Both are fiscal conservatives who want to grow New Hampshire's economy while watching out for existing small businesses. They will work hard for solutions to education funding initiatives such as school building aid as Newmarket faces a tough road ahead in renovating or building a new Newmarket Junior/Senior High School. They will also be a watchdog for Newmarket and other communities in the Great Bay watershed as they face hundreds of millions of dollars in potential upgrades to waste water treatment plants being mandated by the Environmental Protection Agency.I was surprised because one of the first parts of the paper I read is the editorial and I tend to agree with many of the things written there. I don't think that anyone would argue that the paper tends to lean a little to the left and so do I.
Yes, they are both fiscally conservative. No, I haven't seen any funding initiatives to help assist with school building aid or education in general. Both have voted in favor of the moratorium on school building aid and to support voucher systems, eliminating kindergarten and eliminating compulsory school attendance. These measures won't help Newmarket schools.
So I'm left wondering, do you read your own paper? Perhaps you missed...
- An editorial denouncing lack of services for mentally ill. Guess who voted to cut that funding?
- An editorial praising Gov. Lynch for recognizing the importance of education and training. Guess who voted against the community college system and voted for severe cuts to the university system?
- An editorial denouncing the voter suppression campaign in New Hampshire among students and the Voter ID law in general. Guess who supported those bills?
- An editorial denouncing HB 1264--a bill that would legalize discrimination against gay and lesbians.
- And in another opinion piece about this controversial legislation that only 85 house members voted for Shir Haberman wrote: "With all state representatives up for election this fall it is good to remember the eight legislators, all Republicans, who represent Seacoast communities and were among the bill's supporters, and to vote accordingly in November. They were Paul Brown and Kathleen Hoelzel of Raymond, Joshua Davenport and Adam Schroadter of Newmarket, Amy and Lawrence Perkins of Seabrook, Kenneth Weyler of Kingston and William Smith of New Castle."
- An editorial denouncing the repeal of New Hampshire's involvement with RGGI. Guess who voted in favor of that?
Maybe Seacoast Media Group should follow it's own advice and take a harder look at the records of the candidates it endorses.
But I like how they voted.
ReplyDeleteVoter ID= Smart thats why 75% of the people support it.
RGGI disproportionately taxes the poor. AND accomplishes nothing
We already have laws regarding discrimination; we don't need to creat special rights.
I'd like to see unknown's documentation for why he/she thinks RGGI taxes the poor disproportionately, and why he thinks the RGGI rules accomplish nothing.
ReplyDeleteAccording to the pertinent editorial for which you have a link, above, it says "But let's be real. RGGI has generated more than $30 million for the state of New Hampshire alone since it joined in 2008. This is not taxpayer money. This is money paid by carbon-emitting utilities. And the money is going right back out again in programs to make government buildings, businesses, industries and residences more energy efficient. What is not to like about this? - See more at: http://www.seacoastonline.com/article/20120219/OPINION/202190312?cid=sitesearch#sthash.uOZQDUwd.dpuf"
So unknown thinks utilities are poor people? And what special rights are being created that unknown is talking about? A special right to discriminate??? An editorial denouncing HB 1264--a bill that would legalize discrimination against gay and lesbians. I agree, we should not create new rights to make it possible to discriminate even more against anyone.
Thanks for your comment, Joan. Returning to a Republican controlled house won't be good for Newmarket or good for NH.
ReplyDelete