|
|
|
|
 HelloReturn to index of stories... |
Hello. I'm Richard Ager. Welcome to NH Outlook. |
| legislative leades #1 Return to index of stories... |
In this edition, We sit down with Statehouse leaders and take a look at the new legislative year. |
| Chief Justice #2 Return to index of stories... |
Chief Justice David Brock retires we join him for his last day at the Supreme Court. He reflects on his time on the court and what the future has instore. |
| Intro Bradley Endorsement Return to index of stories... |
First, more good news for Howard Dean. The Democratic Presidential candidate has now been endorsed by both of the major Democratic presidential contenders in the 2000 race. Last month, Al Gore announced he was backing Dean. Today, Sen. Bill Bradley came to New Hampshire to lend his support to the Dean campaign. Bradley finished a strong second to Al Gore in the last New Hampshire primary, running on issues including health care and government reform. In his remarks, he said Dean stands for many of the same principles, and will surprise those who dismiss him as too liberal to be elected. |
| Bradley Endorsement Return to index of stories... |
Bill Bradley - "Pundits say that Howard Dean will be destroyed by the Republican machine of innuendo and misrepresentation. But I say Howard Dean is the candidate best able to return the fire in ways the other side doesn't expect." |
| Intro Leadership Return to index of stories... |
With the primary only three weeks away, much of the news has been about the presidential campaigns. But this week, the state house is back in business as the legislature begins the second year of its two year session. There are more than 600 new bills to debate over the next several months, as well as a lot of holdover business from last year. I sat down today with Senate President Tom Eaton and House Speaker Gene Chandler to discuss what state lawmakers will be working on. |
| Legislative Leaders Return to index of stories... |
I THINK WHAT WE SAW WAS A PRETTY BRUISING BUDGET BATTLE THAT DRAGGED A FEW EXTRA MONTHS. THERE WAS A NEW GOVERNOR LEARNING THE ROPES AND SOME TOUGH WORDS AMONG REPUBLICANS BETWEEN THE LEGISLATIVE AND GOVERNORS' OFFICE. NOW THAT THERE'S A BIT OF DISTANCE BETWEEN THAT SESSION, HOW DO YOU REGARD IT? I'LL START WITH YOU, SENATOR. I THINK WE HAD A VERY POSITIVE YEAR ENDING UP. WE WERE VERY PRO BUSINESS, PRO TAXPAYER AND PRO CHILDREN. SOME OF THAT WAS WITH THE EDUCATION FUNDING. WE CRAFTED AN EDUCATION FUNDING BILL WHICH TARGETS THE MOST NEEDED COMMUNITIES FOR BUSINESS. WE REFORMED EMINENT DOMAIN. WE HAD A NET OPERATING LOSS BILL THAT WAS PASSED WHICH HELPS BUSINESSES CAPTURE THEIR LOSSES FOR THE YEARS. OVERALL IT WAS A VERY SUCCESSFUL YEAR. I WOULD AGREE WITH THOSE ITEMS AND SAY THAT THE BUDGET THING THAT YOU TOUCHED UPON I GUESS YOU USED THE WORD BRUISING. AT THE TIME I GUESS IT WAS. THE END RESULT I THINK WORKED OUT FINE. I MEAN, WE PASSED A BUDGET WHICH I SUPPORTED AS DID THE SENATE PRESIDENT. IT WAS A BALANCED BUDGET. IT WOULD HAVE WORKED. WE SPENT A COUPLE MONTHS REVISING IT COMING UP WITH HOPEFULLY SOME MORE SAVINGS, AND IF MOST OF THOSE MATERIALIZE IT WILL BE A BETTER BUDGET PROBABLY. ANY FEELINGS? I'M SURE IN SOME QUARTERS. I MEEFL I GET OVER THINGS. I MOVE ON TO THE NEXT BATTLE NOW. I'M SURE THERE ARE WITH SOME PEOPLE, HERE AND THERE AND DIFFERENT AGENCIES. IT'S NO DIFFERENT THAN ANYTHING ELSE HERE IN CONCORD. WHOEVER IS AFFECTED HAS LINGERING THOUGHTS. THAT'S JUST THE WAY IT IS. WE'LL JUST MOVE ON HOPEFULLY. SPEAKING OF MOVING ON, WE HAVE SOME