The presidential primary is ages away, and the whole armchair pundit thing is tiresome, but this episode bears recording.

Kelly Ayotte won her seat at the crest of a big bad red wave in 2010, and for good measure riding on the bipartisan framework of having been reappointed as AG by a (then) highly popular sitting Democratic governor.

Those conditions will not happen again. For her to win re-election in presidential cycle 2016, our junior senator will have to win a fair share of undeclared voters.

When she sided with the NRA and not with 91% of the state over background checks, with the resulting poll numbers and the fiasco of her town halls, she did irreparable harm to her chances. The way she is viewed now by Granite Staters has changed for the worse. Now she’s to the right of… just about every Republican peer in New England. Getting the undeclareds needed to keep her seat in the Village has now become a steep uphill climb for her.

I don’t know who told Marco Rubio it would help him win the NH Primary to defend her with an ad (likely for self-serving reasons of their own), but he was badly served by it. Romney in 2012, and McCain in the primary previous, clearly show that to win here, you need a sizable percentage of (habitually right-leaning) undeclared voters.

He was probably advised that by helping Ayotte now, he’ll get the upper hand in support from either her (unlikely) and her network (maybe) when running for president.

But the wiser path was to steer clear of the self-inflicted damage Ayotte did to herself. Now he’s associated with propping up a position opposed by almost a totality of voters in the state.

The worst week in Kelly Ayotte’s political career - caused by her active opposition to the will of 91% of Granite Staters on background checks - is ending on a similarly unhappy note for her political future.

While the remarkable and heroic Gabby Giffords is close to the state tonight to receive the 2013 Profile in Courage Award, she has also penned an op-ed in the Union Leader over Senator Ayotte’s tin ear on popular gun reform measures.  Here’s a taste - but really - read the whole thing:

I heard Sen. Ayotte, at her town hall last week, tell the daughter of murdered Sandy Hook Principal Dawn Hochsprung that she felt she could vote against the background checks bill because expanded background checks might not have prevented the Newtown shooting. But that’s not the goal the policy was trying to solve.

We know we can’t say it would have prevented Newtown, or Tucson for that matter. But expanding background checks will prevent criminals and mentally ill people from getting guns; and in those instances, it will save lives in the future. That’s the goal. If Sen. Ayotte didn’t know that, she didn’t pay enough attention to the policy.

…

I can’t tell you why Sen. Ayotte voted against this common sense measure. Sen. Ayotte is a former attorney general, so she must know that expanding background checks will keep guns out of the hands of many dangerous people and will prevent crimes. And she’s a parent, so she must know how it feels to fear for your child’s safety.

Granite Staters have reason to be angry with her. They see that the policy is there — the facts are not in dispute. And they know they and their neighbors all support the policy, overwhelmingly. So they’re left to wonder: What guided Kelly Ayotte’s decision if not facts and not popular support?

Of course, there is a way for Ayotte to climb out of this mess. She could admit she was wrong and vote the way New Hampshire wants her to the next go around. Because as Gabby Giffords and Erica Lafferty and a myriad of Granite Staters have shown, we are not going away on common sense efforts to reduce gun violence.

The Union Leader accused Erica Lafferty, the daughter of murdered Sandy Hook Elementary school principal Dawn Hochsprung, of “bullying” our junior Senator Kelly Ayotte over her opposition to background checks for guns, a position supported by 91% of Granite Staters.

To the best of my knowledge, the Union Leader published Ms. Lafferty’s response in print, but not online. Here it is (with her permission). Readers can decide for themselves if they feel “bullied” by this further advocacy on behalf of the safety of our children.

To the Editor: In your May 1 editorial, “Ayotte’s gun vote: ‘Disgusting’ political bullying,” I was criticized for confronting Sen. Ayotte at a recent town hall in Warren about her vote against expanded background checks.

Your paper described me as “unmoved” by Ayotte’s explanation that these checks wouldn’t have stopped a tragedy like the one at Sandy Hook Elementary School, where my mother and 25 others were gunned down in December.

Forgive me for seeming “unmoved,” but the senator’s argument misses the point of the nationwide push for gun reform entirely. Newtown opened our country’s eyes to the fact that we have a problem with gun violence — and the bloodshed must end. While background checks may not have prevented the massacre in Newtown, they’ve been proven to keep guns out of dangerous hands.

And most importantly, they’ve been proven to save lives. No Senate vote or legislative proposal can bring back my mother, but it can save others from experiencing the heartache I’ll live with for the rest of my life.

I’m not asking for sympathy. I’m not asking for pity. I just don’t want anyone else to endure the grief of losing a loved one to gun violence. Background checks will help.

ERICA LAFFERTY 

Naugatuck, Conn.

Erica Lafferty (daughter of murdered Sandy Hook principal Dawn Hochsprung) stands with New Hampshire, and New Hampshire stands with her on common sense gun safety.

