• Advertisement

NH Pushes Legislation To Limit Big Money In Politics

Overwhelming Cross-Partisan Majorities Believe Big Money in NH Elections is A Problem

Majority Support “Civic Dollars” Solution

CONCORD, NH — A survey of New Hampshire voters has found that large majorities in both parties believe big money is a problem in state elections, and support a current legislative proposal to fix it.

In the survey just released by Public Policy Polling, eight in 10 voters — including  79% of Democrats, 74% of Republicans and 85% of Independents — said they believe big money is a problem in Granite State elections.

House Bill 1773 would provide voters with four $25 “civic dollars” to donate to candidates for Governor, Executive Council and state Senate who pledge to limit their maximum donation from private donors to $250. The bill, sponsored by Rep. Renny Cushing, also includes other reforms, including stronger requirements to ensure financial transparency of SuperPACs and candidate campaigns, and tougher enforcement of campaign finance laws.

The House Election Law Committee has scheduled a hearing on the bill for January 16 at  10:50 a.m.

When the Civic Dollars proposal was described to the survey’s respondents, 60% said they would support it, including 64% of Democrats and 67% of independent voters. A majority of Democrats (71%) and Republicans (59%) also said they’d be more likely to support a Civic Dollars candidate who limits individual donations to $250 than a candidate who accepts donations up to $7,000.

“Civic Dollars will give New Hampshire voters a stronger voice,” said Olivia Zink, Executive Director of Open Democracy in Concord. “Our elected officials should work for all of their  constituents, not just for the big contributors who put them in office.”

“My lengthy and varied experience in New Hampshire election campaigns has convinced me of the need for a public election financing system as a voluntary alternative for candidates,” former state Senator Jim Rubens said in prepared testimony. “The present purely-private elections finance system seriously restricts participation by otherwise viable candidates for governor, councilor and state senate and narrows the range of debate and policy proposals during campaigns.  The result is fewer choices for voters among candidates and slower progress in solving public policy challenges.  Additionally, the current purely-private system tilts influence away from voters and toward those with money to spend on campaigns.”  Rubens has also served as chair of the GOP platform committee; chair of the 2000 GOP redistricting committee; and on two election finance panels which proposed public election finance legislation.  As candidate for US Senate, he proposed voter tax rebates as a means to provide public finance mechanism for Congressional elections.

Other key findings from the survey include:

•    A majority of respondents (63%) would be likely to contribute their Civic Dollars to qualified candidates, including 70% of Democrats, 54% of Republicans and 67% of Independents.

•    38% of respondents said they were even more likely to support the Civic Dollars program after learning that it would cost less than 1% of the New Hampshire state budget.

•    A plurality of respondents (34%) — including 37% of Democrats, 33% of Republicans and 34% of Independents — think wealthy campaign donors have the most influence in New Hampshire politics. Only 14% said they believe that N.H. voters have the most influence.

InZane Times: Corporations Got Their Tax Bill the Old-Fashioned Way

6,243 Lobbyists Or 11 Lobbyist For Every Member Of Congress,
Registered To Lobby Congress On Taxes In 2017

Remember a few years ago, when those talking about “tax reform” said they wanted to lower corporate tax rates, but would close loopholes to balance the impact? That’s not what’s in our stocking.

NPR says, “Trump might get the gift he’s been wanting for a while right before Christmas.” It’s not just a political gift; it’s a gift to the investor class, of which the president is, of course, a member.

But maybe “gift” is the wrong term. After all, the tax bill Congress will vote on this week is the result of untold hours of work by literally thousands of corporate lobbyists. Think of it more as return on investment, investment in political influence, that is.

According to a recent report from Public Citizen, “a total of 6,243 lobbyists have been listed on lobbying disclosure forms as working on issues involving the word “tax” in 2017. That equals 57 percent of the lobbyists who have reported any lobbying activity in 2017 and is equivalent to more than 11 lobbyists for every member of Congress.”

