Carson:  Committee passes Fetal Homicide bill

Carson: Bill brings “closure”

The New Hampshire Senate yesterday passed a bill which modifies the definition of “another” when referring to certain criminal offenses to include a viable fetus or a fetus capable of living outside of the womb when charges of first or second degree murder, manslaughter, negligent homicide or causing or aiding suicide are brought.  Senate Judiciary Chair Sharon Carson, Republican from Londonderry, said the committee heard compelling testimony from a pregnant woman whose, overdue by two weeks, unborn child was killed in a tragic automobile accident.  Quote “The Senate rightly supported this simple, yet necessary change to protect New Hampshire families and ultimately provide closure in the event of such an unfortunate loss,” said Carson.

Birdsell:  Bill provides needed protection

Birdsell: Thanks Senate

District Nineteen State Senator Regina Birdsell, Republican from Hampstead, thanked the senate for supporting the bill saying quote:  “Mothers and families deserve to have the closure that this change provides when faced with a tragedy of this nature.”

Earlier in the week, the House passed Griffin’s Law, sponsored by State Representative Leon Rideout, Republican from Lancaster, which affords similar protection to children in the womb.   We interviewed Rideout earlier in the week regarding the measure he says he filed after nearly nine month pregnant daughter lost her son also in a car accident.  The legislation has been actively opposed by abortion advocates.

Green:  Expect further action

Green: Expect further action

Rockingham County Superior court Judge David Anderson has ruled against Timberlane Regional School Board Member Donna Green’s Right to Know suit.  In an interesting decision, the judge expressed agreement with Green’s arguments and precedents, but said the law enabled the district to choose to provide the requested information in the format it chose to provide it, despite having it in the format requested and said that any changes to the law would need to come from the legislature, not the court.

Naile:  Obvious errors made

Naile: Obvious errors made

Experts Girard at Large has consulted with believe Anderson’s ruling contains several obvious errors.  Coalition of New Hampshire Taxpayer’s Charmian Ed Naile, who himself has won several Right to Know cases and routinely advises on how to use the law, told Girard at Large that the law’s preamble states quote “The purpose of this chapter is to ensure both the greatest possible public access to the actions, discussions and records of all public bodies, and their accountability to the people.” He couldn’t reconcile that with the judge basically telling Green that even though the documents exist in the format she asked for that the district could decide to provide it in a much less user friendly format.  He said Green should ask for Reconsideration and offered his assistance.  He also noted the state Supreme Court has typically taken an expansive view of the law’s intent rather than a restrictive one.  Expect Green to appeal the decision.

News from our own backyard continues after this.

Long:  Bill gets tabled

Long: Bill gets tabled

As we were first to report yesterday House Bill six forty six was laid on the table during the general session of the New Hampshire House.  That’s the bill that would allow communities to assess labor charges for Right to Know requests based on their estimate of the time it might take to complete them before they are conducted. State Rep. Dick Hinch, Republican of Merrimack, made the motion to lay the matter on the table saying the House clearly needed more time to sort through the issues. It will take a two thirds majority of the house to remove it from the table. If it’s not removed, it dies at the end of this session. The tabling move also allows the House Judiciary Committee, which heard the bill, to make further changes. We’ll continue to keep an eye on it.

NH voter requirements to finally change?

NH voter requirements to finally change?

The State Senate Public and Municipal Affairs Committee heard a bill that would clarify the residency requirement for voting purposes in New Hampshire. S B 4, replaces the definition of domicile for voting purposes to more clearly identify New Hampshire residents who are legally able to vote in the state. Senator Sharon Carson (Republican from Londonderry), the prime bill sponsor, released a statement following the hearing saying quote “New Hampshire’s current voting law does not clearly define the qualifications of a voting resident in the state. This bill, SB 4, serves to clarify the definition of a legal voting resident as 46 other states have done.” She said she worked with Secretary of State Bill Gardner on the bill.

Naile:  Supports bill

Naile: Supports bill

Ever skeptical of any politician’s promises on these things given the state’s abysmal track record, we asked our A Question of Voter Fraud anchor and Coalition of NH Taxpayer’s chairman Ed Naile about his thoughts. He supports the bill and provided us with his testimony, which we’ve published.  In it he said we don’t enforce our laws and that quote

“If we did the double voter would have to challenge the law and prove he is a NH citizen, is not registered in another state in violation of his home state law, provide evidence of past elections, car registration,  state income taxes, etc. No out of state voter in his right mind will do that especially if he argues mobile domicile. The only case that stands is attached to Hanover and the Hawaiian student who was – ‘an otherwise qualified’ voter making his home in NH. (Based on a Federal case.) We need to adopt something without the unlawful term ‘mobile domicile’ and get on to prosecution.”

That’s news from our own backyard, Girard at Large hour ___ is next!