Press Releases



Daily News from the Veterans Today Network 

Ft. Hood Tragedy


Was Homeland Security Created to Protect Those Who Deceived the U.S.?

by Jeff Gates, Staff Writer

Was Fort Hood really the target of a terrorist attack? The first clue to the real culprit emerged when Senator Joe Lieberman sought to blame this mass murder on the U.S. military.

As chairman of the Senate Committee on Homeland Security, he promised hearings on how the Pentagon protects its personnel from domestic terrorists.

Will Lieberman, an avowed Zionist, use this incident to insist that the U.S. do more to protect Jewish nationalists? More importantly, what do his concerns mean for homeland security?
Read More >>>

Today's Featured Stories...   
The Missing Link From Killeen to Kabul
Regional Veterans'News
Was the Iraq War Worth It?
Editor's Picks From Around the Web
DAILY MYTHBUSTER: Health Insurance Reform and Veterans
The Army opens a broad new probe into Arlington
Regional Veterans' News
9/11 Terrorist Suspects to be tried in New York City
GULF WAR 1990-91 Operation UNIT REUNITE
USA's image of intrusive power-wielder   


NRLC - Stupak-Pitts Amendment viewed by NRLC, PolitiFact, C-SPAN, NPR 

UPDATE:  NRLC, media reports examine abortion issue as health care bill moves to Senate

Friday, November 13, 2009

It has been reported that Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nv.) may attempt initial procedural steps to bring health care legislation to the Senate floor next week.  In advance of the Senate's debate, we wanted to draw your attention to a number of recent items which you might find helpful in your coverage of the continuing health care debate:

·         The text of the Stupak-Pitts Amendment, as adopted by the U.S. House of Representatives on November 7, 2009 (PDF File)

·         Appearing on C-SPAN's Washington Journal program this morning (Friday, November 13), NRLC Legislative Director Douglas Johnson discussed the effect of the Stupak-Pitts Amendment in the U.S. House and the prospects for the measure in the Senate.  The segment is approximately 21 minutes.

·         On November 9, Wall Street Journal columnist William McGurn discussed the success of Rep. Bart Stupak in prevailing to receive an up-or-down vote on the Stupak-Pitts Amendment in "The Man Who Made Pelosi Cry 'Uncle'".

·         A November 9, 2009 analysis by National Public Radio on what the Stupak-Pitts Amendment does and does not do.  Additionally, the United State Conference of Catholic Bishops released a factsheet entitled "What Does the Stupak Amendment Really Do?" which is made available on the NRLC website.

·         In "Abortion Upends Health-Bill Alliance," published today, the Wall Street Journal's Gerald F. Seib examines efforts by pro-abortion Democrats to strip the Stupak-Pitts Amendment from the final health care bill.

·         A summary of recent polls on public opinion on abortion in health care which is posted on our website.

·         On November 7th, Rep. Nita Lowey (D-NY) said that the Stupak-Pitts Amendment "puts new restrictions on women's access to abortion coverage in the private health insurance market even when they would pay premiums with their own money." On November 9, issued an analysis and has rated this comment as "FALSE."

· also reviewed a November 9 statement by Planned Parenthood, "President Obama campaigned on a promise to put reproductive health care at the center of his reform plan," which rated as "TRUE."  A short video of Obama making the promise can be viewed on NRLC's YouTube Channel.

Additional documentations on these matters are available on the National Right to Life website:


NHDP - Ayotte Brings Establishment Friends to New Hampshire to Promote "KellyCare"

