inside sources print logo
Get up to date New Hampshire news in your inbox

As U.S. Supreme Court Hears Oral Arguments, NH Dems Vow to Push for Late-Term Abortion

New Hampshire Democrats are using abortion cases before the U. S. Supreme Court to renew their push for unrestricted abortion access in the Granite State.

“We are at a crisis moment for abortion rights: The threat to the constitutional right to an abortion has never been greater in our country. Six months from now, abortion could be illegal in half the country,” said Kayla Montgomery, vice president for public affairs at Planned Parenthood New Hampshire Action Fund.

The Supreme Court held oral arguments on Wednesday as it considers whether the state of Mississippi can ban abortion at 15 weeks. The court previously heard arguments on the Texas law banning abortion at six weeks, and a decision on that case is pending.

It’s possible the court could overturn either the 1992 Casey decision or the 1973 Roe decision, both of which restricted the right of voters to pass laws regulating abortion. Some court watchers believe they heard Chief Justice John Roberts suggest a way to leave the Mississippi law in place without overturning Roe.

A decision is expected in June.

Gov. Chris Sununu, a self-described pro-choice Republican who supports upholding Roe v. Wade, signed a 24-week abortion ban when he approved the state budget. The ban was forced into the budget bill by House conservatives who threatened to derail the legislation over the ban. He has since said he supports removing the requirement that all women seeking abortions be required to undergo an ultrasound first.

According to Cornerstone, a non-partisan, non-profit Christian advocacy organization, the description of the ultrasound as mandatory is inaccurate.

“Under the act, performing an abortion without an ultrasound will only be punished in one situation: where there is a “substantial risk” that the child is at least 24 weeks old. In any other circumstance, the provider can skip the ultrasound and face no penalties under the act,” the group says in a fact sheet on the new law.

Asked about the Mississippi case this week, Sununu told NHJournal he wasn’t paying attention to it and does not believe Roe will be overturned.

Devon Chaffee, executive director of the ACLU of New Hampshire, said if the Supreme Court ends Roe, abortion in New Hampshire is still legal for the first six months. Chaffee and Montgomery stood with state lawmakers on Wednesday promising legislative action to make sure abortion stays legal no matter what happens in Washington.

“Unfortunately, it is no longer an option for us to count on the U.S. Supreme Court to protect our reproductive rights,” said state Sen. Rebecca Whitley, D-Contoocook. “Now is the time to take proactive action to protect abortion access in New Hampshire.”

Democrats want abortion rights codified in state law, and they are pushing to undo the 24-week ban and return to the policy of unrestricted legal abortion at any point in a pregnancy.

All the members of New Hampshire’s congressional delegation came out in support of upholding Roe on Wednesday, as well as the federal effort to make sure abortion rights are protected from the Supreme Court. Rep. Chris Pappas said the Women’s Health Protection Act, supported by all members of the delegation, will codify Roe as federal law.

“We can no longer count on the Supreme Court to defend Roe and be the backstop as they have been – in this new era it’s up to us to fight back,” Pappas said.

Supporters of overturning Roe v. Wade have long argued that abortion should be regulated by the democratic process as Pappas suggests, not a court’s ruling.

Sen. Maggie Hassan called the Mississippi ban “extreme” and devastating for women.

“This is one of the most extreme abortion bans in the country and it would take us back to almost 50 years ago,” Hassan said.

Shannon McGinley, executive director of Cornerstone Action of New Hampshire, called out Democrats for equating New Hampshire’s 24-week ban with Mississippi’s law or the fetal heartbeat bill in Texas.

“The currently pending Supreme Court cases challenging abortion law in Mississippi and Texas are not going to have any legal effect on our law in New Hampshire,” McGinley said. “Our law prohibits abortion at six months, not 15 weeks (Mississippi) or six weeks (Texas). Those trying to link New Hampshire’s moderate law with these other states are ignoring the facts.”

Both major Supreme Court abortion decisions, Roe and Casey, allow for states to restrict abortion at some point in the pregnancy. Even those restrictions are considered loose compared to most developed countries, which set the limits at 12 to 15 weeks for elective abortions.

McGinley said Democrats are engaging in misinformation to push for complete, unrestricted access to abortion.

“Planned Parenthood’s position and messaging is predictable in its attempt to cynically sway public opinion,” she said. “With every elected branch of government in New Hampshire led by Republicans, not by Planned Parenthood, there is no reason why we shouldn’t be able to protect a law with absolutely no impediment to abortion access in those first six months, but that does balance that access with commonsense protections for the late-term pre-born.”

Kuster, Pappas Back Biden ‘Build Back’ Plan Adding Billions in Debt, Benefits for Illegals

U.S. Rep. Chris Pappas says the Biden’ Build Back Better” plan he voted for last Friday “is fully paid for and will reduce the deficit by $112 billion.”

Rep. Annie Kuster also says the bill “is fully paid for” by “making super-wealthy corporations and the top one percent pay their fair share.”

But nearly every economic review of the legislation, including the Congressional Budget Office analysis they both claim to rely on, says the bill will add billions in new debt. And the nonpartisan Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget (CRFB) projects the actual cost of the bill is closer to $5 trillion.

That is just one aspect of the budget reconciliation bill Kuster and Pappas helped pass in a straight partisan vote (Maine’s Rep. Jared Golden was the only Democratic “no” vote) that has received little attention from New Hampshire’s media. Democrats say the Child Tax Credit monthly checks, increased healthcare subsidies, and taxpayer-funded pre-K for all will be popular with voters. And they may be right. But there are other details almost certain to appear in campaign ads next year.

 

ADDING TO THE DEBT

New Hampshire’s congressional delegation touted their votes when the House bill passed last week, even as the Congressional Budget Office released a report indicating the $1.75 trillion social spending bill could increase the deficit between $160 and $360 billion over ten years, despite Biden administration promises the spending will be covered by increased taxes.

And the CRFB points out the Democrats’ plan includes ten years of revenue, but only includes spending on some of the largest items for five years — or even one. For example, the Child Tax Credit sending monthly checks to couples earning up to $150,000 costs $130 billion. But Democrats only include it in their 10-year plan for just one year. Assuming the checks don’t stop in 2024 — an election year– and instead last for the entire 1o years, the actual cost is an additional $1 trillion. None of which is paid for in the current plan.

 

BENEFITS FOR ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS

Under the Trump administration, recipients of the monthly Child Tax Credit checks ($300 per child under age six and $250 for each child ages six to 17) had to have Social Security numbers. Under the Build Back Better bill passed by Kuster and Pappas, that requirement is gone, allowing many more people in the U.S. illegally to collect the taxpayer-funded benefit.

The bill also includes a 10-year “amnesty-lite” program in the form of work permits, Social Security numbers, eligibility for welfare benefits, and the ability to get a driver’s license for some 4 or 6 million illegal immigrants. The Washington Post calls it “the largest mass-legalization program for undocumented immigrants in U.S. history.”

 

TAX CUTS FOR THE WEALTHY

The Biden budget lifts the cap on state and local tax (SALT) deductions for federal filers from $10,000 to $80,000. Few Americans — and very few Granite Staters — pay $80,000 in state and local taxes. According to the left-leaning Tax Policy Center, the top 20 percent of earners would reap more than 96 percent of the benefits of a SALT repeal, and the top one percent of all earners would see 57 percent of benefits.

 

Lifting the SALT deduction cap helps subsidize the costs of high local taxes in places like Massachusetts, New York and California. But it does little for the taxpayers of the Granite State. The roughly 10 percent of folks in New Hampshire who itemize deductions only receive about 0.4 percent of the total SALT deduction benefits.

 

MASSIVE INCREASE IN THE SIZE OF THE IRS

Public pressure killed the Biden administration’s plans to increase bank reporting requirements to reach more lower-income earners — a plan supported early on by both Kuster and Pappas. However, House Democrats did vote to drastically increase the size of the IRS in hopes of collecting more tax revenues.