MAJOR INITIATIVES COMING UP PRETTY SOON. A COUPLE OF CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENTS THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT. THE FIRST ONE IS CACR-2 WHICH ESSENTIALLY WOULD BE AIMED AT REMOVING THE ROLE OF THE COURT IN DETERMINING WHAT IS AN ADEQUATE EDUCATION. DO YOU SUPPORT THAT, SENATOR EATON? I WILL SUPPORT THAT WHEN IT COMES OVER TO THE HOUSE. I BELIEVE IT WILL GO THROUGH THE. COMES OVER TO THE SENATE. I BELIEVE IT WILL GO THROUGH THE HOUSE. I DON'T LOOK AT THAT AS GOING BACKWARDS. I LOOK AT THAT AS GIVING THE LEGISLATURE WHAT THEY'RE SUPPOSED TO DO. THAT IS TO LEGISLATE AND THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF DISCUSSION ABOUT THE WORDS THAT THE COURT HAD USED IN ORDER TO MAKE THE DETERMINATION AND I THINK THAT ONCE THIS CACR-2 IS DONE IT WILL RESOLVE ALL OF THAT. A LOT OF PEOPLE HAVE SAID THAT THE ENTIRE CLAREMONT DECISION WAS ACTUALLY A RESULT. LEGISLATURE NOT EXERCISING ITS DUE AUTHORITY AS IT CAME UP WITH VARIOUS FORMULAS. BUT IT DID NOT FUND IT TO THE DEGREE IN WHICH IT WAS PROMISED. TO YOU GET THE SENSE, MR. SPEAKER, THAT THIS IS AN END RUN-AROUND THE SUPREME COURT. IS IT JUST A WAY TO GET RID OF THAT CLAREMONT DECISION WHICH HAS DOMINATED SO MUCH OF STATE POLITICS. IT HAS AND IT WILL CONTINUE TO. I THINK IF PEOPLE READ THIS CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT CAREFULLY, WHAT WE'RE PROPOSING NOW AND WHICH I DO SUPPORT AND I'M HOPEFUL WE'LL GET THE 60% WE NEED IN THE HOUSE TO PASS IT ALONG TO THE SENATE, IT DOESN'T TAKE THE SUPREME COURT OUT OF THE DELIBERATIONS AS MUCH AS SOME PEOPLE WOULD LIKE TO TAKE THEM OUT OF ANY ACTION IT DOESN'T DO THAT. IT DOES DEFINE WHAT THE LEGISLATIVE ROLE SHOULD BE AND WHAT'S THE COURT'S ROLE SHOULD BE. CLEARLY THE LEGISLATIVE ROLE IS FUNDING EDUCATION. TO WHAT LEVEL WE DECIDE THAT. CONSTITUTIONAL ISSUES ARE AND SHOULD BE DECIDED BY THE COURT SO I THINK THAT'S THE FINE BALANCE. THE OPPONENTS OF THIS CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT WILL SAY WE JUST WANT THE COURT TO GO AWAY. I AGREE IN SOME CASES A LOT OF PEOPLE FEEL THAT WAY. BY THE SAME TOKEN THE COURT HAS A ROLE IN THIS. MORE IMPORTANTLY THE LEGISLATIVE PROCESS HAS A ROLE IN IT. IF THIS AMENDMENT DOES PASS AND HAS BEEN RATIFIED BY THE VOTERS, WHAT WOULD THE COURT'S POTENTIAL ROLE IN THIS BE DO YOU THINK? I'LL JUST FINISH BY SAYING THEY COULD RULE ON ANY CONSTITUTIONAL ISSUES THAT CAME UP BECAUSE THAT IS THEIR ROLE ON DOING THAT. HOW WE FUND IT AND TO WHAT LEVEL WE FUND EDUCATION WOULD BE LEFT TO THE LEGISLATURE TO DO. SINCE WE'RE SPEAKING AT THE MOMENT OF THE SUPREME COURT, I WANT TO GET YOUR SENSE OF WHO YOU THINK SHOULD BE RECOGNIZED AS THE NEXT SUPREME COURT CHIEF JUSTICE. JOHN BRODERICK ACCORDING TO STATE STATUTE HAS NOW DECLARED ON THE WEB SITE THAT HE IS NOW THE CHIEF JUSTICE. DO YOU THINK THAT WILL REMAIN THE CASE? WE PASSED A BILL TWO YEARS AGO AND THAT NOW IS RSA-4 9:1 I BELIEVE IT IS. THAT BILL CAME OUT OF THE IMPEACHMENT HEARINGS. IT WAS BACKED BY THE BAR ASSOCIATION, AND IT WAS BASICALLY TO DEPOLITICIZE THE SELECTION OF THE SUPREME COURT JUSTICE. THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT WE DID. HAD GOVERNOR BENSON. WE TALKED WITH HIM ON A REGULAR BASIS, BUT HAD HE DISCUSSED IT WITH US PRIOR TO MAKING HIS ANNOUNCEMENT, I THINK WE MIGHT HAVE BEEN ABLE TO EDUCATE HIM A LITTLE BIT AS TO WHY WE DID IT. DO YOU THINK HE'S TRYING TO REPOLITICIZE THE PROCESS? I'M NOT SURE WHAT HE WANTS TO DO WITH THAT, WHETHER HE FEELS THAT IT'S SOME OF THE POWER TAKING AWAY FROM HIM. IT'S AN ADMINISTRATIVE