In New Hampshire, Tamerlan Tsarnev was able to purchase dangerous explosives possibly used in the Marathon bombings thanks to a law put into place by the 2010-2012 state Republican supermajority.

WaPo:

Tamerlan Tsarnaev bought two “Lock and Load” reloadable mortar kits containing 24 shells each on the evening of Feb. 6, said April Walton, the manager of Phantom Fireworks in Seabrook

…

The amount of gunpowder that could be harvested from the kits — less than a pound and a half — would not have been enough to detonate the Boston bombs, company Vice President William Weimer said, although it’s possible some of that powder may have been used.

Although New Hampshire is much more fireworks friendly than neighboring states, “reloadable mortar kits” once had been illegal here. And for good reason. NHPR:

Monday afternoon, the Fire Marshal’s office presented a fireworks safety demonstration.  Fire investigator Chris Wyman placed a watermelon above a mortar, to substitute a person’s body part.

“We’re gonna shoot on one, ready? Three, two, one! [two explosions] That is significant. That was solely shear velocity that went through that watermelon and broke that watermelon apart. You heard the effect go off actually seconds later. Shear velocity coming out of that mortar. So you can understand that if you had a portion of your body, a hand or God forbid even your head over that device when you lit it off, you can see the impact that it has.”

It’s that kind of impact that has Fire Marshal Degnan hoping to see reloadable mortars put back on the illegal fireworks list.

 “When this law went into effect, it wasn’t one week to the day following the time that that went into effect that we had a gentleman who had set them off and one blew apart. He had shrapnel in his leg as well as his son lost an eye.”

And the Union Leader on a particularly bad outcome from reloadable mortars:

Reloadable mortar fireworks that New Hampshire made legal last year were involved in a Pelham fireworks mishap that left 13 people injured last week, according to a fire investigator.“They were a factor in that incident,” said state Deputy Fire Marshal Rob Farley, whose office is investigating the accident.Legislators last year changed state law to allow for more types of fireworks to be sold.“There’s no doubt in my mind it increased the risk to potential users because some of the things banned before because of safety reasons were allowed to be used — the most notable of which was reloadable mortars,” Farley said.

The bill to make reloadable mortars legal in New Hampshire was born from the 2011-2012 Republican supermajority legislature.  It became law without the signature of the Governor. The sponsors were Reps. Christiansen, Coffey, and Hopper.

Rep. Christiansen gained notoriety last biennium for wanting to use the legislature to assist a convicted child rapist.

Rep. Coffey, a Free Stater, led efforts on a bill to put warning signs between the New Hampshire-Massachusetts border.

Yesterday a broken Congress failed to move on a bill supported by 91% of Granite Staters and a similar percentage of Americans overall.

When deciding whom to support with time and money for 2014, it’s worth noting who did and didn’t match that level of support among our major pols in New Hampshire.

When President Obama unveiled his plan for commonsense gun safety in the wake of 20 murdered children, Rep. Carol Shea-Porter immediately responded with support for it. She was vindicated in her leadership on this by two subsequent polls (UNH, NEC) showing clear majority support in New Hampshire for the key elements of the President’s plan.

Senators Shaheen and Ayotte, Rep. Kuster, and Gov. Hassan (who, it will be remembered, made a very publicized choice to be speak out on the federal issue of DOMA) were all silent on the President’s plan unless pressed by reporters.

Yesterday, around the time it became clear the background check bill was headed for defeat, Sen. Shaheen tweeted support for it.

Senator Ayotte voted against bringing legislation supported by nearly all Granite Staters to a vote, Senator Shaheen voted for it.

The failure of the U.S. Senate do pass this bill likely means that Reps. Shea-Porter and Kuster will not get an opportunity in the House to vote.

Among those New Hampshire elected last November, a fair review shows that only President Obama and Rep. Shea-Porter advocated on behalf of the majority of Granite Staters when it mattered.  

(Would be pleased in this case to be wrong on the facts - email corrections with link to dean.t.barker AT gmail and I will update)

I supported the Iraq war.

I didn’t trust W. Clearly he was not the one in charge of his own administration. But ultimately I trusted Colin Powell and his little vial, and I figured the leader of another country (Blair) wouldn’t go along with something on this grand a scale on a lie.

I was wrong.

When it became clear in early summer 2003 that WMDs weren’t going to be found, it was like getting punched in the stomach.

An undefined six-digit number of lives ended prematurely, more than that physically damaged, millions displaced. For reasons not yet made clear and decided by those held accountable only through the ballot box. All of which could have been prevented had the country been more skeptical and demanding of its leaders. An unspeakable tragedy.

Luckily I wasn’t in a position of influence, nor did I hold public office at the time of my support. But still.

My digital footprint over the past decade has more or less been an attempt to make up for that support. Dean for America, which led me to billmon and Eschaton and DailyKos, which led me to Blue Hampshire, subsequent social media campaign work, etc…

Ten years is a long time. In an unintentionally neat inversion, I find I am pulling away from political life more and more. Our time on this earth is short, and my wandering mind wanders.

