By Live Free or Die Blog

http://newhampshire.wordpress.com/2008/08/22/under-new-management-please/

Gov. Lynch’s almost-ignored approval of the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative(RGGI) a few months back is indicative of how the cataracts have grown wildly across New Hampshire’s traditional vision of a limited and responsible government. RGGI will make energy in New Hampshire more expensive and no one can dispute that. The research shows it, even tries to write it off as a wash because the State will get increased revenue from it.

Since Lynch has condoned laundering tax money through the energy companies, in the form of increased energy prices to consumers–that happen to relate directly to how much more money ends up in the state coffers–is anyone in the press going to question this backhanded abandonment of his promise to veto a broad based tax? This is a broad based tax.

And why is a state that is currently begging for federal fuel aid like some Dickensian orphan, signed on to a program that is almost guaranteed to make that need greater each and every year?

We’re getting Lynch’d.

The democrats had two years to send us a message about their ideas on good governance, and that message appears to be pay up.

By Dave Jarvis

Fear always has a way of spreading. It moves like a plague through different markets and into social issues and security issues, all without people ever really understanding that they are being ruled by it.

Most American homeowners these days are looking toward the future with trepidation. They are concerned about energy prices, they are worried about falling home values, and most importantly they are fearful of all the negative dings mounting up on their credit reports. They are worried that their long-term financial record is being ruined by forces beyond their control, and that they are assured a life of poverty and expensive credit.

Because of this they fail to respond quickly to obvious market pressures that would otherwise convince them to sell their home and find a less expensive way to live. If they were to do so, their credit would be ruined and no one these days wants a bankruptcy, or foreclosure or loan default on their credit.

But one of the most important benefits of a market economy is the way markets signal consumers as to when it is time to change their lifestyles. Today, we see smaller vehicles on the roads because consumers responded to market signals regarding the price of oil and changed their lives accordingly.

Now economists are calling the obvious transformation in our country from SUVs to compact cars a big reason for the falling demand for oil. So, positive results are coming from the economic signals being sent through the markets when people are able to respond to those signals. Our economy becomes healthier because of it.

But a very dangerous problem still exists in the housing market, a danger that threatens the long-term prosperity of the United States. Americans are afraid to change their homes in the same way they have with their cars because the risks are much greater.

Selling their homes in this market could mean enormous losses because home values have dropped in many areas to much lower than the existing mortgages. And there really isn’t much market for home purchases because so many are stuck fighting for their current homes.

The only answer for most Americans would be to allow the banks to foreclose on their homes, or to go bankrupt or to sell their homes for well under their mortgage value and continue to pay a mortgage for a home they no longer own. In any of these cases, the fear of a lifetime of bad credit and the financial problems that go with it is tangible.

Meanwhile, investors in mortgages are well aware of both the fears of existing homeowners and of their increasing inability to meet their mortgage obligations in an environment of high energy prices, diminishing credit availability, and the increasing weakness in the job market. So even existing mortgages are risky investments because of the looming presence of consumer fears.

The effects on the credit markets are being felt everywhere: in the stock markets, in the currency markets, and in the commodities markets. And the only way to rebuild our credit markets is to address the fears in the mortgage markets. If we can do that, and it is a difficult task, we can nip our economic problems in the bud before they create further panic in the job market and before inflation goes out of control.

The medicine I suggest is one few are eager to consider because it requires a great deal of courage. It would also cause a temporary crash in home prices, in the stock market and in the currency markets. And it would cause inflation to spike temporarily as well.

But it would definitely bring us to the bottom of our current recession and would have the immediate effect of rebuilding our credit markets.

We need to give every American a fresh start with regard to their credit reports. We need to wash every negative ding that has hit American credit reports for the last three years. And we need to advertise this “credit reporting holiday” in advance so every American has the opportunity to get their financial house in order before their credit is cleaned.

The result of such a move would be a great number of bankruptcies and foreclosures, and banks and mortgage companies would get hit hard as they would anyway eventually.

But in my scenario it is a controlled action that would change the entire economic outlook for our country. Afterward, credit would flow freely, confidence would abound, and liquidity would make a strong resurgence. And the American economy would once again be the safest bet in town.

There would be a great deal to clean up afterward. And our currency would have taken a big hit. But in the end, addressing our fears today is a much better idea and much healthier way to manage an economy. And in so doing we quickly cure ourselves of the disastrous effects of fear.

by Tom Humphreys

In the upcoming Presidential election, our country, our ideals, our philosophy and ultimately our way of life, which has kept America as a world leader and beacon of hope for the past 200+ years face the greatest challenge in our history.

This challenge comes not from an outside threat, although we certainly face those, but from within, from those determined but severely misguided individuals who would like nothing better than to turn America into another one of the socialist states that exist in Europe or other parts of the world.