“Many of the discrete tax issues that these lobbyists and organizations have sought to influence are at the heart of the debate over the current legislation,” the group founded by Ralph Nader said in its report, “Swamped.” Corporate tax rates, repatriation of corporate profits, intra-organizational transfers of assets, depreciation rules and deductibility of interest were among frequently listed topics by the organizations that have hired the most tax lobbyists.”

The NY Times reported that the Business Roundtable, “desperate to remove the corporate alternative minimum tax, worked behind the scenes, calling lawmakers and raising concerns about how it would effectively kill the ability of companies to utilize the prized research and development tax credit.” They succeeded.

Remember Donald Trump saying on the campaign trail that “hedge fund guys are getting away with murder,” by using a tax break commonly known as the “carried interest loophole?” The loophole survived the “reform.”

The GOP bill ends taxation on most of the foreign-profits gained by so-called “American” firms, a measure that has long been on the agenda of the multi-national corporate lobby. Take a look at this 2013 report from the Heritage Foundation, which says a “territorial tax system would create jobs and raise wages.” The argument goes something like this: if multi-national corporations are taxed less on their foreign operations, they will have more incentive to invest in job-creating enterprises in the USA, and that will create jobs. In other words, take a walk on the supply side.

Not only could this have been predicted, it was. I’m currently reading People Get Ready: the Fight Against a Jobless Economy and a Citizenless Democracy,” by John Nichols and Robert McChesney, who single out the tax system as an example of the rigged system. “Americans are told that tax cuts for the wealthy and for multi-national corporations must simply be accepted on faith as the necessary cost of doing business in modern times,” they write.

“Speaker of the House Paul Ryan” they write, “has long been a supporter of the ‘territorial tax’ scheme, which would let US-based multi-national corporations avoid paying taxes on dividends they receive from foreign affiliates… Ryan is always pitching proposals to balance budgets on the backs of working people while opposing tax hikes for wealthy campaign donors and corporations.”

If you didn’t look at the title page, which says the book was published in 2016, you might think you were reading the morning news.

It’s not all over; there’s still a chance that two or more GOP Senators could rebel. If you live in Maine or Arizona, pick up the phone and call your Senators.

This article first appeared in InZane Times by Arnie Alpert

NH Rebellion “Democracy Dinner” With Special Guest Lawrence Lessig

On Thursday, November 30, NH Rebellion will hold a “Democracy Dinner” starting at 5:30 pm at the Lawrence Barn Community Center, 28 Depot Road, Hollis, NH with special guest Lawrence Lessig.

The speaking program will focus on the group’s campaign for a “Civic Dollars” campaign financing system in New Hampshire.

“Open Democracy believes in an equal voice for all,” said Executive Director Olivia Zink. “Through our NH Rebellion campaign, we are working to stop big money in politics, end partisan gerrymandering, protect the right to vote, and more by engaging thousands of Granite Staters in nonpartisan civic involvement.”

In 2018, the group will be supporting “Civic Dollars” legislation with bipartisan support in Concord. A Civic Dollars system would help balance the influence of out-of-state dark money in New Hampshire’s elections. It would also end the so-called “money primary” that keeps qualified candidates from running for office, empower every citizen to fund the candidate(s) of their choice, and encourage voter participation. Maine, Arizona and Connecticut already have this type of system at the state level; and some cities, including Albuquerque, NM, have also passed this kind of election reform.

When enacted, the measure would allow political candidates to opt-in to a “Civic Dollars” system that will limit campaign contributions to $250 per person.  It would also ban out-of-state donors; require quick disclosure of contributions; create a voluntary program for citizen-funded campaign financing through four $25 “civic dollars” issued to registered voters that could be donated to qualified candidates of the voter’s choice; and establish an agency to enforce campaign finance laws.

