Archive for November, 2007

Message From NH GOP 11-16-07

Saturday, November 17th, 2007

NH GOP ALIVE AND WELL: Last week’s municipal elections held a lot of good news for Republicans.

Highlights:

Frank Guinta’s re-election as Mayor in Manchester with 54 percent of the vote despite an all-out attack from the Gov. John Lynch and the New Hampshire Democratic Party. Gov. Lynch did mail and paid TV, radio, and newspaper ads against Guinta.
Donnalee Lozeau’s election as Mayor of Nashua means both of NH’s largest cities now have Republican Mayors.
Scott Pope and Ken Merrifield were reelected and elected mayors of Claremont and Franklin, respectively – two cities not exactly known to be Republican strongholds.
Dover voters passed a tax cap, a policy heavily favored by limited government fiscal conservatives.

MESSAGE FROM SENATOR SUNUNU: For a 1 min 30 sec video message from Senator Sununu, check out http://www.nhgop.org/home/2007/11/13/a-message-from-senator-john-sununu.html

SHAHEEN GETS LOST: Jeanne Shaheen missed an event last weekend because she got lost. Hey, it can happen – but in Dover, part of her own former state senate district? “My directions were incorrect, and I drove around for an hour looking for it,” Shaheen told Fosters. Today’s Union Leader reported: State Republican Chairman Fergus Cullen poked fun at Shaheen. Cullen said that Shaheen has been out of office for five years and has spent “most of that time at Harvard,” where she directed the university’s Institute of Politics, “and is just starting to reacquaint herself with New Hampshire. “If the event had taken place in Cambridge, I’m sure she’d have known just where it was,” said Cullen. “Of course, she could have pulled over and asked for help, but maybe there wasn’t enough time to assemble a blue ribbon commission on directions. Besides, a lot has changed over the years she was at Harvard. For example, Google came up with this cool feature called Google Maps which helps people find directions,” Cullen said.

TAXPAYER FUNDED CAMPAIGN MAIL: Many of you have reported receiving a piece of taxpayer funded campaign mail from Pelosi Twins Hodes and Shea-Porter this week. Make no mistake: This is an abuse of tax payer dollars, pure propaganda paid for a taxpayer expense. They said they’d go to Washington to reform…and they have quickly become part of the problem.

LETTERS TO THE EDITOR: If you think that taxpayer funded campaign mail is an abuse, how about writing a letter to the editor to bring attention it? Our tireless Vice Chairman Wayne MacDonald had a nice LTE in the Concord Monitor the other day: http://www.concordmonitor.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20071110/OPINION/711100319/1029/OPINION03

CONGRATS: To Dover’s David Scott, who was named the winner of the Union Leader’s First Amendment Award yesterday for his tireless pursuit of opening up city hall and exposing a series of sweetheart contracts involving hundreds of thousands of taxpayer dollars. David was also re-elected to the Dover city council last week.

SECOND CD NEWS: We currently have one announced candidate for congress in the second district (temporarily held, for now, by Paul Hodes), three people publicly exploring bids, and at least two others privately exploring candidacies. This article is mostly about announced candidate Jim Steiner of Concord: http://cqpolitics.com/wmspage.cfm?parm1=5&docID=news-000002626000

MUCH ADO ABOUT DELEGATES: As you may have heard, there is an effort by the RNC to reduce the number of Republican delegates at stake in the primary from 24 to 12. For perspective, we had 16 delegates in 1996 and 17 in 2000. We have chosen not to rattle sabers on this issue at this time, while reserving the right to challenge the decision at a later date. The first-in-the-nation primary has never been about the number of delegates at stake. Candidates come here to prove their ability to earn support in a broadly participatory primary.

HIGHER TAXES, HIGHER TOLLS: Gov. Lynch has raised tolls for the second time of his administration. To see a sign that has been popping up on ramps to the turnpike system, go to http://www.nhgop.org/home/2007/10/23/john-lynch-higher-taxes-higher-tolls.html And to read an op/ed I wrote about Lynch’s higher tolls, go to http://www.citizen.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20071015/CITIZEN_05/710150047/-1/CITIZEN

GOOD IDEA: A Cheshire County Republican suggests that when you are making out your Christmas cards this year, consider sending one here:

A Recovering American Soldier
c/o Walter Reed Army Medical Center
6900 Georgia Avenue, NW
Washington,D.C. 20307-5001

ON THE ROAD: I’ll be speaking to the Wakefield GOP this coming Tuesday night. If you have a GOP meeting coming up and are looking for a speaker, I’d like to come.