If we allow the election of Barack Hussein Obama to the Presidency, then we will find ourselves on a dangerous and perhaps irreversible course to oblivion, and the dust bin of history.

• Obama's inexperience and extreme left-wing voting record is more dangerous than any threat we face today
• The Rev. Wright debacle reveals Obama's poor judgment of character and deceitful nature
• It won't be politics of change with President Obama — it will be liberal politics as usual

Obama is the most unqualified and ill-equipped individual that could ever be mistakenly elected as our President. His only qualification (??) comes from his public speaking. In speaking with and listening to those who support him, the common thread one hears is that he is so inspiring and uplifting. Well, so were Adolph Hitler, Benito Mussolini and Fidel Castro, but look what they did for Germany and Italy in the 1940’s or what Cuba is today.

DO YOU REALLY WANT SOMEONE LIKE THEM ELECTED AS OUR PRESIDENT?

Obama is carefully pandering to a smorgasbord of target groups, following the lead of other like minded individuals in his party such as Nancy Pelosi and Howard Dean.

Nancy Pelosi : “ "We democrats are going to address this issue after the election when we take control of the congress. We will return to the 60% to 80% tax rates on the rich and we will be able to take at least 30% of all current lower Federal Income tax payers off the roles and increase government income substantially. We need to work toward the goal of equalizing income in our country and at the same time limiting the amount the rich can invest."

When asked how these new tax dollars would be spent, she replied ; "We need to raise the standard of living of our poor, unemployed and minorities. For example, we have an estimated 12 million illegal immigrants in our country who need our help along with millions of unemployed minorities. Stock market windfall profits taxes could go a long ways to guarantee these people the standard of living they would like to have as "Americans".

Howard Dean : In 2004, the current head of the Democratic National Committee, while speaking to a party gathering in New York, told them “I hate Republicans and everything they stand for”

My response would be: “Well Howard, we don’t think much of you and your party of compassion and understanding either”

More on Obama’s qualifications.

One would be hard pressed to find documentable and quantifiable evidence of his contributions to his constituency as either an Illinois or US elected official. In the words of an Illinois resident and voter: “In 2006 we elected him to the United States Senate, and two days later he started running for President and has not done one meaningful thing for the people of Illinois.”

As a US Senator Obama has a reputation for voting “present,” thus avoiding controversial decisions that could be used against him later. In the U.S. Senate, he has missed more than one in five votes. Only one of the measures Obama has sponsored as a U.S. senator was enacted: a bill to “promote relief, security, and democracy in the Democratic Republic of Congo. Contrary to Obama’s portrayal of himself as a unifier, on every bipartisan effort in the Senate to forge compromises on tough issues, Obama has been missing in action.

In sum, it would be difficult to imagine a more mediocre record. Most candidates for dog catcher have contributed more to society. Yet with the help of adoring reporters, Obama has managed to parlay extraordinary speaking and political skills into a presidential campaign built on sand.

The idea that America might entrust its security and future to someone who has never demonstrated an ability to get anything of significance done is scary.

It is remarkable, and more than a little un-nerving to watch the mainstream media, and note how soft is their touch on Barack Obama. It appears there’s a desire on the part of many in the mainstream media to recreate the Camelot years of John F. Kennedy, in the hope that Barack, his wife Michelle, and their young children can be like the Kennedys of old. And so we will have the rose-colored glasses probably throughout the campaign .

There are those in the media, and the East Coast, West Coast bastions of liberalism who view the upcoming election as an un-necessary formality. Having anointed Obama as the chosen one, these liberal elitists, and their supporters, see no reason why it should be necessary to entrust the outcome to the unknowing masses of voters in flyover country. It began with the presumptive nominee’s trip to the Middle East and Europe. The Obama campaign began referring to the candidate as if he already were president. That, while politically risky, is certainly understandable. What is not understandable is how many in the media went along with what the campaign fed them. They began to treat the senator from Illinois as if he already had been elected president. These are media types who believe that perception is reality. If they can convince the electorate that Sen. Obama already is president the election will become a mere formality. In fact, the election is a sort of tolerated nuisance in their eyes.

The Democratic party, in its quest for power, has created a “Messiah-Like” image of an individual who fails every reasonable test of leadership, other than the fact he is one of most radical, leftist thinking people one could encounter in their lifetimes, and anyone who dares criticize or speak negatively of Obama is either a bitter, gun-toting religious nut or a racist or both, and will be demonized and denigrated for doing so.

In a recent campaign event, Obama stated that his opponent was running a campaign designed to scare voters. Well, I for one, was already scared, and that feeling only grows stronger with the passing of each day.