“We all want our children and the next generation to have a better life and more opportunities than we did. But too many hard-working Granite Staters are just barely scraping by because wealthy donors and special interests have too much power and make the rules.” Zink said. “If we want our children and the next generation to inherit a free and fair New Hampshire, that will take coming together to make our democracy work for all of us.”

NH Rebellion members have walked a total of more than 40,000 miles, continuing the legacy of New Hampshire’s legendary campaign finance reform activist “Granny D.”  The network of more than 33,000 local activists have organized town meetings, circulated petitions, supported legislation and “Asked The Question” hundreds of times to get candidates on the record about their position on campaign reform.

Scholar-activist Lawrence Lessig draws inspiration from the “rebellion clause” of the New Hampshire Constitution, which empowers citizens “to reform the old or establish a new government” when laws serve a privileged few rather than “the common benefit, protection, and security of the whole community.

NH Rebellion is part of Open Democracy, the Concord-based nonpartisan reform organization founded by Granny D. To learn more,  please visit: www.nhrebellion.org.

Northern Pass Advocates Angry Over ‘Dark Money’ In Local Fight. Well Get In Line

This weekend the Union Leader published ‘No names, please: Mystery money out to kill Northern Pass’ highlighting how Northern Pass advocates are upset over ‘Protect the Granite State‘ use of money from unknown donors to push back against Northern Pass.

“Protect the Granite State is spreading false and misleading information about the project,” said Eversource spokesman Martin Murray. “Because their funders are secret, there is no one to hold accountable. Regardless of your opinion on Northern Pass, it should be concerning that an anonymous group has invested so much money into misleading the public as it attempts to stymie a clean energy project and influence New Hampshire energy policy.”

Though Eversource may not like it, “Donald Kreis, head of New Hampshire’s Office of the Consumer Advocate, says Protect the Granite State (PTGS) is within its rights to protect the identity of its donors.”

“The organization is a 501(C)(4) whose donors choose to remain anonymous,” said Protect the Granite State spokesman Jim Merrill. And that’s about all Merrill and another PTGS operative will say. They declined to answer a list of questions submitted by the New Hampshire Union Leader and Sunday News.

The article also clearly differentiates union political action funds and dark money C4’s.

There is money flowing from both sides as the adjudicatory hearings before a statewide planning board for big energy projects grind on toward a 2018 conclusion. Northern Pass partners have invested in promoting the project, as have supporters like the IBEW electrical workers union, but those sources are identified.

This article highlights what many of us have been saying for years. Since the Citizens United decision there has been a significant rise in “social welfare” programs (501(C)(4)) using unknown donors to influence political decisions.

From OpenSecrets

Take for example the ongoing fight to pass Right to Work in New Hampshire.  Every year this bill is submitted and every year the people of New Hampshire speak out against it and the bill dies.  Yet every time the bill gets submitted the National Right To Work Committee (NRTWC) spends money to lobby the legislature, take out advertisements to sway the public, and dump tens of thousands of dollars into campaign coffers.

But who is really behind the NRTWC?  There are many theories but NRTWC has every right to disclose who funds their PAC. The NRTWC raised over $25 million dollars to push Right to Work laws across the country.

Chart created by Center for Media & Democracy

Another example is Americans For Prosperity, a 501(C)(4) that was started with seed money from the Koch Brothers, was instrumental in building and funding the Tea Party movement.  Along with the NRTWC, AFP pushes for anti-worker legislation like Right to Work and to take away workers rights to collectively bargain.

AFP spent over $13 million in nine federal elections in 2016 and all of that money was spend attacking Democratic candidates.  AFP raised and spent $122 million dollars in 2012 elections most of it going to “communications, ads, and media” attacking President Obama and Congressional Democrats.

Don’t Hate The Player, Hate The Game

The system has be rigged by those who are using their money to buy politicians and mislead the public for their own personal gains.  We do not need to know who is behind Protect the Granite State, we need to know who is behind all of these dark money groups. We need to know who is buying our political system.

