muslim countries funding his political campaigns.
On Virginia shooting: ‘So was this shooting really a hoax?’
Rep. David Murotake (R-Nashua) posted a link on his Facebook page that claims last week’s shooting of two reporters in Virginia was a “staged event” likely funded by “billionaire ‘philanthropists’ who back aggressive gun control initiatives.”
“The latest reporter shooting hoax in Virginia is getting so easily torn apart by the conspiracy research community,” the DC Clothesline article explains, “that the media’s emotional staging of actors is becoming absurd.”
“Hmmm… So was this shooting really a hoax?” asked Murotake. “I don’t think I have seen anything on this on any [mainstream media] yet…” he added. Five hours later, when Murotake was criticised for posting the story, he added a qualification: “You find all kinds of stories on the blogosphere… Not all are true…”
On 9/11 attacks: ‘We still do not have an answer…’
Rep. Max Abramson (R-Seabrook) is no stranger to controversy. The one-term Free Stater, who was bounced from the Criminal Justice Committee after House leadership learned of his 2012 felony conviction, makes frequent allegations of police and judicial misconduct.
Yesterday, Abramson posted a link to a 9/11 Truther video that disputes the notion that the collapse of New York’s Twin Towers and adjacent buildings was caused by Al-Qaeda terrorists crashing two airliners into the towers.
“We still do not have an answer from anyone for why Building 7 came down,” Abramson wrote on Facebook. “It was not struck by a plane nor anything else. There were only a few trash can sized fires reported in the building, and only a few broken windows. At first, we were told that the building had been demolished. Then the official story changed only a few days later.”
On Pres. Obama: ‘you’re dealing with a Muslim duck’
And then there’s former Rep. Lee Quandt (R-Exeter), the maverick Republican who battled then-Speaker Bill O’Brien (whom he referred to as Bully O’Brien) before losing his reelection bid in 2012.
Quandt took to his blog last week-end to assert U.S. supporters of the Iran nuclear agreement are all traitors. The president, Quandt explained, is a secret Muslim who is letting Iran obtain nuclear weapons because “Muslim countries” financed his political campaigns.
“When Obama claims he isn’t a Muslim; if it walks like a duck and quacks, guess what, you’re dealing with a Muslim duck…” Quandt wrote. “Money is a wonderful thing,” he added, “and since Obama cannot, or would not, divulge where much of his campaign donations came from so it is easily speculatable that it came from Muslim Countries and he is beholding to them. [sic]”
AND NATIONALLY
8. The Clinton Substance Abuse Prevention Plan
Clinton unveils $10 billion, 10-year anti-drug abuse, treatment initiative
by John DiStaso, wmur.com, September 1, 2015
MANCHESTER, N.H. —Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton Tuesday night is unveiling a $10 billion, 10-year initiative targeting what her campaign is calling “America’s deadly epidemic of drug and alcohol addiction.”
WMUR is the first news organization in the nation to obtain details of the plan.
Clinton has said that she first learned about the seriousness and depth of the substance abuse problem in New Hampshire and nationally by speaking with Granite Staters in Keene early in her campaign. She returned to Keene in early August to hold a forum on the issue and promised a detailed plan would soon be issued.
“I have to confess, I was surprised,” she said at the time. “I did not expect that I would hear about drug abuse and substance abuse and other such challenges everywhere I went.”
The Clinton plan rolled out Tuesday night calls for establishing a $7.5 billion fund to support new federal-state partnerships to comprehensively address substandce abuse. It also adds $2.5 billion to the existing Substance Abuse Prevention and Treatment Block Grant program, a 15 percent increase.
The Clinton campaign says in a plan outline obtained by WMUR that nearly 23 million Americans suffer from substance abuse disorders, “yet only about one in 10 receive treatment.”
The federal-state partnership would require states to formulate plans for meeting broad national anti-abuse goals in order to receive federal funding. States that meet the goals in their plans can receive $4 of federal support for each $1 they commit.
