A busy day in New Hampshire ends with three veto overrides

  Yesterday was a very busy day in the State House in New Hampshire so I thought I would take a little time to recap the events for anyone who might be interested.

  First; The New Hampshire House and Senate agreed on a new two year budget which includes an 11% cut in state spending with no tax or fee increases. Considering the fact that the Democrat controlled legislature of the last four years passed budgets which increased state spending by 25% and included many tax and fee increases, this is a huge step in the right direction. This budget also cuts the tobacco tax. The bill now goes to the governor’s desk for action and it is unclear whether Governor Lynch will sign the budget or veto it. To Governor Lynch’s credit, he did propose a budget which would cut state spending, but this budget cuts an additional $500  million from his proposal.

  By a vote of 3-2 (all Republicans) the Executive Council voted to cut off all funding for Planned Parenthood in the state. Because the Executive Council voted to cut off funding Planned Parenthood no further action is necessary; no New Hampshire taxpayer dollars will not be spent on this organization. Needless to say, I consider this a huge victory.

  The State House and the State Senate voted to expand the Castle Doctrine; this gives New Hampshire residents the right to defend themselves not only in their homes, but also in any place where they have the legal right to be without first having to try to retreat. This bill also included a provision inspired by the Ward Bird case, which I wrote about extensively; this provision clarifies language to ensure that nobody is tried for a crime simply for brandishing a weapon when they feel threatened, and removes the mandatory sentence of 3-6 years in jail  for doing so. Governor Lynch has vetoed similar legislation in the past and is likely to do so again, but this bill passed with veto-proof majorities so is is likely this bill will become law when the legislature reconvenes in the fall.

  In another victory; the legislature voted to overturn SB 500. SB 500 was a bill which was designed to save the state money by ordering the automatic parole of violent criminals nine months before their sentences ended, but it has come under fire from both citizens and the parole board because some of the people who were released under the law were deemed by the parole board as dangerous. The parole board begrudgingly was forced to release some criminals back into society before they deemed these criminals were ready for release. This bill puts the discretion of the parole board back into play. The governor has stated that he must read the wording of this bill before he makes a final decision on it.

  And finally; the State House and the State Senate voted to overturn three of Governor Lynch’s vetoes. The legislature overturned a veto and repealed the state minimum wage law and also a law concerning mandatory sprinkler ordinances at the local level. But the biggest override concerns parental rights. The legislature overturned Governor Lynch’s veto of the Parental Notification law, handing parents a huge victory. As of January 1st of next year the parents of an UNDERAGE girl who is seeking an abortion will have to be notified before an abortion can be performed. It is sad that we have come to the point in this state–and in this nation–when a law needs to be passed in order to ensure parental rights on issues as important as this one, but we have because the statists have convinced enough people that the government know best, but today the state legislature made sure that the parents are kept in the loop on an issue as important as abortion.

  There is still one veto override vote which hasn’t taken place yet and that is on the “Right to Work” bill which was passed by the legislature and vetoed by the governor. This bill would make New Hampshire the 23rd “right to work” state and the first in the Northeast, but Speaker of the House William O’Brien simply does not have the votes to override this veto in the State House so he has delayed a vote until the fall in the hopes that he can “persuade” enough Republicans to get on board with the override.

  I have a problem with this action, because above all else I believe in the constitutional process and I feel that because the people are the sovereign they have the final say–through their legislators–on all bills. The Speaker previously tried to override this veto with an almost full House but when he found out the votes were not there he tabled the discussion, here is what I wrote back then:

This is the one time that I actually agree with the unions because this goes beyond my personal feelings on this issue; this is about the way our government is supposed to work, this is about the system. The State House was near full capacity, which means that most of the residents were represented today; this is the best time to take a vote on ANY issue because the outcome of the vote will most likely best represent the will of the people and yet William O’Brien decided that his political agenda was more important than the will of the people of New Hampshire.

  The Speaker knew he did not have the votes to pass the override so he tried to “encourage” the no votes to stay home and shirk their duties. When he was unable to convince enough legislators to ignore the responsibilities they volunteered for he decided to pull the override vote. In my opinion the best time to vote on ANY legislation is when there is a full House regardless of how the vote may fall, because this is when the most people will be represented.

    In my opinion William O’Brien’s actions on this bill are no better–or different–than the Wisconsin Democrats who fled the state to avoid voting when they knew they faced certain defeat; and this action was not better than Barack Obama’s end run around the Constitution using federal agencies to impose his policies through dictate. The vote should be taken and let the chips fall where they may.  This is the closest that this legislation has come to becoming law, if William O’Brien wants to pass this legislation and the votes are not there he needn’t resort to trickery, he simply should work on getting people elected who will pass the legislation next time. If that is what the people want they will certainly oblige him.