We need to change the game and eliminate all of this outside, dark money.

See Who Voted For A More Open Democracy In NH

Legislative Scorecard Released: Who voted for, and against, open democracy 

CONCORD, NH – The New Hampshire legislature failed to pass several bills during its just-concluded session that would have taken strong steps toward returning the state’s government to the people it is obligated to represent, according to an open-government watchdog group.

A legislative scorecard released by the nonprofit Open Democracy Action (ODA) tracked votes on nine bills that would have closed campaign-spending loopholes, strengthened enforcement of existing spending laws, ended the practice of gerrymandering, and encouraged every legal voter to exercise their democratic right.

Only one of the election reform bills was successful, a House referendum calling on Congress to consider an amendment to the US Constitution prohibiting campaign contributions from donors who aren’t eligible to vote in that federal election. Two other bills were retained, meaning they can still be acted upon.

Seventy-four legislators—eight in the senate and 68 in the House—had perfect voting records on the reform bills. Eighty-four—all in the House—received scores of zero for voting against all of ODA’s recommended bills (or failing to vote).

“It’s clear that New Hampshire’s elected officials are out of step with voters, who want to reduce the influence of money in politics and want to make it easier for every citizen to vote,” said ODA chair Rick Bourdon.

“It’s one thing for candidates to declare that they believe in open democracy and stand for political equality, quite another for office holders to vote in ways that move us in that direction,” Bourdon said.

The 2017 scorecard, available at www.opendemocracyaction.org/scorecards, is the first of what ODA says will become annual reports distributed across the state.

The two bills that were retained would close a loophole that allows independent spending groups to avoid registering with the state and filing expenditure reports, and appropriate $200,000 to enforce election and lobbying laws.

Shea-Porter Introduces Corporations Are Not People Amendment

Constitutional Amendment Attacks Flood of Dark Money
Unleashed by Citizens United Decision
 

WASHINGTON, DC— Congresswoman Carol Shea-Porter (NH-01) today introduced the Corporations are Not People Amendment, a Constitutional Amendment to ensure that people, not corporations, are entitled to First Amendment-protected political speech. The Amendment would reverse the catastrophic effects of 2010’s Citizens United Supreme Court decision, which has allowed dark money to flood our elections and drown out Americans’ voices in our democracy. 

“Getting dark money out of politics is the necessary first step toward restoring trust in elections and getting our government working for the people instead of for corporate interests,” said Shea-Porter. “With the Corporations Are Not People Amendment, we can stem the flood of money unleashed by Citizens United and make sure our government is working for real people instead of big business.” 

Shea-Porter’s amendment has earned endorsements from government accountability advocacy groups including Common Cause, People for the American Way, and Free Speech for People. 

“Common Cause commends Congresswoman Shea-Porter and the many other Members of Congress who have championed a Constitutional amendment to help reduce the influence of big money in politics,” said Aaron Scherb, director of legislative affairs for Common Cause. “This amendment would help ensure that the voices of all Americans can be heard in our democracy even if they can’t hire a lobbyist, make a large campaign contribution, or start a super PAC.”

The Corporations Are Not People Amendment is the first bill Shea-Porter is introducing as part of her People Not Profits initiative to root out corporate influence in Washington. In addition to getting money out of politics, Shea-Porter will tackle lobbying loopholes that currently allow revolving-door influence, and work to strengthen prohibitions against conflicts of interest so we can make sure government officials aren’t using their position for personal profit.

Rep Ellen Read: When will the House listen to NH?

The call to end the 2010 Citizens United Supreme Court decision—the decision that allowed an unlimited flood of corporate and dark money into elections by creating the shadowy “SuperPAC”, and declaring that corporations were people and that money was the same thing as free speech—has come before the NH House again for the third biennium in a row. The vote is Thursday.