"KellyCare" Will Empower Insurance Giants and Leave 53 Million Uninsured Americans in the Dust
CONCORD - Tonight, House Republican Leader John Boehner, one of Kelly Ayotte's DC establishment friends, will be attending an NHGOP fundraiser in Concord. Both Ayotte and Boehner support a risky healthcare plan that would eliminate protections for New Hampshire families and empower big insurance companies.
"KellyCare" - Ayotte's plan to take control over healthcare away from Granite Staters and put it squarely in the hands of insurance giants - was manufactured by Boehner and the Republican establishment in Washington. By eliminating essential state-level protections that require insurance companies to remain accountable to the consumers they serve, "KellyCare" lets insurance bureaucracies decide what they will or will not cover. Without these crucial safeguards, insurance companies are free to cover only the most profitable services for themselves, leaving women, children and those with pre-existing medical conditions particularly at risk.
"Kelly is calling in her establishment friends to do the dirty work she keeps avoiding - defending and discussing her disastrous plan," said Emily Browne, Press Secretary for the New Hampshire Democratic Party. "New Hampshire has created rock-solid consumer protections to ensure that no insurance bureaucracy can choose not to cover something just to protect its own profit. To do away with these would not only threaten the ability of Granite Staters to keep their families healthy, but would allow insurance bureaucrats to deny New Hampshire its right to decide how to care for its residents. 'KellyCare' lets insurance companies call the shots - and leaves New Hampshire families in the dust."
Earlier this month, the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office estimated that "KellyCare" would leave 53 million Americans without healthcare. When pushed about this massive shortfall, Boehner said: "What we do is try to make the current system work better...We do not attempt to cover 46 million more Americans" [Roll Call, 11/2/09, CNN, 11/1/09; CBO Analysis, 11/4/09]. 

The New York Times said that the Ayotte-Boehner plan would "do almost nothing to reduce the scandalously high number of Americans who have no insurance...and isn't health care reform." (New York Times 11/6/09)


NHDP - How Quickly Bass Forgets 

Charlie Bass Goes to MSNBC and Ignores His Own Record of Reckless Spending, Record Deficits, and Special Interest Tax Breaks

Concord, NH - Former Congressman Charlie Bass has apparently forgotten his own record when it comes to government spending - a record that was defined by his support for reckless spending, record deficits, and tax breaks for the wealthy.  
Appearing on MSNBC yesterday to discuss the 2010 political climate, Bass shockingly declared, "I wouldn't want to be an incumbent congressman who had raised spending," ignoring the fact that his role as a rubberstamp for George Bush's reckless spending turned a record surplus into a record deficit.  Bass not only repeatedly voted for Bush budgets that ballooned the deficit, but he also supported making permanent the Bush special interest tax breaks that benefited the wealthiest Americans. Those tax policies would cost the Treasury approximately $4 trillion.
"Charlie Bass has no one to blame but himself when it comes to the federal deficit," said Derek Richer, Press Secretary for the New Hampshire Democratic Party.  "In Congress, Bass was nothing more than a rubberstamp for George Bush's reckless spending that turned a record surplus into a record deficit, and that Bush-Bass agenda helped create the mess our economy is in right now. Instead of trying to shift the blame, Bass should take a look in the mirror."
The Real Charlie Bass: A Rubberstamp for George Bush's Reckless Spending
Deficit Exploded Under Bush. Although President Bush had hoped to preside over a deficit reduction in his last year in office, the New York Times reported that the FY2009 budget he sent to Congress in February of 2008 would raise the federal deficit by nearly $250 billion- bringing it to $410 billion in 2008, up from $162 billion the year before. [New York Times, 2/05/08]

In 2007, the Washington Post reported that Bush "inherited a budget surplus when he took office, but it disappeared amid a recession, the 2001 terrorist attacks and his massive tax-cutting program. By 2004, the deficit had soared to $413 billion...but it fell to $248 billion [in 2006]." [Washington Post, 10/16/07]

Voted to Make Bush's Tax Breaks Permanent. In 2002, Bass voted to make the fiscally irresponsible Bush tax breaks permanent. In the first decade after 2012, the tax breaks would cost the Treasury approximately $4 trillion. When it is fully phased in, the cost of the tax breaks over the next 75 years will be more than twice as great as the entire 75-year shortfall projected in the Social Security Trust Fund. Additionally, when all of the enacted tax breaks are fully in effect, the benefits will flow disproportionately to those with the highest incomes. The 1.3 million tax filers who make up the most affluent one percent of filers will receive more than one-third of the tax breaks. At the same time, the 1.3 million tax filers in this elite group will receive about twice as much in tax breaks as the 78 million low- and moderate-income filers who comprise the bottom 60 percent of filers. The proposal passed, 229-198. [Associated Press, 4/19/02; Center on Budget & Policy Priorities, "The Administration's Proposal to Make the Tax Cut Permanent," 4/16/02; HR 586, Vote #103, 4/18/02]