The goals that must be met in the state partnership programs focus on prevention, treatment and recovery, ensuring first responders have access to naloxone, controlled drug abuse training for prescribers, and criminal justice reform.
Such reforms would include “alternatives to incarceration for low-level and nonviolent drug offenses,” and treatment programs that would help those affected to get “back on their feet.”
“Clinton also believes we should foster more collaboration between our public health and criminal justice systems before, during, and after a person is released from prison, to ensure continuity of care for those who suffer from substance use disorders and are arrested and incarcerated,” her plan says.
According to the plan outline, increasing the federal block grant program would expand inpatient and outpatient care options.
Federal regulations would be changed to allow nurse practitioners and physician assistants to prescribe medications for the treatment of opioid additions.
Among several other key federal adjustments called for in the plan is a directive to the Justice Department to issue guidance prioritizing treatment over incarceration for non-violent and low level drug offenders.
“Significant savings to the federal criminal justice system” by ending “mass incarceration” will partially fund the initiative, Clinton says.
“Drug and alcohol addiction is a national epidemic and our nation is failing to address it,” Clinton’s plan says. “And we cannot arrest and incarcerate our way out of it.
“We need a new approach to tackling this complex challenge. The costs to our nation of not doing so are huge: reduced productivity, overloaded health care and criminal justice systems, and hundreds of thousands of human lives lost.”
9. If We Let It Happen
http://www.washingtonmonthly.
Our Democracy is Only Rigged if We Let it Be
by Nancy LeTourneau, washingtonmonthly.com, August 29, 2015
Cass Sunstein has written an important rejoinder to the idea that our democracy is rigged.
Here’s the paradox: The U.S. is in a period of extraordinary reform, and many recent changes have been made to help those against whom the system is supposedly rigged.
Without mentioning the Obama administration specifically, he lists some of the reforms we’ve seen over the last seven years:
* Obamacare
* Dodd-Frank (including the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau)
* The Credit Card Accountability Responsibility and Disclosure Act
* The Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act
* Repeal of “Don’t Ask/Don’t Tell”
* Aggressive fuel economy standards for cars and trucks
* EPA rules on mercury and greenhouse gas emissions
* Increased taxes on wealthy Americans
* American Recovery and Reinvestment Act
* Dodd-Frank (including the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau)
* The Credit Card Accountability Responsibility and Disclosure Act
* The Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act
* Repeal of “Don’t Ask/Don’t Tell”
* Aggressive fuel economy standards for cars and trucks
* EPA rules on mercury and greenhouse gas emissions
* Increased taxes on wealthy Americans
* American Recovery and Reinvestment Act
And then he concludes:
A rigged system couldn’t have produced such a range of reforms, many of them aggressively opposed by well-funded private interests.
On why so many people resonate with the idea that the system is rigged, here’s what he has to say:
One answer is that whenever you lose, it’s tempting to blame the system, and concentrated wealth, rather than to acknowledge the existence of disagreement and debate. People on the left want Congress to enact many other reforms, including a significant increase in the federal minimum wage, a far more progressive income tax, infrastructure improvements and national legislation to combat climate change.
But on these and other issues, rigging doesn’t adequately explain Congress’s inaction. The major obstacle is political polarization. Americans are divided, and so are their representatives. In a democracy with checks and balances, large-scale reforms are difficult to achieve without some consensus.
Neither Sunstein nor anyone else would ever deny that big money has too much influence in our democracy. But I think he makes a very important point. Assuming it is the only roadblock for further reforms becomes a kind of self-fulling prophecy. First of all, it makes the whole enterprise seem hopeless. If the system is rigged against us…why try? I believe that is the attitude of a lot of Americans who have said “a pox on both your houses” and given up on engagement. That simply ensures even more clout for big money.