In 2014 the NH House passed a bill to call upon Congress to end Citizens United, only to have it defeated by one vote in the Senate. In 2015, the Senate passed it unanimously, but the House, after miraculously overturning the committee recommendation to kill it and then actually passing it, in a very rare move decided to reconsider the vote and then defeated it.

This year, the House has already overwhelmingly passed HR 7, the “Real Reform Amendment”, calling upon Congress to make it so that only eligible voters in an election can influence an election with money—including both direct contributions and independent expenditures. Because one has to be an actual human being in order to vote (unless corporate America gets their way!), corporations, superPACs, and wealthy special interests would be automatically barred from contributing to campaigns or taking out independent ads (the “not approved by any candidate” ads that have become so ubiquitous since 2010). They could still organize their members within their organizations, of course. HR 7 passed with a hearty bi-partisan vote of 211-75.

Since 2014, 69 NH towns have each independently passed Town Warrant Articles and Town Resolutions calling upon the State House to pass a call for an amendment to deal with the corrupt Citizens United decision. HR 7 would certainly fit the demands of those 69 towns. The only problem with HR 7 is that it is a resolution, not a bill…which means that the Senate will likely refuse to hear it.

HB 116, on the other hand, will be heard by the Senate if it passes the House, because it is a bill. Unlike HR 7, it does not include specific language for a proposed amendment—it merely acknowledges the need for something to be done and creates four public hearings throughout the state, at which the residents of those 69 towns that have locally demanded this action as well as the general public, can submit official statements to inform our Congressional delegates of what exact language NH would support.

However, the highly partisan Election Law Committee, which has consistently voted on virtually every bill along party lines (including voting down a bill allowing senior citizens who do not have driver’s licenses to use the photo ID issued by their assisted living facility to vote, as well as a bill that would create a mathematical formula to determine the best district lines in order to prevent the egregious gerrymandering NH has seen under both parties), has, true to form, voted down HB 116…along the same party line vote as virtually every other bill.

Ninety percent of NH citizens, regardless of party affiliation, believe that money is corrupting our political process and is giving us “the best Congress money can buy”. In the presidential primaries, NH voted overwhelmingly for the two candidates that were viewed as an end to our current “pay-to-play” system, spawning national movements on both the left and the right that were fueled by an American people utterly sick of their government being bought and paid for. A recent 20-year study by Northwestern and Princeton has proven what Granite Staters have known all along: that while the will of wealthy special interests determines political outcomes, the will of the American public has “only a miniscule, near-zero, statistically non-significant impact upon public policy”. This is not the representative democracy we all were told America was meant to be.

How can the NH House in good conscience continue to ignore NH citizens when we are so fervently demanding action on the rampant corruption in D.C.? With the partisan committee recommendation to kill HB 116, it will be difficult to save it on the floor—but every representative who voted for HR 7 should logically vote for the much more modest and more effective HB 116. Passing it through both the NH House and Senate will make NH the 18th state (and last New England state) to call for such an amendment. NH has a chance once again to lead the nation in politics…this time in cleaning it up. And to the NH House I would say, “cleaning time has come!”

Global Citizen Patriots: Citizenship Is More Than A Birthright

What does it mean to be a citizen? Webster’s defines it as “a native or naturalized person who owes allegiance to a government…”

So again I will ask what does it mean to be a citizen?

Mac Regan explores this very question in his new book, ‘Global Citizen Patriots’. He challenges the idea that to be a true ‘citizen’ requires more than just birthright or naturalization.

According to Regan to be a true citizen one must: take part in our political process, have knowledge of our government and how it functions, take on the corruption within the two-party system, and be willing to stand up for what is best for the people.

“At present, our political debates have devolved into a state of sensationalistic reality television characterized by bias, misinformation, and a lack of civility,” Regan says. “Global Citizen Patriots suggests strategies to create reasoned debate and accountabilities designed to engage citizens and reward their participation.”