In the words of Jon Voight, (One of the few Hollywood types who is not afraid to speak out against the prevailing mindset that exists there) “With what Obama has openly stated about his plans for the military, and his demonstrated lack of understanding of the true nature of our enemies, there is not a cell in my body that can accept and believe that as president he would keep us safe from the Osama Bin Laden’s of the world whose only goal is our downfall and destruction. This is a perilous time, and more than ever the world needs a unified and strong America. If, God forbid, we should see Obama elected president, we will find ourselves in a socialist era, the likes of which have never been seen in America before, and our country will be weakened in every way.”

In conclusion, to meet this unprecedented threat, we need to mobilize all of our resources and focus every effort in not only electing Senator John McCain our next president, but in taking back control of Congress. For if we fail, then our future will indeed be bleak. We need only to look to our south to see what not only New Hampshire, but our entire country will become like. That being the “Socialist Peoples Republic of Massachusetts”, where a “State of Oneness” exists. Such a state being defined as “One Citizen, One Vote, One Candidate, One Party, One Way of Thinking.

by Rep Andrew Renzullo (Hills- 27)

“No man's life, liberty, or property are safe while the legislature is in session.” — Mark Twain

Now that the regular session of the New Hampshire legislature has mercifully ended, we can all breath a little easier. Unfortunately, and in spite of the Republican minority’s best efforts, Mark Twain’s warning was especially prescient these last two years as higher taxes, out-of-control spending and nanny-state legislation made significant inroads in New Hampshire.

What happened? What caused this? Well, in 2006 there was a sea change in New Hampshire politics. For the first time, in 85 years, both houses of the Legislature and the Governor’s Office were controlled by the Democrats. Besides the obvious, and reasonably to be expected, inexperience at governing coming into the legislative branch, there was also a pent up predisposition in the newly elected majority toward a big government solution to all real and imagined problems.

Now when the party of bigger government takes control, it doesn’t take Nostradamus to predict that new and expanded programs mean a bigger budget, 17.5% bigger, in fact. It is axiomatic that more spending means higher taxes. Let’s face it. The government, any government, has only one source of income and that’s taxes. So when you spend more, you have to tax more. This session the raising of taxes and fees was the death of a thousand cuts. No one tax would seem significant, but taken together they were substantial, working out to an estimated $150 per New Hampshire citizen. And few things were safe. Besides raising the cigarette taxes TWICE, new taxes and fees were levied on mortgages, deeds, car registrations and court filing fees and yes, even on gasoline and diesel fuel!

But even with the new taxes, last year the Republicans warned the Governor and the Legislature that the revenues being projected were unrealistic to cover the costs of the new and expanded government. They were told that they were inflating the numbers. In my Legislative Update from April 2007, I wrote, “And finally, when you can’t find anything else to tax or bond, just wish that the money will be there. The Ways & Means committee inflated the revenue estimates by $81 million. If you can’t balance the budget the normal way, make up the numbers.”

Now that reality has finally hit and there are red-ink projections as high as $200 million, the wailing has begun. First off, deflect the blame. “It’s the slowing economy,” the spinmeisters bemoan, deliberately ignoring the fact that more, not less, money is coming into the state’s coffers than ever before, just not enough to cover the huge increases in spending. Next, finagle the books. In order to get around rules requiring public hearings, a few weeks ago the Governor called an “Emergency Special Session” (ignoring the fact that the Legislature already was in session) in order to bond millions in expense items. That’s like taking out a mortgage to pay for dinner, but it sure does lower the apparent deficit (just leaves it for our kids to pay, plus interest). And finally, the Governor did use some commonsense and stopped spending money that the state doesn’t have. Unfortunately, this is like closing the barn door after most of the horse has left the barn. All you catch is the tail. Sometimes knowing what you’re doing at the outset is far more effective than you’re best efforts at fixing the mess.

I’m not alone in my opinions. A June 22 editorial in the Union Leader stated, “So Gov. Lynch is cutting state funding for the mentally ill, drug addicts, cancer victims, sick children, and university students. And nary a peep from the liberals. Boy, it sure pays to be a Democrat. Notice, too, that Republicans are not assailing the governor for victimizing the needy and vulnerable. They weren't trained in the Ray Buckley School of Unfair Political Attacks. Instead, they've fairly criticized the governor for overspending in the first place.”

Taxes and spending are issues that affect our wallets and our economic well-being. But there are other issues that touch on our core beliefs and how much control government should have on the lives of individuals. While most conservatives believe you should take personal responsibility for the consequences of your behavior, those in power in Concord believe that the government is responsible for your behavior and has the duty and obligation to regulate your choices and life style. This nanny-state attitude can be comical, like the House-passed bill (thankfully killed in the Senate) which made it a crime to release a helium-filled balloon. But it can be very serious when it bans entire industries and costs people their livelihood. A prime example is the payday loan industry. Payday loans are very high interest, small, short-duration loans intended to tide people over (usually until payday) when they are temporarily strapped for cash, thus the moniker “Payday Loan.” The Legislature capped the interest rate on these loans such that the industry will disappear and with it over New Hampshire 100 jobs.