Supported $70 Billion in Bush Tax Breaks That Benefited the Wealthiest Americans. In 2006, Bass voted in favor of $70 billion tax breaks for the wealthiest Americans. The bill extended the Bush tax breaks on capital gains and dividends for two years, but only included a one year patch for the Alternative Minimum Tax, a tax that was particularly painful for millions of middle class families. The Washington Post called the bill a "windfall for the rich, and a hole in the federal budget." According to a study by the Brookings Institution Tax Policy Center, Middle-income households would receive an average tax cut of $20, while the 0.2 percent of households with incomes over $1 million would get average tax breaks of $42,000. The bill passed 244-185. [Washington Post, 5/11/06; HR4297, Vote #135, 5/10/06]

Voted For Budget that Would Spend the Social Security Surplus, Increase the Debt. In 2004, Bass voted in favor of the FY 2005 Budget Resolution that spent $174 billion of the social security trust fund would pay in part for $55.2 billion in additional tax breaks. The agreement also increased the public debt limit by $690 billion. The plan includes much weaker rules against red ink than the Senate approved budget. The $ 2.4 trillion, one-year agreement would require any new tax breaks to be offset by spending cuts or tax increases elsewhere in the budget. But that "pay-as-you-go" rule expires in a year under the final version, instead of five years as in the original House bill. The measure passed 216-213. [CQ House Action Reports, "The Budget Agreement," 5/19/04; USA Today, 5/20/04; SCR 95, Vote #198, 5/19/04]

Bass Voted for FY 07 Budget that Hurt America's Working Families. In 2006, Bass voted in favor of a $2.8 trillion budget that is fiscally reckless and harmful for America's working families. The budget adds hundred of billions to the already record budget deficit and includes a provision to increase the debt limit by $653 billion to $9.6 trillion. It cuts key programs like education, health and veterans programs. It does nothing to help lower gas prices and does not provide a permanent fix for the Alternative Minimum Tax, which hurts millions of middle class families every year. The budget includes a projected deficit for 2006 of $372 billion, and a deficit for 2007 of $348 billion. By 2011, the deficit could total $1.1 trillion. The budget resolution contains no plans to balance the budget, and, in fact, the Republican policies make the deficit worse by $410 billion over five years relative to current budget policies. The bill passed 218-210. [House Budget Committee, Minority Staff Analysis of the FY 07 Budget; HCR 376, Vote #158, 5/18/06]

Supported Final $40 Billion Budget Cut Bill that Cut Billions from Medicaid and Student Loans. In 2006, Bass voted for the conference agreement to cut mandatory spending programs by $39.7 billion over the next five years. The measure cut a record $12.7 billion from federal student loan programs, $7 billion from Medicaid that included increased cost-sharing and premiums for the poor, $1.5 billion from child support enforcement and $2.7 billion from initiatives that help the nation's farmers. The bill also repealed a program - known as the Byrd amendment - that helped local employers injured by unfair trade. The measure did not touch a $5 billion HMO slush fund established by the 2003 Medicare bill, and after intense lobbying from the health insurance industry, the budget saved HMOs $22 billion dollars by maintaining Medicare reimbursement formulas that favored the industry. The bill passed 216-214. [House Budget Committee Minority Staff, "Key Provisions in the Conference Report on the Republican Spending Reconciliation Bill." 12/19/05; CQ Today, 2/1/06; Washington Post, 2/1/06; HRS 653, Vote #4, 2/1/06]


Manchester Mayor Frank Guinta's Public Schedule (November 14-22, 2009)

Monday, November 16, 2009

12:00 p.m. – American Red Cross-New England Blood Services blood drive (sponsored by the City of Manchester); 1000 Elm St.; Manchester

Wednesday, November 18, 2009

5:30 p.m. – Boynton’s Tap Room ribbon-cutting; 155 Dow St. (third floor); Manchester

Friday, November 20, 2009

7:30 a.m. – Veterans Count breakfast; C.R. Sparks; 18 Kilton Road; Bedford

12:00 p.m.New Hampshire Union Leader 50th Annual Santa Fund Luncheon; Radisson Hotel at the Center of New Hampshire; 700 Elm St.; Manchester

Saturday, November 21, 2009

6:00 p.m. – New Hampshire Baseball Dinner; Radisson Hotel at the Center of New Hampshire; 700 Elm St.; Manchester

Please contact Mark Laliberte at (603) 624-6500 or for more information about any of these events.