Invite me at fergus@nhgop.org

Sincerely,
Fergus Cullen
Chairman, NH Republican Party

International Security – Dr. William Martel

Sunday, November 11th, 2007

Recently, new BRC member Dr. William Martel appeared on FOX News to talk about world affairs. Here is the video:


New Hampshire Matters

Sunday, November 11th, 2007

What is the “General Welfare”?

It’s always a pleasure to read the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. Those documents, hammered together to “form a more perfect Union”, launched an exercise in democracy and free enterprise that remains the envy and wonder of the world even today.

The Founders limited the responsibilities and prerogatives assigned to the Federal government, concerned that it could expand and constrain the freedom and rights of the people.

The Constitution states in Article 1, Section 8. “The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defense and general Welfare of the Unites States.”

The Founders established checks and balances to prevent small but powerful groups from leveraging the power of the government to serve their interest to the detriment of the rest of the citizens.

Over the years, greater portions of the economy, our freedoms and our finances have fallen under the control of government, and more are being proposed. No task is too large (Ending Poverty) or too small (seat belts) for government to manage on our behalf.

What we should ask is why the government needs to do these things, as opposed to private citizens or enterprises, or leaving them undone. Why should we believe the government would do a better job than private citizens or enterprises, working through the free market?

Are these government programs really necessary to provide for our “general Welfare”?

Ethanol: After government mandated adding ethanol to gasoline, demand for corn rose and has driven up the cost of food. Ethanol takes as much energy to make as it provides when burned. Exactly who benefits from a more expensive, less energy efficient alternative fuel?

Embryonic Stem Cell Research: Drug companies and venture capitalists have the ability (and are) funding such research. Why does government need to?

Passenger Trains (Amtrak): Interstate highways and air travel, both government supported, virtually eliminated inter-city passenger trains. Why does government provide train service?

Farm Subsidies: Payments for not planting crops, or to plant different crops, or to buy “surplus crops” and take them off the market, drive up the price of food for all. Who exactly benefits from this?

The problem seems to be the triumph of financial interests over frugality, integrity and common sense.

Government growth is fueled by special interests seeking advantage (financial or competitive) for themselves (or those they “speak for”) by having their costs or benefits paid by government (the taxpayers, that is). Politicians focused on reelection (power, money, prestige) are beholden to special interests who support campaigns and to voters who expect more government money in their districts.

Since politicians and interest groups understand that taxpayers don’t like to pay taxes, let alone more taxes, they have to be clever in pitching their programs.

They’ll say a program (Nationalized Health Care) is beneficial and necessary for the “general Welfare” of the citizens at large, or identify a specific interest group in great need. You shouldn’t mind pitching in just a little more for such a worthy cause.

They’ll say that some other group (business, corporations, or the rich) will pay the cost, hoping we’re gullible and won’t recognize that those costs will show up in the cost of the products we buy.

These schemes wouldn’t work unless the public allowed it. We are enabling this process if we fail to watch over our representatives, or hope we’ll get more value back than we put in through tax payments, or forget that there is no “free lunch”.

Nobody else worked harder for your money than you did.
Nobody else will spend it more wisely than you will.
Nobody else will be as responsible in managing your risks.
Nobody else has a right to use your money to solve his or her problem.

If you believe the above, make sure your representatives know you want spending controlled, and watch how they spend your money. Don’t vote for politicians or parties that want to expand government.

If not, consider a new legislative initiative I began developing after my car turned 10 years old.

The Federal “Auto Pride Act” will provide a free new car every four years, eliminating the embarrassment experienced by owners of older cars. In addition to the health benefits associated with a positive mental attitude, the Act would boost employment in automobile manufacturing.

Farfetched? Doesn’t meet your definition of providing for the “general Welfare”?

Perhaps, but the UAW, the Big Three and Senators and Congressmen from Michigan would support it.
Do you think the public would support a program that gives them a new car?

The only reason it might fail is that the free cars can’t be made available to “the children”.

###

Ray F. Chadwick is a resident of Bedford who is active in promoting conservative and Republican ideals. He is the Chairman of the Bedford Republican Committee.