A+ A A-

Does Senator Odell realize Groton wind power goes to Mass.?

To the editor,
New Hampshire State Senator Bob Odell, justifying his vote against the energy moratorium, recently stated that the government should not be in charge of "picking winners and losers in the production of renewable energy."
Senator Odell, the government has put itself in that position many times. Our government picks winners and losers by endorsing and subsidizing energy projects. Governor Lynch was part of a big celebration in Franklin when the Northern Pass was announced ballyhooing the perceived benefits of industrial hydro-electricity coming through New Hampshire. The federal government has handed out many millions subsidizing wind energy projects, underwriting their construction costs and guaranteeing profits for the corporations even if they never produce a kilowatt of electricity. It is absolutely the responsibility of our legislators to decide if an energy project is ultimately beneficial or harmful to our state. That is your job, Senator Odell, and a moratorium would have provided the time and facts to make good decisions.
Senator Odell lamented that the state will not meet its 25 percent renewable energy goal if we eliminate renewable energy projects before they are built. I guess the senator is unaware that all the electricity and renewable energy credits (RCIs) produced at the Coos wind project go to Vermont and the electricity and RCIs generated at the Groton wind project go to Massachusetts. Either New Hampshire has already met its renewable energy goal and can afford to ship these precious energy credits out of state or we have no intention of ever meeting this goal.
Senator Odell reported that 500 new permanent jobs would be created in Franklin if Northern Pass is completed. Even Northern Pass never made such an outrageous claim. Only five permanent jobs would be created while many other jobs have already been lost or are in jeopardy in the tourism dependent and second home areas of the state. Real estate sales have plummeted in the Newfound Lake area because of the three wind projects slated for that area and the Northern Pass project has had a chilling effect on home sales in the Campton/Thornton area already and NP is years away from fruition.
Senator Odell may feel very proud that he was part of the effort to squash the energy moratorium perhaps because he feels these projects won't affect the Monadnock area of the state. If he had taken the time to read testimony that was turned in at the SB-99 public hearing and looked at the ISO New England 2030 study, he would have noticed a 10,000 mw transmission line slated for the southern part of the state where his constituents live. Maybe if he looks at these maps he will have a little more sympathy for his fellow N.H. citizens around Newfound Lake, along the Northern Pass route, and the environmental agencies concerned for the beauty of the state.
Pamela Martin
Plymouth

Last Updated on Friday, 26 April 2013 12:57

Hits: 297

I bet they don't even know what's in the bill Ayotte voted against

To the editor,
It's great to see the local liberals writing letters because they are glowing examples of why the rest of us should reject their ideas. The recent barrage of anti-gun letters lacks any intellectual thought process toward solving the problems related to the recent tragedy at Sandy Hook and other gun related tragedies.
Chastising Senator Ayotte for voting against the proposed gun control bill is their latest senseless rant. For starters, even if Senator Ayotte discovered the cure for cancer these people wouldn't vote for her. Why? She's an evil Republican and if that's not bad enough, Senator Ayotte can read and make decisions based on logic. This simply doesn't work for liberals. According to them, it shouldn't matter that the proposed legislation wouldn't have prevented the tragedy at Sandy Hook. It shouldn't matter that the proposed legislation wouldn't save a single child from a twisted individual who is bent on killing people (with or without a gun). It shouldn't matter that we've had similar "tough" guns laws for years that failed to lower gun violence and in fact resulted in higher gun related violence. It shouldn't matter that the alleged 90 percent of "polled" Americans that favor back ground checks is proven to only be 49 percent, nor should it matter that few if any of them have actually read what was being proposed. It shouldn't matter that 94 percent of Americans do not see changing the gun laws as "important". It shouldn't matter that the proposed legislation includes provisions that would allow significant government intrusions that could go beyond the purchase of a gun.
No, facts and results are NOT important. Passing legislation that makes people "feel good" right now is the most important thing.
I'd bet that none of the clueless letter writers I referred to earlier have any idea what was in the proposed legislation that Senator Ayotte voted against. I'd also bet that representatives Shaheen, Kuster and Shea Porter don't know what's in it either but they would eagerly vote for it. Why? Because they blindly support Obama's failed "feel good" policies. One inescapable fact is that they are more responsible for putting more guns and ammunition on the street than the NRA or any gun lobbying group. Guns and ammo have been flying off the shelves in record numbers ever since the beginning of the push for tighter gun control (I can assure you that the NRA didn't start this campaign). You would think they would have learned a thing or two from President Clinton's push for gun control; he also created a huge gun buying spree when he too pushed for and achieved tighter gun laws which resulted in more guns on the street with no decreases in gun violence. When it comes to liberal Democrats, some things never change.
Terry Stewart
Alton Bay

Last Updated on Friday, 26 April 2013 12:49

Hits: 302

Why do law abiding people need high powered lethal weapons?

To the editor,
A question for Don Ewing:
I just read your letter to the editor re: Rights to Own Guns and Pres. Obama. One question, sir. Could you please give me and the rest of New England a logical answer as to why ordinary, law abiding people need to own or be able to use high powered, lethal weapons?
If you are able to separate out your political leanings, it would be very appreciated. Just a logical answer without misleading us. Thanks.
Bernadette Loesch
Laconia

Last Updated on Friday, 26 April 2013 12:33

Hits: 278

Democrats have no real intent of lifting the poor out of poverty

To the editor,
Democrats have declared since Adam and Eve that they represent the less fortunate of America. If that is true no advocate for any one has failed their cause with such certainty, for so long as the Democratic Party. If the thinking/programs of the Democratic Party were indeed the solutions to the unequal society is it not reasonable to expect after 75 years there might be one sign of progress. We implemented endless legislation from the greatest "society equalizers" of the 20th century, from FDR to JFK and LBJ. Government programs from all of them trumpeted with great fan fare, assigned catchy code names like the "New Deal" and the "Great Society" all aimed to produce EQUALITY and reduce poverty in America. Face the truth people, every boondoggle, contrived, jury-rigged, paper-clipped, band-aided, cleverly-hyped, whirly gig contraption dreamed up by that donkey threesome, hoodwinked on a society, brain washed to think GOVERNMENT would solve their every problem has done absolutely NOTHING. . . I repeat. . . NOTHING except push this country ever closer to financial extinction.
After all the great hype and the trillions spent, what do we have to show for it? Record poverty, record numbers on welfare by any measurement, record disability claims (many totally fraudulent), record debt waiting delivery to our children and Democrats who never stop PROMISING their NEXT IDEA will FIX EVERYTHING. We are 60 years past FDR, 50 years past JFK, and 40 years past LBJ.The differences between the top and bottom of society has never been greater despite the greatest number of safety nets and most costly social programs in our history all SOLD TO US IN THEIR DAY BY DEMOCRATS attached to promises to reduce poverty and produce equality. Guess what....EVERY IDEA FAILED.
Democrats have no intent to let the POOR OUT OF POVERTY only to lose dependent voters. They know making empting promises with catchy names, tied in candy wrappers buys elections. The less fortunate will never stop buying the sweet ILLUSION free handouts from government will bring them equality no matter that it has not happened after 75 years of promising that it will.
Tony Boutin
Gilford

Last Updated on Friday, 26 April 2013 12:30

Hits: 376

Author of 'Tundra' comic strip needs to find a second act

To the editor,
Does the cartoonist who draws your "Tundra" strip think anything besides snowmen is funny?
Ray Carbone
Bemontt

Last Updated on Friday, 26 April 2013 12:26

Hits: 402

 
The Laconia Daily Sun - All Rights Reserved
Privacy Policy
Powered by BENN a division of the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

Login or Register

LOG IN