Some NH Lawmakers Want Free Passes to Cannon

[Nick]

http://newhampshire.watchdog.org/11758/nh-reps-want-to-ski-for-free/

Threecy?

Anyways, I don't know too much about the Cannon situation and I also don't have too much info on "watchdog.org" site this is sourced from; but the article is kind of interesting. According to the article, NH reps used to get free passes to Cannon but this policy changed last year when it was determined this violated a ban on gifts in the state.

(CONCORD) Some New Hampshire Representatives want their free lift ticket back. After getting free passes to state-owned Cannon Mountain Ski Area for years, a Legislative Ethics Committee letter last winter found that the freebies violated the Legislature’s ban on gifts over $25. But a trio of lawmakers have introduced a bill that would exempt Cannon Mountain from the gift ban.

Anyways... an interesting discussion I'm sure.

 

[jrmagic]

I hope the bill fails. The point of the gift ban is to avoid the appearance of impropriety by the legislators. Pushing legislation to allow it doesn't pass the smell test IMO.

 

[D-2.5-GT]

Typical entitlement.

They must not like having to pay the increasing ticket prices like the rest of us...

 

[AdironRider]

Considering NH legislators get paid like 100 bucks a year, I dont think this is that big a deal.

Assuming that is still the case, but arent NH house members basically volunteers? I realize the Gov has that mansion in Rye and such...

 

[Nick]

Considering NH legislators get paid like 100 bucks a year, I dont think this is that big a deal.

Assuming that is still the case, but arent NH house members basically volunteers? I realize the Gov has that mansion in Rye and such...

This is why I wanted to be careful with my commentary on this, as I don't know enough about NH politics ....

 

[BenedictGomez]

Here are the 3 A-holes listed in the article.

Representatives Gary Coulombe (D-Berlin), Andrew Schimdt (D-Grantham), and Herb Richardson (R-Lancaster) are sponsoring HB 514, which adds an exemption to the ethic guidelines

Horrible move politically.

This is why I wanted to be careful with my commentary on this, as I don't know enough about NH politics ....

You dont need to. Nobody is forcing a gun to their head to make them take the job.

 

[bobbutts]

I believe the time and money wasted making this an official bill is far more costly vs. any lift ticket savings. As a NH resident I'd like to see these legislators stop messing around and get to work. I don't give a damn if they get comps or not.

 

[AdironRider]

Here are the 3 A-holes listed in the article.



Horrible move politically.



You dont need to. Nobody is forcing a gun to their head to make them take the job.

Says the out of state guy.

This is a blip on the radar compared to NH's other issues.

 

[Nick]

Yeah I can see though how the "blips" are symptomatic or representative of other fundamental issues.

Also said by an out of state guy :lol:

 

[AdironRider]

No doubt, but this is a local issue.

I can see Bene's thoughts given the junk show that is Albany, but NH is perfection compared to that...

Frankly, given they are paid basically nothing for their time, I think getting compd ski tickets (this costs noone anything really - those lifts will spin regardless) is a political play to create drame more than anything else.

 

[BenedictGomez]

Says the out of state guy.

Yes, one should only have or form opinions on matters that happen within the borders of one's own state.

I anxiously await all your other Alpinezone.com posts, which from now on will only pertain to threads, comments, thoughts, or musings of or related to events contained within the borders of New Hampshire.

I don't give a damn if they get comps or not.

I doubt many people do. But you can certainly see how it could create a conflict of interests as jrmagic noted.

But it's really just a dumb move politically. My guess is relatively few NH residents as a function of percentage were even aware of this, but now these 3 called attention to a bill (which costs money) that's chief function is to restore a perk for politicians, at a time in American history when many people are fed up with such things. Watch this be used for fodder against each of them the next time they run.

 

[billski]

I'm for giving them the perk. Put Cannon mountain at the forefront of their mind, in their face. Bring the family. No better lobbyist than a kid bugging their parents go to skiing. So when funding time comes along, they've got a fresh perspective why a treasure like this needs to be well-operated.

It costs pretty much nothing for a resort to hand out free tickets. As long as there is transparency, I've no issue. Just don't go giving them free beers, skis, meals, etc.

 

[billski]

Yes, one should only have or form opinions on matters that happen within the borders of one's own state.

+1

 

[AdironRider]

Yes, one should only have or form opinions on matters that happen within the borders of one's own state.

I anxiously await all your other Alpinezone.com posts, which from now on will only pertain to threads, comments, thoughts, or musings of or related to events contained within the borders of New Hampshire.



I doubt many people do. But you can certainly see how it could create a conflict of interests as jrmagic noted.

But it's really just a dumb move politically. My guess is relatively few NH residents as a function of percentage were even aware of this, but now these 3 called attention to a bill (which costs money) that's chief function is to restore a perk for politicians, at a time in American history when many people are fed up with such things. Watch this be used for fodder against each of them the next time they run.