But Sunstein gets to another way it undermines our political discourse. Rather than explore disagreements and debate our differences, we too often assume that our opponents are simply controlled by big money. The most obnoxious example of that I’ve seen is when immigrant rights groups accused Delores Huerta of corruption by financial interests when she urged patience about immigration reform. I suggest that you pay attention to how often that argument comes up. If you want to earn some cheap points in a debate, simply accuse your opponent of being beholden to big money. But if you have any interest in getting to the source of the disagreement and highlighting the issues, it requires a bit more curiosity and dialogue.
I believe that one of the great undercurrents happening in our politics right now is the one articulated by Marshall Ganz as the tension between private wealth and public voice. As ugly as it looks right now, that is exactly what we’re seeing on the right with the way the “base” is challenging the “establishment.”
On the left, the tension isn’t as great because we just witnessed Barack Obama lead two grassroots campaigns based predominantly on small donors. And now, Bernie Sanders is absolutely right when he says this:
The lesson to be learned is that when people stand together, and are prepared to fight back, there is nothing that can’t be accomplished.
That is exactly the same message we heard from a candidate in New Hampshireback in 2008.
Democrats, independents and Republicans who are tired of the division and distraction that has clouded Washington, who know that we can disagree without being disagreeable, who understand that, if we mobilize our voices to challenge the money and influence that stood in our way and challenge ourselves to reach for something better, there is no problem we cannot solve, there is no destiny that we cannot fulfill…
We know the battle ahead will be long. But always remember that, no matter what obstacles stand in our way, nothing can stand in the way of the power of millions of voices calling for change.
The result is that list of reforms up above. But we’ve still got a lot of work to do. The only way that happens is if we believe we can…and if we are willing talk to each other (sometimes even disagree) about how to do it.
10. It's Not "Liberty" To Force Your Religious Views on Everyone Else
We have reached the George Wallace stage of the same-sex marriage fight
by Janell Ross, washingtonpost.com, September 2, 2015
There's a long and not exactly auspicious history in this country of people resisting court orders aimed at defending the civil rights of minority groups.
On Tuesday, a Kentucky county clerk named Kim Davis created the basis for the latest chapter. Davis is refusing to issue marriage licenses to anyone so that she might avoid the task of having to issue or refuse to issue one to a gay or lesbian couple. Davis said in a statement released by Liberty Counsel, a Christian legal organization representing her, that her religious beliefs bar her from doing so.
I love my job and the people of Rowan County. ... I never imagined a day like this would come, where I would be asked to violate a central teaching of Scripture and of Jesus Himself regarding marriage. To issue a marriage license which conflicts with God's definition of marriage, with my name affixed to the certificate, would violate my conscience.
She made similar comments during a last-ditch legal bid Monday that went before the U.S. Supreme Court and failed. Davis's reasons might be principled and deeply rooted in her faith. There's no real public reason to question that or even the accuracy of her read on the Bible.
But as an elected public official, Davis's duties include issuing documents such as marriage licenses that bring with them a whole host of tax and other financial benefits and clarify procedures and rights in the event of an accident, a death or even a breakup.
Davis is free to believe whatever she would like; this is America. However, multiple courts have said she is not at liberty to impose her beliefs at work in such a way that the legal rights, options and access of others are curtailed. Of course, from Davis's point of view — and that of many Americans who agree with her, especially white evangelicals, according to a June 2014 Public Religion Research Institute poll — forcing her to issue licenses to same-sex couples impinges on her religious liberty.
And here's the thing: The real issue -- if you know something about the history of American moments like the one that Davis has brought to pass, and even if you don't — is that legally, Davis has put herself in league with men like former Alabama governor George Wallace.
Let's review a little mid-20th-century history here, shall we?
Wallace said publicly that his refusal to integrate Alabama schools, in defiance of multiple federal court orders, was a matter of personal principle, too. In fact, in 1963, Wallace expressed that in what might be the only widely known passage from a gubernatorial inauguration speech.