POSITION. HE GETS TO APPOINT A SUPREME COURT JUSTICE, AND THAT'S A PRETTY MAJOR THING TO DO. THE SUPREME COURT JUSTICE HAS ADMINISTRATIVE DUTIES. THAT'S WHERE WE SEPARATE THOSE. MR. SPEAKER, THERE'S ANOTHER CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT THAT YOU'RE LOOKING TO PASS. CACR-5 CONCERNING THE RULEMAKING. RIGHT. EXPLAIN A LITTLE BIT, IT'S A LITTLE ARCANE ON THE SURFACE OF IT. ONCE AGAIN WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO ESTABLISH IS WHAT THE LEGISLATIVE PREROGATIVE IS. CERTAINLY THE COURT HAS CERTAIN ABILITIES TO RUN THEIR INSTITUTION AS THEY SEE FIT OVER THERE. WE HAVE CERTAIN FINANCIAL OBLIGATIONS, AND WE THINK WHEN WE PASS THE LAW OR A BILL OR GIVE THE MONEY, IT SHOULD BE SPENT IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE WAY WE WANT IT DONE AND NOT RULES THAT THEY MIGHT PASS DIFFERENTLY. I THINK ONCE AGAIN IT'S A NARROWING OF THE DUTIES. I THINK AS TIME GOES ON AND DUTIES EXPAND OF THE COURT AND AS THEY HAVE IN THE LEGISLATURE OVER THE YEARS, IT NEEDS TO BE DEFINED. THE PUBLIC VERY NARROWLY, WE JUST. I SAY WE BEING SOMEONE THAT SUPPORTED THAT PROPOSAL QUITE STRONGLY, WE ONLY LOST BY A LITTLE LESS THAN 2% OF GETTING TWO-THIRDS WHICH IS ALMOST UNHEARD OF BECAUSE WE WERE OUTSPENT, GOSH, I DON'T KNOW, 100-11 I THINK. PEOPLE THAT TRIED TO NOT HAVE THAT MEASURE PASSED. 100-1. DURING THE LAST BUDGET PROCESS THERE WAS A VERY HANDS ON-APPROACH BY THE LEGISLATURE IN DETERMINING HOW THE COURT BUDGET WAS GOING TO BE SPENT. WHAT WOULD THIS CHANGE? OH, I THINK. I DON'T KNOW AS IT WOULD CHANGE MUCH OF ANYTHING OTHER THAN THE WAY THAT WE'RE DOING A LOT BETTER NOW. I THINK THE SENATE PRESIDENT WOULD SAY THAT. WITH MEETINGS WE'VE HAD WITH THE COURT THEY'VE COME OVER AND BEEN MUCH MORE FORTH COMING. JUSTICE BRODERICK AND DUNCAN HAVE WORKED WITH US. I SEE A LOT OF PROGRESS THERE CERTAINLY. WHAT THIS DOES IS MAKE SURE THAT THE PROGRESS CONTINUES AND DOESN'T GO BACK TO TODAY'S WHEN CERTAIN PROCESSES SHOULD HAVE HAVE HAPPENED THAT DIDN'T PROBABLY AND THE COURT AND THE LEGISLATURE'S MIND AND I THINK IN THE PUBLIC OBVIOUSLY THE VAST MAJORITY OF THE PUBLIC AGREED THAT THE COURT WAS ESTABLISHING RULES THAT WERE OUTSIDE OF THEIR AUTHORITY PROBABLY. I WOULD HAVE TO OR LIKE TO ADD TO THAT THAT I THINK WE'VE TURNED A NEW CORNER WITH THE JUDICIAL SYSTEM. WE'VE WORKED VERY WELL WITH JUSTICE NADO AND JUSTICE DUGGAN. WE'VE HAD A NUMBER OF MEETINGS WITH THEM AND PLAN TO MEET ONCE A MONTH TO HEAR EACH OTHER'S CONCERNS. WE'RE GOING TO BE HEARING THEIR BUDGET MUCH EARLIER THIS COMING BUDGET PERIOD. THAT IS ALL POSITIVE FOR EVERYONE. FOR THE LEGISLATURE AND THE COURT. THERE'S NO ONE TO DEFEND THE THREE RANKS OF THE GOVERNMENT ANY MORE THAN I DO. THAT'S CORRECT. I'M SURE TOM FEELS THE SAME WAY. BUT WE HAVE TO DEFINE THE PARAMETERS TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE ALL LIVE INNING THE SPACES THAT WE'RE SUPPOSED TO BE LIVING IN. I THINK THAT'S WHAT BOTH OF THESE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENTS DO AND NOTHING MORE. LET'S TALK ABOUT MONEY FOR JUST A MOMENT BECAUSE THERE HAS BEEN SOME SPECULATION AS TO WHETHER WE'RE GOING TO NEED TO REOPEN THE BUDGET. MUCH OF THE FEDERAL MONEY THAT WAS COUNTED ON IN THE BUDGET COMPROMISE DOESN'T SEEM LIKE IT'S COMING FORWARD FROM THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT AT LEAST NOT YET. DO YOU THINK WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO REVISIT IT? I CAN'T IMAGINE REVISITING THE BUDGET. REVENUES ARE GOING VERY WELL. FOR THE STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE AND PRESIDENT BUSH'S TAX CUTS ARE HELPING THE ECONOMY. NEW HAMPSHIRE IS ONE OF THE FIRST STATES IN NEW ENGLAND TO COME OUT OF THIS. WE'RE THE LAST ONE TO GO IN. THAT COMMENT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE PRIMARY, RIGHT? SO I THINK THAT NEW HAMPSHIRE IS AHEAD OF THE CURVE WITH OUR ECONOMY. WE WOULD JUST SEE HOW WE COME WITH THAT AS FAR AS OPENING UP THE BUDGET I DON'T THINK THAT'S GOING TO BE NECESSARY. IF THERE HAVE TO BE CHANGES THAT CAN BE DONE BY EXECUTIVE ORDER AND THAT'S WHERE WE HAVE TO GO. IF WE HAVE MORE CUTS THEY'RE GOING TO BE SEVERE. |
| Legislative Leaders #2 Return to index of stories... |
DO YOU THINK JUST SORT OF THE USUAL SECOND-YEAR TINKERING? IF THAT. I MEAN I'M NOT CERTAINLY LOOKING TO OPEN UP THE WHOLE BUDGET. I CAN'T IMAGINE A CIRCUMSTANCE LIKE THAT HAPPENING. IT'S ALWAYS A POSSIBILITY I GUESS. CERTAINLY I REMAIN OPTIMISTIC THAT THE REVENUES WILL KEEP COMING IN AND THE FEDERAL MONEY WILL KEEP COMING THAT WE COUNTED ON OR THE VAST MAJORITY OF IT ANYWAY. MAYBE SOME EXECUTIVE ORDERS FROM THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH AND THAT TYPE OF THING BUT CERTAINLY I DON'T THINK THAT'S AN OVERLY OPTIMISTIC VIEWPOINT IN MY OPINION. WELL, YOU'RE ON RECORD AS SUPPORTING THE TWO CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENTS WE JUST DISCUSSED. THERE'S A THIRD ONE WHICH THE GOVERNOR HAS BEEN PROMOTING. HE CALLS IT THE TAXPAYER BILL OF RIGHTS THAT WOULD LIMIT THE GROWTH OF THE BUDGET TO THE RATE OF INFLATION PLUS ANY GROWTH IN POPULATION. DO YOU SUPPORT THAT? AT THE MOMENT I DON'T SUPPORT IT. I HAVEN'T DECIDED YET HOW STRONGLY OR WHAT WE'RE GOING TO DO FROM A LEADERSHIP POSITION UNTIL I GET SOME QUESTIONS ANSWERED RIGHT NOW I HAVE SOME PEOPLE DOING SOME RESEARCH ON THE ACTUAL FACTS OF WHAT'S WRITTEN THERE. IT'S VERY COMPLICATED. I REALLY BELIEVE THERE ARE A LOT OF PEOPLE WHO DON'T UNDERSTAND IT. THEY THINK IT'S VERY SIMPLE. TRUST ME. IT'S A VERY COMPLICATED MEASURE, AND THE WAY IT'S WRITTEN IS PRETTY DIFFICULT TO TRY AND FIGURE OUT EXACTLY WHAT IT MIGHT DO FROM YEAR TO YEAR. AND HAVING SAID THAT, THOUGH THERE ARE SOME CONCERNS. THE OTHER CONCERN I HAVE IS IT DOES TAKE AWAY THE LEGISLATIVE AUTHORITY TO DEAL WITH BUDGETS. BASICALLY THAT'S WHAT IT'S DOING. IN MY POSITION THAT'S A REAL BIG PROBLEM. THE PEOPLE, THEY ELECT A GOVERNOR TO DO CERTAIN THINGS BUT THEY ALSO ELECT A LEGISLATURE TO PASS A BUDGET AND FUND PROGRAMS. DO YOU THINK THIS IMPLIES THAT SOMEHOW THE LEGISLATURE HAS BEEN IRRESPONSIBLE? OTHERWISE WHY DO YOU NEED THAT? I GUESS ONE COULD MAKE THAT IMPLICATION, BUT THE LEGISLATURE MEETS THE NEEDS OF THE PEOPLE. THE LEGISLATORS ARE ELECTED EVERY TWO YEARS. PRESUMABLY THEY'RE REPRESENTING WHAT MOST OF THE PEOPLE IN THE STATE WOULD LIKE TO DO. FOR THE MOST PART THAT HAPPENS CERTAINLY. ANY CHANCE ON IT PASSING THE SENATE DO YOU THINK? I WOULD AGREE VERY MUCH WITH THE SPEAKER. I'M NOT SURE THAT I AM FOR THIS. THIS WHAT IS ANOTHER ONE OF THE GOVERNOR'S SURPRISES OF COMING OUT IN THE PRESS BEFORE SPEAKING WITH LEADERSHIP TO SEE WHETHER THEY WERE BEHIND IT. WE JUST WENT THROUGH A MAJOR BUDGET PROCESS, AS YOU KNOW, AND OUR BUDGET FROM '03 TO '04 WAS 1.8% HIGHER. THAT'S PRETTY LEAN. AS ONE OF THE. SOMEONE HERE IN CONCORD WHO HAS WORKED ON BUDGETS IN YEARS IT'S THE LEANEST BUDGET IN 25 YEARS. ACTUALLY LESS THAN THE RATE OF INFLATION WASN'T IT? YES, SO IF WE HAD T-BORE AND COULD HAVE SPEND UP TO THAT RATE OF INFLATION PLUS THE POPULATION GROWTH, WE COULD HAVE POSSIBLY SPENT $100 MILLION MORE THAT WE DON'T HAVE. THE OTHER ISSUE IF I CAN JUST