You should probably know what youre talking about first though if you are going to comment on another states politics. NH people use common sense, and know this is a non-issue. Especially in those districts the 3 people mentioned are from. If you knew what you were talking about, youd know they could already take gifts as long as they file a disclosure to begin with. Furthermore, this bill creates an exemption for Cannon Mtn, not a free for all. So yeah, out of state sensationalism doesnt really apply here.

These are effectively unpaid volunteers. How is getting a free ski day, from a state owned entity to begin with mind you, going to affect their judgement calls?

So the state is giving a gift (that costs nothing other than the paper the lift tic is printed on) to itself? This is an issue why?

If you think anyone in Lancaster is going to give a shit that their rep wanted a free ski ticket, you are sorely mistaken.

Again NH does not equal NY. In this arena of politics, its extremely local. If anything, these districts want Cannon in the public conversation. Lancaster isnt exactly booming.

 

[riverc0il]

Looks like a Repub is one of the three sponsoring... so it is bipartisan. Threecy will still find a way to work this over to his agenda though. :lol:

Considering NH legislators get paid like 100 bucks a year, I dont think this is that big a deal.

Assuming that is still the case, but arent NH house members basically volunteers? I realize the Gov has that mansion in Rye and such...

Some might argue the fact that NH legislators not getting paid keeps them from being full time politicians thus making not receiving any kick backs, perks, and benefits just as important. I'm dubious of politicians not getting paid because it means you have to be rich or retired to be able to run for office, it certainly limits the pool. Any ways...

Considering leasing Cannon is a political issue, I think pushing for free tickets as a benefit is a conflict of interest. I don't see how this can't be seen as a conflict of interest regardless of which side of the issue you are on.

If elected officials need to entertain out of state guests, they can put it on their personal credit card and submit an expense report with documentation on who they needed to entertain and for what reasons.

 

[AdironRider]

Think about it logically Riv. Do you really think a couple comp tix are going to sway a local politicians vote on leasing? Really? Even if it did, how many state reps ski at Cannon to take advantage of it, I suspect the pool is small.

Were not talking suitcases of cash left in aisle 3 of the library here, were talking a comp lift ticket. THe bill is creating an exemption for Cannon. Im ok with it.

I know the rep from my hometown is a local schoolteacher and pulls double duty. Not exactly well off, but not hurting either. While I can see how not having them paid certainly excludes a lot of candidates, one could also argue that they are truely in it for public service, which is pretty rare these days in politics. Every argument can flip.

Again, this seems to be media sensationalism of kickbacks and under the table money plays when in reality its not. This is no different than arguing we need to charge them for the stationary they wrote the bill on, given that Cannon is a public asset to begin with.

 

[BenedictGomez]

You should probably know what youre talking about first though if you are going to comment on another states politics. NH people use common sense, and know this is a non-issue. Especially in those districts the 3 people mentioned are from. If you knew what you were talking about, youd know they could already take gifts as long as they file a disclosure to begin with. Furthermore, this bill creates an exemption for Cannon Mtn, not a free for all. So yeah, out of state sensationalism doesnt really apply here.

These are effectively unpaid volunteers. How is getting a free ski day, from a state owned entity to begin with mind you, going to affect their judgement calls?

So the state is giving a gift (that costs nothing other than the paper the lift tic is printed on) to itself? This is an issue why?

If you honestly dont understand how/why this could create a potential conflict of interest, or why "giving away free tickets to politicians" to a select entity with state ties isn't potentially troublesome, then perhaps you should spend some time studying similar issues with "out of state" entities.

 

[Puck it]

It is a kickback. It should not espaecially for a quote unquote political position.

These things breed corruption and greed. Sorry they do, even the smallest things.

And NH people are not the people they use to be. Look who they voted in Nov. They lower half from Manchester down to the Mass Border are all displaced Masshole liberals now. It is not the same demographic as ten years ago. Sorry is that is too political but it is the truth.

 

[riverc0il]

Puck It, don't forget about us liberal University transplants up here in central NH. Not that that has ANYTHING to do with the discussion at hand. Seriously. Where did that come from?

:beer:

AR... dubious ethical position, IMO. I try not to resort to the slippery slope argument too much but in this case, I think it is appropriate and valid. You are arguing that small inexpensive low cost conflicts of interest are acceptable. Where does it end? What is your upper end? If a free ticket to Cannon is acceptable, in the name of fairness, you would need to extend that to ALL state owned operations that cost money. Flume for sure. Maybe they should get free parking at Hampton Beach. Maybe they should get free access to state beaches that normally charge fees. Maybe, thanks to their service, they should get free motor vehicle registration or free licensing. Etc. Where do you draw the line and how would you justify their not getting discounts and freebies over and above where you draw your arbitrary line? The better option is simple: no arbitrary line, legislatures pay the same rate as everyone else.

 

[deadheadskier]

Well, they could ask for the State Park Plates and take care of a few of those perks riv. :lol: