New Hampshire House to Weigh Gay Marriage Repeal Vote

By Norma Love

Concord, New Hampshire - New Hampshire lawmakers are considering whether to take the first step toward making their state legislature the first one to repeal a gay marriage law, even as the governor threatens a veto.

But regardless of the final outcome of the push to repeal the 2-year-old gay marriage law, both sides are pledging to continue fighting into the fall elections.

The bill, scheduled for a House vote on Wednesday, calls for repealing gay marriage in March 2013 and replacing it with a civil unions law that had been in place in 2008 and 2009. Gay marriages occurring before the repeal took effect would still be valid, but future gay unions would be civil unions. The bill also would allow voters could weigh in through a nonbinding November ballot question.

If the House passes the repeal measure, it would go to the Senate; both houses are controlled by Republicans. Democratic Gov. John Lynch has promised to veto the bill if it reaches his desk.

A two-thirds vote of the Legislature is required to override a veto. Opponents of a repeal have lobbied hard in the House in the hopes of achieving a narrower margin if the bill passes on Wednesday. The House would be the first chamber to take up an override vote if Lynch vetoes the bill, and if it failed to muster two-thirds, the measure would die.

Repeal opponents hope to solidify what they argue is public support for gay marriage, while supporters hope to reverse the law in a region of the country that gay rights groups have strength.

The National Organization for Marriage has pledged to spend $250,000 to help lawmakers running for re-election who support repealing the law. On the other side, the New Hampshire Republicans of Freedom and Equality PAC is raising money to back Republicans who vote to retain it.

If the law is repealed, a lawsuit is expected to be filed arguing New Hampshire's law discriminates against gays who no longer can get married.

Democrats enacted both the civil unions and gay marriage laws when they controlled the Legislature, and Lynch signed both. After Republicans took control of the House and Senate in 2010, repeal legislative was introduced, but held over until this year.

The repeal legislation, sponsored by state Rep. David Bates, would ensure the 1,906 existing same-sex marriages would remain valid if the gay marriage law is repealed. Bates said it would replace the current "illegitimate definition" of marriage with one defining it as between one man and one woman.

Same-sex marriage is legal in New York, Connecticut, Iowa, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Vermont, Maryland, Washington and the District of Columbia. New Jersey lawmakers recently passed a gay marriage bill, but the governor vetoed it. An override vote could come as late as January 2014.

Since 1998, 31 states have had ballot measures related to same-sex marriage, and opponents have prevailed in every state. Those states include Maine, where voters in 2009 rejected the state's gay-marriage law.

Last month, a federal appeals court declared California's same-sex marriage ban to be unconstitutional. The ruling could mean the bitterly contested, voter-approved law will be appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court.

Voter ID Becomes Law in Pennsylvania, Opponents Vow Legal Fight

By David Warner

Pennsylvania - A requirement that voters show photo identification at the polls became law in Pennsylvania on Wednesday, the latest in a spate of Republican-led efforts to impose stricter controls at the ballot box.


Pennsylvania Governor Tom Corbett signed the act into law, saying it set a "simple and clear standard to protect the integrity of our elections."

"I am signing this bill because it protects a sacred principle, one shared by every citizen of this nation," the Republican governor said. "That principle is one person, one vote."

Opponents, who say the measure seeks to suppress voter turnout, vowed to challenge it in court.

Pennsylvania joined several Republican-governed states, including Texas, Kansas and Wisconsin, that have adopted stricter voter identification laws, arguing they were needed to prevent ballot box fraud.

Supporters say the laws are no different from needing identification to board an airplane or obtain a library card.

But some civil rights groups say such laws discriminate against the poor who may not be able to pay fees for copies of legal documents such as birth certificates, and that they could suppress minority votes.

Democrats say voter identification measures are aimed at squeezing out university students and senior citizens who tend to vote for Democrats.

Andy Hoover, legislative director for the American Civil Liberties Union's Pennsylvania branch, said there was no evidence of voter impersonation fraud in the state.

Other states have encountered setbacks trying to impose voter identification requirements. A judge issued an injunction earlier this week against Wisconsin's law, and the U.S. Justice Department blocked a new voter identification law in Texas.

The Justice Department, which also blocked a voter identification law in South Carolina from taking effect, said the Texas law could harm Hispanic voters who lack identification documents.

"Our legal team is currently mapping a strategy for overturning this voter suppression bill," ACLU of Pennsylvania Executive Director Reggie Shuford said in a statement. "The evidence is clear. Some citizens will lose the vote if this becomes law."

Corbett said 99 percent of Pennsylvanians already had valid identification, and those who did not could get one for free at state Department of Transportation driver license centers.

Under the Pennsylvania law, photo identification will not be required for the state's April 24 primary, but will be required for the November 6 general election.