Regan floats the idea that citizenship must be earned by voting and engaging in our democracy. He also argues that citizenship should be taken from those who fail to do their part in our democracy. This idea would strip citizenship from half of the American population, as they did not vote in the last elections.

Is this what we need to do in order to get the attention of the millions of Americans who have failed in their duties as citizens?

“Citizenship is the most important job in an effective democracy and it should have accountabilities, rewards and penalties that ensure that the job is well done. But citizens are created not born,” Regan writes in Global Citizen Patriots.

Regan wants to create a “citizens bill of responsibilities” to motivate and engage citizens beyond just military service, jury duty, and voting. He also states that creating strong Global Citizen Patriots begins by strengthening our education system, spending more time on government and politics, and testing student’s knowledge before granting them citizenship at age 18.

Immigrants must pass a rigorous testing of our political process, branches of government, and our history, before being granted citizenship. Why do we not require the same of our birthright citizens?

When 1,000 U.S. citizens were asked to take America’s official citizenship test, twenty-nine percent couldn’t name the vice president, seventy-three percent couldn’t correctly say why we fought the Cold War, and forty-four percent were unable to describe the Bill of Rights. With such an ill-informed and disinterested populace, it’s no wonder that our representative form of government is falling short.

Taking Back Our Government From Corruption And Special Interest Groups

Millions of Americans are outraged at Congress and our entire political process as they continue to fail the American people. These elected leaders continue to push their partisan agendas instead of doing what is best for the American people.

Our government is failing to what “we the people” want and are beholden to the special interests that fund their never-ending campaigns. We need leaders not lackey’s, Regan argues.

A reoccurring theme in the book is that we must make sacrifices in the short term to make substantive gains in the future. We need representatives who listen to “we the people” and who are willing to do whatever it takes, no matter the cost.

Take for example the idea of raising taxes to rebuild our nations roads and bridges, and to expand our national railroad system. A short-term loss that would create millions of jobs, make it easier for businesses to move their products throughout the country, and ultimately strengthen our economy in the future.

Regan also goes into great detail about the corruption of our elected leaders. Businesses buy politicians and in turn politicians reward businesses with government funds. This never-ending cycle is commonly referred to as “crony capitalism” and must be stopped. Ending crony capitalism begins with limiting, or completely eliminating, money in politics.

To create a stronger, healthy democracy we must take back our government from the crony capitalists. To do this Regan says we must become Global Citizen Patriots.

“Recognizing the challenges inherent in broad-based citizenship, the founding fathers of our democracy wisely set in place a system of representation designed to balance the expressed, and often short term, needs of various citizen constituencies with the broader, and longer term, goals of society,” Regan explains. “The question now is, can American citizens and their representatives live up to the legacy of America’s founders?”


Mac Regan spent 35 years as a consultant and executive for Mercer, a large multinational corporation, before attending the Graduate Master of Arts Program (GMAP) at the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy (Tufts University), where he expanded and improved his understanding of the U.S. from a global perspective. He has significant expertise in human capital management including role design, compensation and incentives, technical and emotional competencies, health care systems and financing, retirement programs, and labor productivity, which has been invaluable in helping to inform his new book, Global Citizen Patriots.

In addition to providing concrete strategies to address the crisis of a disengaged and angry citizenry, Global Citizen Patriots offers insight into:

  • How to make elected representatives more accountable to “we the people” and ensure that they do their jobs
  • Why we need to pay our congressional representatives more and what’s in it for citizens
  • Why only America qualifies as the essential global leader and ways we can better fulfill this role
  • Why periodic evaluation and discussion of America’s values is essential to compromise and change

Global Citizen Patriots is available on Amazon.com.

For more information, visit www.GlobalCitizenPatriots.com and connect with the author on Facebook and LinkedIn

 

Celebration of Doris Granny D Haddock’s Birth 107 Years Ago

Dublin, NH: Open Democracy/New Hampshire Rebellion and PACE: Promoting Active Civic Engagement announce that on January 24, 2017 they will hold a celebration of Doris Granny D Haddock’s birthday 107 years ago. Granny D gained fame and admiration by walking across the United States in her 90th year in support of  campaign finance reform. Subsequently she travelled the country to help countless citizens to register to vote. For her activism she received many awards in New Hampshire and elsewhere.