Democrats voted to add $88 billion of new funding for the IRS, including $45 billion dedicated to enforcement and $4 billion to administer green energy initiatives. The biggest expense will be some 80,000 new IRS agents to conduct audits. The revenue target set by the legislation is $400 billion in additional tax collections over ten years. Given that high-income earners tend to have tax attorneys handling their finances, many observers believe this $40 billion a year will come from small business owners and upper-middle-class individuals.

Democrats dismiss this data, arguing the benefits of the bill outweigh any problems.

“This legislation will lower taxes while bringing down the cost of the everyday expenses that burden so many Granite Staters,” Pappas said. “It will invest in a strong workforce that will help our small businesses and economy thrive. It will lift up working people, give our kids the best head start we can, and chart a course for a healthier, stronger, more resilient future.”

 

Pappas and Kuster Break With Biden, Progressives on Payouts to Illegal Immigrants

Granite State U.S. Reps. Annie Kuster and Chris Pappas have a reputation for being loyal Democratic Party soldiers. But on one of the hottest political issues of the moment — cash payouts to immigrant families separated at the border — they have both broken with President Joe Biden and progressives in their party.

At issue is the Biden Justice Department’s current negotiations with the ACLU and other immigrant advocates over a proposal to pay perhaps as much as $450,000 in reparations to illegal immigrants who were separated from their children during the Trump administration.

First asked about the reports, Biden called them “garbage,” adding “That’s not gonna happen.”

But just three days later, on November 6, Biden reversed his stance and claimed any such taxpayer-funded payments were a moral obligation. “If in fact, because of the outrageous behavior of the last administration, you coming across the border, whether it was legal or illegal, and you lost your child, you lost your child! … you deserve some kind of compensation no matter what the circumstance. What that will be, I have no idea,” Biden said.

The Trump administration separated around 5,500 children from their families when they were caught illegally crossing the border. At the reported $450,000 per child, the settlement will be close to $2.5 billion.

It’s a position embraced by pro-immigration advocates and social-justice organizations — but rejected by Kuster and Pappas.

“Absolutely not. I don’t support any kind of settlement like that,” Pappas told radio host Jack Heath on Wednesday.

Pappas is heading into an uphill reelection fight once the new map for the First Congressional District is complete in the spring. With a likely GOP advantage in a newly-drawn district, supporting payouts to undocumented migrants is politically problematic.

The next day, Kuster echoed Pappas’ position on the same radio show.

“That’s not happening. The president has said that’s not happening,” Kuster mistakenly told Heath.

With New Hampshire Republicans turning her district even more Democrat-leaning (no Republican has carried it since 2010), Kuster is believed to have a safe seat, despite her unimpressive polling. However, it’s possible a national Republican wave election could break against Kuster, particularly with Biden polling in the 30s in swing states like New Hampshire.

A recent NBC News poll found Americans trust Republicans more on border security than Democrats by a 27-point margin, their largest advantage among 13 areas polled. In the most recent Washington Post/ABC News poll, Americans said they’d prefer to be represented by a Republican in Congress over a Democrat by a margin of 51 to 41 percent. That’s the largest GOP advantage in the generic preference question in the history of the poll.

“If you’re a Democrat and President Biden won your seat by 16 points, you’re in a competitive race next year,” House GOP Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) recently declared. “You are no longer safe.”

Kuster and Pappas aren’t just abandoning the Biden administration’s position, they are also moving to the right of immigrant activists and progressives with their position. 

Eva Castillo, director of the New Hampshire Alliance for Immigrants and Refugees, said the families are owed something for the resulting trauma.

“I think they should pay the families something,” Castillo said. “It was a callous decision on the part of the government, the least we could do is pay them for their pain and suffering,” she said.

The ACLU, which is suing the government over the separations, also agrees that families ought to be compensated.

“For the sake of these families, the Biden administration must repair the harms inflicted by family separation and ensure such an atrocity never happens again,” Lee Gelernt, deputy director of the ACLU’s Immigrants’ Rights Project wrote.

While illegal border crossings have been trending downward since July, the number of migrants apprehended at the U.S. southern border in October is 128 percent higher than October 2020, when Trump was still president, according to data released this week by Customs and Border Protection (CBP). July saw more than 213,000 border crossings, a 20-year high.