"In the name of the greatest people that have ever trod this earth, I draw the line in the dust and toss the gauntlet before the feet of tyranny. And I say segregation now, segregation tomorrow, segregation forever," he exclaimed.
That June, Wallace famously stood at the door of a University of Alabama building determined to physically block — or at least be seen on camera blocking — two black students and National Guard troops dispatched by the Kennedy White House.
Thus far, it seems that of the 22 Republicans and Democrats vying for the White House, only a few have dared to voice an opinion on the Davis matter. Speaking to a Boston Herald Radio on Monday, before the Supreme Court decision, Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) said:
You know, I think one way to get around the whole idea of what the Supreme Court is forcing on the states is for states just to get out of the business of giving out licenses. Alabama has already voted to do this — they’re just no longer going to give out licenses. And anybody can make a contract. And then if you want a marriage contract you go to a church. ... But I think people who do stand up and are making a stand to say that they believe in something is an important part of the American way.
Really, that's pretty consistent with what Paul said in 2010 (but has since denied) about the 1964 Civil Rights Act. It forced privately owned facilities open to the public to integrate. Paul said he didn't like the idea of federal policy overriding owner preferences. He said the public should punish those who refuse to integrate by not patronizing them.
Late Tuesday, two more GOP candidates weighed in on the matter in Kentucky. Both Carly Fiorina and Sen. Lindsey Graham (S.C.) told reporters that Davis must comply with the court orders.
During an interview with the Hugh Hewitt Show, a conservative radio program, Fiorina said this:
First, I think that we must protect religious liberties with great passion and be willing to expend a lot of political capital to do so now because it’s clear religious liberty is under assault in many, many ways. Having said that, when you are a government employee, I think you take on a different role. When you are a government employee as opposed to say, an employee of another kind of organization, then in essence, you are agreeing to act as an arm of the government. And, while I disagree with this court’s decision, their actions are clear.
Graham was also a guest on Hewitt's show and expressed similar ideas.
When contacted by The Washington Post, the campaign of Sen. Ted Cruz (R- Tex.) issued a brief statement consistent with previous remarks about the Supreme Court's June decision.
"The federal government, and by extension, the court, has no business to compel people of faith to violate their religious beliefs," Cruz spokeswoman Catherine Frazier said. "Religious liberty is a protection guaranteed under the 1st Amendment."
That kind of logic is also precisely why some people understand "religious liberty" to be the new "states' rights" — a catchphrase that sounds principled and connected with American ideals but can also be used to resist established legal change. States' rights (and its local equivalent) have in the past formed the basis of legal and public arguments for reserving the nation's best-resourced schools, neighborhoods, parks, pools and hospitals for white people. Those arguments helped keep Catholics and Jews out of public offices and certain communities, led state officials in some places to shut down all public schools rather than integrate, made it possible to impose black codes and sundown laws that made it illegal for black people to even be present in certain places in this country. And, of course, those arguments undergirded legal slavery.
The parallels between Davis and Wallace, of course, have their limits. Wallace's stand at that University of Alabama door came after years of organized and sometimes loosely coordinated efforts to ignore, evade or resist the contents of court orders and laws directing the integration of public and most private facilities open to the public. It was referred to as massive resistance. When the federal government dispatched troops to compel compliance, it said both symbolically and literally that this sort of activity would no longer be abided.
But the showdown shaping up in Kentucky should not be understood as random or isolated. Kentucky and Alabama — states notably with large white evangelical populations — have their respective histories and must also contend with the present. Right now, Alabama is busy charting new territory in the effort to resist legal same-sex marriage. This month, a state legislative committee voted for a measure that, should it reach and pass the full state Senate, could eliminate state-issued marriage licenses.
Americans can and do disagree about same-sex marriage. But in public life, equal treatment under the law ranks among the hallmarks of the American experiment. The struggle to make equality real — meaning consistent, unabridged and unconditional — remains an ongoing project.
FINALLY duo
No comments:
Post a Comment