FINISH UP ON ONE THING THAT CONCERNS ME IS THAT WE'VE HAD A PRETTY, FAIRLY STRONG HOUSE POSITION IN THE PAST CERTAINLY ON THE JUDICIAL CACR, AND NOW HOPEFULLY PERHAPS THE EDUCATIONAL CACR-2. WE CAN'T HAVE ANY QUESTIONS ON THE BALLOT EXPECTING TWO-THIRDS FROM PEOPLE. THAT'S MY REAL CONCERN. I'M FOCUSING ON THE ONE WE HAVE THE HISTORY OF SUPPORTING. PEOPLE GENERALLY FEEL YOU'RE LUCKY TO GET THE PEOPLE WHO VOTE FOR ONE IF YOU GET THAT. TO HAVE TWO OR THREE OR FOUR ON THERE WOULD BE A PROBLEM. IT'S PROBLEMATIC CERTAINLY. THE DISTRIBUTION OF EDUCATION AID. DO YOU EXPECT ANY ADJUSTMENTS THIS YEAR? I EXPECT WE'LL BE LOOKING AT ATE. . AT IT, AS WE DO EVERY YEAR. IN THE HOUSE AND THE SENATE I'M HOPEFUL WE HAVE SOME DIFFERENCES RIGHT NOW. WHAT WE PASSED LAST YEAR WAS A STEP FORWARD. CERTAINLY WE NEEDED TO DO THAT. WE DID THAT KNOWING IN THE SECOND YEAR WHAT WE MIGHT BE DOING WE HAD A COMMITTEE STUDY IT. THEY CAME UP WITH A RECOMMENDATION OF 4-2 TO CONTINUE ALONG. HOPEFULLY THEY'LL BE LOOKING AT IT. THE HOUSE AND THE SENATE WILL HAVE A POSITION AND TRY TO WORK TOGETHER TO MAKE WHATEVER CHANGES TO WORK ON AND IMPROVE WHAT WE DID. I WANTED TO TAKE NOTE THAT THE FEDERAL COURT OF COURSE JUST STRUCK DOWN THE PARENTAL NOTIFICATION BILL THAT PASSED THIS YEAR. IF THAT COMES UP AGAIN, WILL YOU TAKE A MORE ACTIVE ROLE, SENATOR? I KNOW THAT YOU DECLINED TO VOTE ON IT THE LAST TIME WHICH ENABLED IT TO PASS. WELL, MY POLICY HAS BEEN TO VOTE ON LEADERSHIP ISSUES ONLY AND ISSUES THAT AFFECT MY COMMUNITY. SENATE DISTRICT 10. PARENTAL NOTIFICATION IS A PERSONAL SOCIAL ISSUE. I BELIEVE IF ANYTHING IS GOING TO HAPPEN, I'M NOT SURE EVEN IF ANYTHING WILL HAPPEN THIS YEAR BUT I BELIEVE IT WOULD START IN THE HOUSE. IT'S SPLIT PRETTY MUCH EVEN IN THE HOUSE AND IN THE SENATE. WE'LL SEE WHAT HAPPENS BUT BOTH SIDES ARE LOOKING AT THEIR OPTIONS BUT THE ATTORNEY GENERAL IS APPEALING THAT DECISION. I THINK THAT THEY HAVE TO WAIT AND SEE WHAT THE RESULTS OF THAT IS. I'M NOT SURE. THERE ARE SOME PEOPLE WHO IMMEDIATELY WANTED THAT TO HAPPEN. I WOULD SAY UNDER THE RULES THAT WE USE FOR LATE INTRODUCTION IT PROBABLY WOULD QUALIFY FOR A LATE INTRODUCTION. HOWEVER, MY UNDERSTAND ING IS THAT MOST OF THE PEOPLE INVOLVED IN THAT ISSUE WANT TO WAIT AND SEE WHAT THE APPEAL DOES. EVEN IF THEY FILE LEGISLATION NOW, APPEAL MIGHT GIVE THEM MORE INSIGHT IF IT ISN'T CHANGED, EVEN THE FURTHER APPEAL MIGHT GET MORE INSIGHT ON WHAT NEEDS TO BE CHANGED. MY UNDERSTANDING IS MOST OF THE PEOPLE WHO HAVE SUPPORTED THAT WANT TO SEE AND WHAT THE RESULTS OF THAT APPEAL ARE AND THEN BRING IT UP AT A FUTURE TIME. I WANTED TO ASK YOU ABOUT THE GOVERNOR'S PROPOSAL FOR GETTING PRE-PRESCRIPTION DUGS FROM CANADA. THERE HAVE BEEN FDA OFFICIALS WHO QUITE CLEARLY STATED IT'S ILLEGAL WHAT IS BEING PROPOSED. DO YOU HAVE ANY CONCERNS ABOUT THAT OR DO YOU THINK THERE WILL BE A WAY TO WORK AROUND IT? I HOPE THERE'S A WAY TO WORK AROUND IT. CERTAINLY I FEEL THAT IF PRESCRIPTION DRUGS ARE AVAILABLE TO PEOPLE OF THIS STATE FOR A CERTAIN PRICE THAT'S CHEAPER THAN WHAT WE'RE DOING IT NOW, WE OUGHT TO BE ABLE TO MAKE THAT HAPPEN. IS IT ILLEGAL? THAT'S A DIFFERENT PROBLEM. I'M NOT SURE WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN THERE. BUT IT'S INCUMBENT WE DO IT IN THE BEST PROCESS WE CAN. IT JUST SEEMS WRONG TO ME THAT WE CAN JUST CROSS THE BORDER AND BUY THEM CHEAPER. I'M SUPPORTIVE OF TRYING TO DO THAT CERTAINLY AND WORKING OUT A WAY TO MAKE IT HAPPEN. I'M GOING TO GO FOR A LAST COMMENT. IS THERE A PARTICULAR ISSUE YOU THINK WILL EMERGE THIS SESSION THAT MAYBE ISN'T QUITE ON THE HORIZON YET? NOTHING THAT I CAN SEE THAT ISN'T QUITE ON THE HORIZON. I THINK THAT WE REALLY BEING A NON-BUDGET YEAR, WE WILL LOOK FURTHER INTO HOUSE BILL 608 THAT THE SENATORS HAVE WORKED VERY HARD AT AND THE EDUCATION FUNDING AND THE DISTRIBUTION FORMULA. THAT BILL IS ON THE BOOKS. I KNOW THAT COMMITTEE IS WORKING TO SEE IF THEY CAN STILL TWEAK THAT A LITTLE BIT. THAT'S. WE HAVE TO HAVE THAT SETTLED. I THINK THIS YEAR WILL BE THE TELL TALE OF IT ALL. DO YOU THINK THIS YEAR WILL ALSO BE MORE SURPRISES PERHAPS FROM THE CORNER OFFICE, MR. SPEAKER? I MAKE NO PREDICTION. YOU HAVE TO ASK THE CORNER OFFICE. IT WOULD BE A SURPRISE IF IT WASN'T. RIGHT. THANK YOU BOTH FOR JOINING US VERY MUCH. APPRECIATE IT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. |
| Intro Justice Return to index of stories... |
Finally, as this new year began, it also marked the end of a quarter century of service on the New Hampshire Supreme Court by David Brock. The Chief Justice retired December 31st but will be remembered for many of the decisions he wrote. Allison McNair recently sat down with David Brock to look back at some of the highlights and challenges of his career. |
| Chief Justice Return to index of stories... |
IT'S VERY DIFFICULT TO COME UP WITH A SINGLE ACCOMPLISHMENT. THERE HAVE BEEN SO MANY CHANGES SINCE I CAME TO THE SUPREME COURT IN 1978. WE'VE GONE THROUGH A UNIFIED COURT SYSTEM, STATE FUNDING OF THE COURT SYSTEM, THE STATE BUILDING MANY COURTHOUSES. IT'S JUST DIFFICULT TO SINGLE ANY ONE THING OUT. I THINK THAT YOU LOOK AT OUR JURISPRUDENCE AND WE'VE RENDERED SOME VERY IMPORTANT AND CONTROVERSIAL DECISIONS, NOT THE LEAST OF WHICH WAS THE CLAREMONT CASE. THAT WAS A VERY DIFFICULT CASE THAT CAME BEFORE US, AND WE DID WHAT WE THOUGHT WAS THE RIGHT THING REGARDLESS OF WHAT PUBLIC OPINION WOULD BE. THE FIRST CLAREMONT CASE SAID THE ULTIMATE RESPONSIBILITY FOR PROVIDING AN ADEQUATE EDUCATION TO OUR CHILDREN IS WITH THE STATE. IT'S A RESPONSIBILITY THAT CAN'T BE DELEGATED. YOU WROTE THE OPINION, DID YOU NOT, FOR THAT? YES. DO YOU THINK THAT HAS CAUSED SOME KIND OF A RIFT BETWEEN THE SUPREME COURT AND THE LEGISLATURE? THIS WHOLE ISSUE OF EDUCATION FUNDING, I MEAN, WILL IT EVER END AND BACK AND FORTH? WHO SHOULD ULTIMATELY DECIDE WHAT AN ADEQUATE EDUCATION IS? DO YOU THINK THAT CREATED A RIFT? I'VE WATCHED YOU THROUGH THE YEARS AND THINK MAYBE I SHOULD ASK YOU THAT QUESTION BASED ON. NO, SERIOUSLY. THERE'S NO QUESTION. IT'S BEEN A DIFFICULT ISSUE FOR THE LEGISLATURE TO COME TO GRIPS WITH. IT'S BECOME A VERY EMOTIONAL ISSUE. THERE'S OBVIOUSLY PRESENTLY A LACK OF REVENUE SOURCES AND IT CAUSED GREAT CONSTERNATION AMONGST SOME OF THE LEGISLATORS. I'M HOPEFUL THAT AT SOME POINT THE ISSUE WILL BE RESOLVED. WHAT DO YOU THINK OF THE FACT THAT PEOPLE WANT TO MOVE FORWARD AND SAY THAT THE SUPREME COURT SHOULD HAVE NOTHING TO DO AS FAR AS DECIDING EDUCATION? WHERE DID THAT ORIGINATE AND WHAT'S YOUR RESPONSE TO THAT? WELL, I DON'T KNOW WHO THE SPECIFIC ORIGINATORS WERE. I DO KNOW THAT THE HOUSE LEADERSHIP PASSED A RESOLUTION SAYING THAT OUR CLAREMONT DECISIONS WERE UNCONSTITUTIONAL AND THEREFORE THEY HAVE NO OBLIGATION TO ABIDE BY THEM. FORTUNATELY IT WAS KILLED IN THE SENATE. THE CONSTITUTIONAL PROPOSAL, I MEAN, THAT'S FAIR GAME. THAT'S THE SAFETY VALVE IN OUR SYSTEM OF CHECKS AND BALANCES. IF ANY BRANCH OF GOVERNMENT EXERCISES POWERS THAT THE OTHERS OR IF THE PUBLIC THINKS ARE BEYOND THEIR RESPONSIBILITIES, THEY CAN PROPOSE A CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT, PRESENT IT TO THE PEOPLE. AND IF TWO-THIRDS