Georgia Law Would Outlaw Picketing Homes of Corporate Executives

By Noel Brinkerhoff and David Wallechinsky

 

Georgia - Coming only days after a protest outside a major telecommunications company, Republican lawmakers in Georgia have introduced a bill that would subject non-violent demonstrators involved in a labor dispute to heavy fines and felony convictions.

 

If SB 469 passes, picketing outside the homes of company executives would be forbidden. The bill’s wording defends the executives’ right to “quiet enjoyment.” Protesters also could face fines and felony charges if they demonstrate outside businesses that have won court rulings ordering the sit-ins to stop.

 

The legislation was introduced on February 21, only eight days after a demonstration inside AT&T’s headquarters in Atlanta, where 12 people were arrested for criminal trespass, which currently is a misdemeanor. Since the arrests, Occupy Atlanta and union groups have camped out in front of the building.

 

SB 469 was introduced by four Republican state senators, Don Balfour, Bill Hamrick, Bill Cowsert and Ross Tolleson, who are members of the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC). Funded by corporations, ALEC creates model bills for sympathetic state legislators, including proposed laws they fight labor unions. ALEC also drafted Arizona’s controversial anti-immigration bill as a way of helping one of members, Corrections Corporation of America (CCA), the nation’s largest private prison company.

Keystone XL Pipeline Still Has Fight Behind It

United States/Canada - Although the Keystone XL pipeline legislation was pushed back due to President Obama vetoing it, there still seems to be an effort to push it through.




A new bill proposed by Republican Senator John Hoeven would allow the pipeline to start immediately and  without President Obama's approval, though the passage of the bill itself will require his signature.  The bill is sponsored by 43 Republicans and one Democrat, Senator Joe Manchin.  Other Democrats have stated their approval of the pipeline in the past. The Congressional Research Service says Congress has the constitutional right to legislate permits for pipelines such as Keystone XL.

The State Department, which will conduct an environmental impact review before the project is officially given the green light, said authority for the pipeline should be with the administration because of foreign policy, economic, environmental and safety issues.

If this doesn't pass, TransCanada plans to apply for yet another presidential permit but it won't happen until after the election taking place later this year.

The Keystone Pipeline and Obama's Missteps

The Proposed Keystone XL pipeline runs through six states

United States - While Republicans are saying the Keystone XL pipeline needs to be approved as soon as possible, the Obama Administration is still questioning if an alternate route would be a better solution.  Sadly the Obama's White House is seeing this project in the completely wrong light.

Republicans have announced, however, their game plan.  If Obama rejects it - and chances are he won't given he caves in to pressure - they will force it through Congress' power to regulate commerce with other countries.

Ryan Bernstein, energy adviser to Senator John Hoeven of North Dakota, said in an interview "We believe that express authority in the Constitution gives Congress the ability to approve and move forward on such a project." While Tom Donohue, president of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce states, falsely, the pipeline will create about 20-thousand jobs the day it's approved.  It will create about six-thousand menial jobs which are temporary until its completion, upon which only 20 people will have a permanent job.

If this happens this could put the State Department at odds with Congress, as it holds authority when it comes to cross-border pipeline permits.

What Obama needs to do is to look at the facts and go with them.  While labor organizations are supportive of the pipeline, believing the Republican lie about how many jobs will be created, the fact is it will not only create less of them, but actually take away jobs from people.  He also has to deal with the few environmentalists who are left on his side.  Moving forward with thi idea will cause almost all of them to abandon him completely and he needs every single bit of support he can hold for the election.  The only way to solve this issue is to work on genuine energy alternatives and leave the Keystone XL pipeline idea where it's sitting.  He then needs to get the Democrats who are supporting this project in line with him and state the actual facts about the pipeline.  It's supported by Republicans and Democrats who are in the pockets of oil interests, that it harms the environment in a devastating way, and if a spill happens it could destroy the Midwest for an untold period of time.  All the people who live there will get is a dirty life, 10 to 20 cents more per gallon  added to the price at the pump and dirty water.  Nobody wants any of that stuff.

Attempt to Strike Down EPA Rule Stopped

Washington D.C. - Senate Democrats struck down a bill proposed by Rand Paul which would've prevented environmental regulators from slashing air pollution coming from power plants that go across state lines.

The rule in trouble is called the Cross State Air Pollution Rule and was put into place in July. It plans to, when combined with state environmental laws, reduce approximately 73 percent by 2014. Nitrogen emissions will be reduced by 54 percent by the same year.

The bill needed to have 50 votes to pass but failed to do so, getting 41. Six Republicans voted against the bill as well while one Democrat voted for it. Even if it passed the Senate, however, President Obama would definitely have voted it, the White House said.