Certainly the most contentious example where ideology got in the way of common sense was the Democrat repeal of the Parental Notification law which, except in cases of safety or immediate health risk, required notification of parents if their minor daughter was seeking an abortion. Remember, this statute did not give parents the authority to veto, as is the case in Massachusetts, but only to be notified so they could counsel and support their child. The Democrats had argued that the law was unconstitutional, but voted down any attempts to include language upheld by the Supreme Court. Imagine the absurdity of a pregnant 13-year-old being provided an abortion, paid for by her 22-year-old “boyfriend,” without at least notifying the child’s parents? Yet the school nurse cannot give the child an aspirin without the parents’ permission. The issue is not about being pro-choice or pro-life, it is about being pro-parent.

These 2 years have laid the groundwork to transform New Hampshire. Unless the electorate calls a halt to it in the next election, the biggest transformation will be in the tax structure. The dirty little secret is that many costly items are not due to take effect until after the 2008 elections. Unless there is immediate action by the incoming legislature, when these bills come due there will be immense pressure to enact a broad based sales or income tax. If that happens, the New Hampshire Advantage, already severely weakened, will tumble down like the Old Man of the Mountain and be just a fond memory.

By Marshall Cobleigh, former NH Energy Chief

As is usual with poll driven politicians Jeanne Shaheen is running television commercials and writing op-ed pieces addressing the dominant problem facing America sky rocketing gasoline prices, but providing no real solutions. Even worse anyone who knows her history also knows that during her entire career she has been a big part of the problem.

Long time NH residents know that she and I were weekly regulars on Channel 9's Close Up program for ten years and I have many of the tapes of those programs. Those tapes show Shaheen fighting fiercely to hamstring nuclear licensing regulations. They also show her fighting against building an oil refinery in Rochester after the Durham location failed.

In today's world China is scheduled to build 50 Nuclear Reactors by the year 2020; Russia has scheduled to build 26 nuclear reactors; and India is scheduled to build enough nuclear reactors to meet 1/4 of the electricity needs of its one billion people. Meanwhile thanks to Shaheen's and others opposition  the United States has not built a nuclear plant in 31 years. In that same period Europe gets 35% of its electricity from nuclear power; France gets 78% from nuclear power; Lithuania gets 70% from Nuclear and Slovakia gets 56% from nuclear power.

Its the same story when you come to building new efficient refineries. While Shaheen was fighting to hamstring refinery licensing America last built a new refinery when Jerry Ford was President. 

Jeanne Shaheen and the democrats propose tighter regulation of illegal oil price manipulation, ending all speculation on oil futures and a windfall profits tax on oil company profits. Doesn't Jeanne Shaheen remember that when Democrat President Jimmy Carter tried a windfall profit tax it was a miserable failure. Domestic oil production plunged 795 million barrels. Carter and the Congressional democrats predicted tax revenue from their windfall profits tax of $393 billion dollars. It brought in an actual revenue of $80 billion. The non partisan Tax Foundation states that the oil industry since 1981 has had a cumulative $1.12 trillion in profits but it paid $1.65 trillion in taxes.

Shaheen like a stopped clock is often correct once or twice a day and her call for an investigation of possible oil price manipulation makes some sense. However ending all futures trading is ridiculous, it could penalize homeowners, farmers and all kinds of traders, as well as cripple our economy.

We do not need another democrat in Washington. Lets look at the figures Congressman Roy Blunt of Missouri put together. They clearly tell us who caused gasoline prices to sky rocket:  

A few facts about these issues that Shaheen and the democrats oppose:

• ANWR is larger than the area of 5 states, Mass. Delaware, Conn.,R.I. and New Jersey and the drilling would be done in an area 1/6th the size of Dulles Airport.
• Drilling is now being done 60 miles off of Florida, but that drilling is being done by China in cooperation with Cuba. Meanwhile Congress has a moratorium on off shore drilling and we are at the mercy of the mideast shieks.
• Louisiana has 3200 oil rigs offshore and a a flourishing fishing industry.

Does this record make you want to send Jeanne Shaheen to the Senate so that she can make it tougher to drill and refine oil and make gasoline prices continue to rise. Yes Jeanne Shaheen always addresses the big issues that her political polls show the American people care about, but her voting record clearly show that she is part of the problem and not part of the solution.

When Jeanne Shaheen started in politics we imported 1/3rd of our oil. Now we import 2/3rds of our oil. Since she and other democrats started fighting for tougher regulations on energy production America's domestic oil production has decreased from 9 billion barrels a day to 5 million barrels a day.

Jeanne Shaheen talks a good game about high gas prices and alternative energy sources, but her record shows clearly that she has done nothing constructive to solve the problem. Her television ad is a fraud. Its what you do, not what you say that pays off at the gas pump.