APPROVE IT, THAT BECOMES THE LAW. LET'S TALK ABOUT THE WHOLE ISSUE OF THE IMPEACHMENT HEARING IN THE HOUSE, THE VOTE AND THEN YOUR ACQUITTAL IN THE SENATE. IT WAS OBVIOUSLY VERY. A VERY PAINFUL EXPERIENCE FOR ME, FOR MY FAMILY, FOR THE COURT PERSONNEL HERE AT THE COURT. BUT IT WAS SOMETHING WE HAD TO GO THROUGH. AT ITS ROOTS THE INDEPENDENCE OF THE JUDICIARY WAS THE ISSUE. IT WAS SOMETHING THAT HAD TO BE PLAYED OUT AND WE DID IT. WE'VE MOVED ON FROM THERE. WE'RE TAKING GREAT STRIDES AND ESPECIALLY HERE AT THE SUPREME COURT. I WAS JUST SO PROUD OF WHAT WAS ACCOMPLISHED SINCE THEN IN ELIMINATING OUR BACKLOG. WE'RE DECIDING MOST CASES WITHIN THREE MONTHS OF ORAL ARGUMENTS. STARTING TOMORROW ALMOST ALL APPEALS WILL BE ACCEPTED BY THE COURTS SO PEOPLE WILL END UP HAVING FULL CONSIDERATION OF THEIR APPELLATE ISSUES BY THE COURT. I WANT TO READ YOU A QUOTE THAT WAS ACTUALLY ON THE WEB SITE AND I THINK IT CAME FROM A LAW JOURNAL. IT'S SOMETHING YOU SAID. IF I'VE CHANGED, IT COMES FROM A DEEPER UNDERSTANDING OF THE FRAILTY OF HUMAN NATURE AND THE VAST ARRAY OF PROBLEMS THAT PEOPLE HAVE. WHAT DID YOU MEAN BY THAT? WELL, I'VE SEEN SUCH A SEA CHANGE IN THE ISSUES THAT PEOPLE BRING TO THE COURT SINCE I FIRST BECAME A JUDGE BACK IN THE LATE 1970s. MORE AND MORE PEOPLE LOOK TO THE COURTS TO RESOLVE THEIR PROBLEMS. IT'S USUALLY IN AN ADD VERARY SETTING. WHEN YOU READ THE RECORD IN THESE CASES AND HEAR THEIR COMPLAINTS ABOUT ONE ANOTHER, YOU REALIZE THE FULL RANGE OF PROBLEMS THAT PEOPLE HAVE. IT'S MADE JUDGING MUCH MORE CHALLENGING AND COMPLICATED AND YOU REALLY HAVE TO TEMPER THE ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE WITH A SENSE OF HUMANITY TO TRY TO COME UP WITH PRAGMATIC DECISIONS THAT HOPEFULLY RESULT IN A RESOLUTION OF THESE DISPUTES. WHAT'S THE DRIVE HOME GOING TO BE LIKE DO YOU THINK TONIGHT? AS YOU WALK OUT OF THIS BUILDING FOR THE LAST TIME AS A CHIEF JUSTICE? ONE OF UTTER EXHILARATION AND HAPPINESS. I REALLY FEEL GOOD ABOUT THE DECISIONS THAT I'VE MADE. I'VE MADE IT FROM A PERSONAL VIEWPOINT, AND I THINK PROFESSIONAL VIEWPOINT, AT THE PROPER TIME. IT'S BEEN A GREAT PRIVILEGE AND HONOR TO SERVE THE CITIZENS OF NEW HAMPSHIRE AND PROVIDE THEM WITH THE MOST EFFICIENT ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE WE CAN WITH EXISTING LIMITED RESOURCES. THEY SHOULD KNOW HOW HARD WE AND OUR STAFF WORK GIVEN THAT THOSE LIMITED RESOURCES TO DO THE JOB AS WELL AS WE CAN. THEY HAVE A GROUP OF COMMITTED, DEDICATED, LOYAL EMPLOYEES WITHIN THE JUDICIAL BRANCH WHO JUST EXPERT THEMSELVES BEYOND. SOMETIMES BEYOND WHAT IS REASONABLY EXPECTED OF THEM TO DO THEIR JOBS. |
| Tag Chief Justice Return to index of stories... |
The Chief Justice says he's looking forward to spending time with his family and enjoying the outdoors. He'll even work on his golf handicap. We hope to sit down with him again once he's had a little time to unwind. |
| Web Pointer Return to index of stories... |
That is it for this edition of our program. For more information and links to our guests and interviews, connect with us on-line at nhptv.org. Join our online discussion and tell us what's on your mind. You can also find streaming video of all our broadcasts. |
| Tomorrow Return to index of stories... |
On the next New Hampshire Outlook - We continue our series of conversations with the candidates. We'll hear from Senator John Edwards on corporate responsibility. |
| Goodnight Return to index of stories... |
I'm Richard Ager. We'll see you next time. Thanks for watching. |
| Founders Return to index of stories... |