“In the present turbulent times it helps to take a deep breath and remind ourselves of an intrepid citizen like Doris Haddock, who was willing to use her ‘power of one’ in the fight for the health of our democracy”, said Regina Bringolf, co-chair of Open Democracy.

The celebration on January 24 will be held at 12 noon at the Dublin Community Center, 1123 Main Street in Dublin, NH.  The public is cordially invited. There will be a potluck luncheon (please bring a small dish to share) and remembrances of Granny D’s walks and others, organized by the NH Rebellion, that her friends and supporters have undertaken in her memory. RSVP requested to Doreen@opendemocracy.me, or call 603-715-8197.

New Hampshire Elects Money In Politics Reform Champions

 This year’s elections made one thing clear in New Hampshire: Granite State voters turned out to support champions intent on getting big money out of politics. Up and down the ballot, they voted for candidates firmly behind a robust agenda for reforms aimed at creating a democracy truly of the people.

Hillary Clinton and her platform for comprehensive money in politics reform won the day in New Hampshire. New Hampshire voters also chose to replace U.S. Senator Kelly Ayotte with Maggie Hassan, who supports a constitutional amendment to overturn cases like Citizens United. Ayotte has failed to support such an amendment, despite being repeatedly asked by her constituents.   

Granite Staters voted to replace campaign finance scandal-ridden Frank Guinta with longtime champion Carol Shea-Porter in Congressional District 1. 

Voters also made money in politics a down-ballot issue. Pending a recount, incumbent Hillsboro District 28 state representatives Eric Eastman and Elizabeth Ferreira will likely be replaced by former state representatives Jan Schmidt and Sylvia Gale. Eastman and Ferreira voted multiple times against SB 136, a bill that nearly made New Hampshire the 17th state to go on record in support of overturning cases like Citizens United—while Schmidt and Gale voted to pass a nearly identical bill as previously elected state representatives in 2014.  

“Up and down the ballot, Granite Staters voted for people who are committed to fighting big money in politics. We elected representatives who will fight for democratic reforms for all,” said Linds Jakows, NH Campaign Organizer at People For the American Way. “In the wake of electing a president who hired the head of Citizens United to help run his campaign, local, state, and national efforts to fight the corrosive influence of money in politics is more important than ever.”

Some highlights of People For the American Way’s work in New Hampshire fighting big money in politics this election cycle:

  • Led New Hampshire voters in building support for SB 136, a proposal in favor of a constitutional amendment to overturn cases like Citizens United, through petition deliveries, meetings with representatives, op-eds and letters to the editor, and more. In January 2016, SB 136 initially passed—briefly making New Hampshire the 17th state to officially call for an amendment—until New Hampshire State House leadership succeeded in getting 14 Republicans to change their votes and kill the bill. Representatives Eastman and Ferreira, who voted multiple times against the bill, appear to have been defeated this election, pending recount.
  • Knocked on almost 4,000 doors to urge voters to support Maggie Hassan over Kelly Ayotte because of their stances on money in politics reforms and filling Supreme Court vacancies. 
  • Knocked on almost 1,000 doors in Hillsboro 28 to urge voters to vote on money in politics when casting a ballot for state representatives. To see the literature we distributed to voters, email media@pfaw.org.
  • Held “Ayotte Won’t Get Money Out” light brigade in July 2015 after she refused to support the Democracy For All amendment
  • Organized Granite State activists to submit questions on money in politics reform to U.S. Senate debates and candidate interviews 
  • Subscribe to the NH Labor News via Email

    Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

    Join 12,612 other subscribers

  • Advertisement

  • Advertisement