Thanks to our founding sponsors who have provided major funding for the production of New Hampshire Outlook: New Hampshire Charitable Foundation Public Service of New Hampshire Stratford Foundation |
| Tonight 10:00 Return to index of stories... |
Tonight on New Hampshire Outlook. We continue our series of conversations with the candidates. We'll hear from Senator John Edwards on corporate responsibility. Join us tonight at 10:00 only on New Hampshire Outlook. |
| key: National Politics / Government Return to index of stories... |
NEW HAMPSHIRE OUTLOOK Air Date/Time: 01/06/04 22:00 HOST: Richard Ager Length: 1:30 minutes In this edition of New Hampshire Outlook, NHPTV's nightly news magazine, we sit down with Statehouse leaders and take a look at the new legislative year. Chief Justice David Brock retires we join him for his last day at the Supreme Court. He reflects on his time on the court and what the future has instore. Today, Sen. Bill Bradley came to New Hampshire to lend his support to the Dean campaign. Bradley finished a strong second to Al Gore in the last New Hampshire primary, running on issues including health care and government reform. In his remarks, he said Dean stands for many of the same principles, and will surprise those who dismiss him as too liberal to be elected. PRODUCER/REPORTER: Richard Ager NAME OF PARTICIPANTS: Sen. Bill Bradley\Democratic Presidential Candidate 2000 |
| key: State Politics / Government Return to index of stories... |
NEW HAMPSHIRE OUTLOOK Air Date/Time: 01/06/04 22:00 HOST: Richard Ager Length: 17:00 minutes In this edition of New Hampshire Outlook, NHPTV's nightly news magazine, we sit down with Statehouse leaders and take a look at the new legislative year. Chief Justice David Brock retires we join him for his last day at the Supreme Court. He reflects on his time on the court and what the future has instore. With the primary only three weeks away, much of the news has been about the presidential campaigns. But this week, the state house is back in business as the legislature begins the second year of its two year session. There are more than 600 new bills to debate over the next several months, as well as a lot of holdover business from last year. I sat down today with Senate President Tom Eaton and House Speaker Gene Chandler to discuss what state lawmakers will be working on. PRODUCER/REPORTER: Richard Ager NAME OF PARTICIPANTS: Sen. Tom Eaton\President, NH State Senate, Rep. Gene Chandler\Speaker, NH House |
| key: State Politics / Government Return to index of stories... |
NEW HAMPSHIRE OUTLOOK Air Date/Time: 01/06/04 22:00 HOST: Richard Ager Length: 7:00 minutes In this edition of New Hampshire Outlook, NHPTV's nightly news magazine, we sit down with Statehouse leaders and take a look at the new legislative year. Chief Justice David Brock retires we join him for his last day at the Supreme Court. He reflects on his time on the court and what the future has instore. Finally, as this new year began, it also marked the end of a quarter century of service on the New Hampshire Supreme Court by David Brock. The Chief Justice retired December 31st but will be remembered for many of the decisions he wrote. Allison McNair recently sat down with David Brock to look back at some of the highlights and challenges of his career. PRODUCER/REPORTER: Allison McNair NAME OF PARTICIPANTS: David Brock\Chief Justice, NH Supreme Court 1986-2003 |
| WEB PROMO Return to index of stories... |
Tonight on New Hampshire Outlook. . Tonight at 10pm on New Hampshire Public Television. |