I’m still eager to support those rare public servants like Carol Shea-Porter who truly serve the public, and those causes which it would be immoral not to, such as finding ways to reduce gun violence, preserving retirement security for seniors, investing in the education of our children. Who knows what the future brings?

But I think the time has come to let go of the daily remorse of conscience that brought with it a daily focus on politics.

The ways to do good in this world are many.

The Concord Monitor:

Gov. Maggie Hassan renewed her pledge yesterday to support a “high-end, highly regulated” casino to help balance the state budget.

There is no other way to pay for promised investments in higher education, health care and state infrastructure, the first-term Democrat said.

and

She said she’s not willing to look for revenue elsewhere.

“I oppose an income or a sales tax. This is what I campaigned on.

“There is no other way” and “not willing to look for” is illogical outside of New Hampshire. But thanks to Mel’s legacy, we take statements like that for granted.

New Hampshire Democrats are not allowed to listen to Mark Fernald (or something) because he had the guts to run in one of the worst GOP demagogued mid-term cycles in the past two decades, but he predicted this predicament.

Maggie Hassan has been honest in saying that [taking the Pledge] is a tactical decision, that New Hampshire is not ready to have a conversation about taxes.  But if she is elected, she will be a Democrat in a Republican box.  On vital issues of taxes and spending, she will have conceded to the Republicans before the legislature is even seated.

New Hampshire Republicans, who haven’t won the governor’s office in five cycles, are now trying to take advantage of this concession.

In an alternate universe they are pushing hard for Governor Lamontagne’s casino plan. But in this one they ginning up a phony meme of “DEMS IN DISARRAY!!!” on the one hand, and on the other imitating their obstructionist national peers with a round of “Whatever it is, I’m against it!”

Within hours of the Obama-Biden plan to strengthen gun safety, Rep. Shea-Porter voiced her support. 

Shea-Porter’s decision to stand with the president has quickly been vindicated by the people of New Hampshire, who overwhelmingly support the core elements of it.

As of this writing, the rest of NH’s federal delegation, and its governor, have not responded to the Obama-Biden plan. The president has made it clear that for this to work, the people need to demand it of their public servants.  He’s even provided an easy tool to do so.

Here is Shea-Porter’s bi-weekly column expanding on her support for the plan.

Time for Action

As I write this column, the news is covering still another shooting, this time on a college campus. We will learn who was involved, who was standing where when it happened, who witnessed it, who was hurt, who the hurt people’s friends and families are. Students—reportedly 10,000 students attend the college—will say how terrified they were. And then…the story of this shooting will be dropped from the news cycle, only to be replaced by another shooting story. And Americans will wonder why we can’t seem to stop the violence. Or can we?

When the children and teachers were executed in a mass murder at an elementary school, right before Christmas, while we were talking about love and faith and family and peace, everyone thought that this time, politicians would take action. It did seem for awhile that we had reached our breaking point, and that we would finally be ready to pass responsible gun legislation that would give us both the freedom to hunt and protect our families and the freedom to go about our daily lives without fear of being gunned down in still another act of violence. There was encouraging talk about passing legislation as quickly as possible, and President Obama did sign some Executive Orders with the families of the murdered six and seven year olds and the slain staff in the room.

The fight was already ugly, but that’s where it got uglier. The head of the National Rifle Association said that President Obama was “attacking firearms and ignoring children.” There was a sea of outrage that President Obama had children at the event. Children were at the site of the massacre—I think it is appropriate that children who knew it happened and wrote about it should be in the room when grownups say we are going to try to stop this from happening again to children, or anyone else. The NRA leadership also dragged the President’s own children into the fray, as they falsely warned that President Obama was going to take guns away from law-abiding citizens.

Some in Congress were upset at even the mildest suggestions, such as doctors asking if there are guns in the house so they can talk about safety issues involved when there are children in the residence. Doctors ask if somebody smokes around children. They talk about being safe and careful with candles and stoves, but apparently, they should not ask about a huge killer of children—guns.

It’s time to stop the fighting and work on the solutions here. It is time to stop bowing to special interests and yes, the money they bring to campaigns, and talk about how we are going to protect both the right to have guns for sport and for protection, and the right to be safe from gun violence.

The easiest step should be to require background checks for gun sales. This means gun sales involving most private sales also. The majority of Americans support this plan. We also need to make sure that critical information is available when there is a background check. Records right now are too often incomplete, and do not identify a buyer’s criminal history or a dangerous mental illness.

It is time to end high-capacity magazine sales. It used to be that citizens had a chance to get away from a shooter when he had to stop to reload. But with high-capacity magazines, the killer can just keep firing away a lot longer, murdering many more innocent folks. Hunters do not need to fire 30 rounds. Neither do citizens exercising their right to defend themselves. I support banning magazines holding more than ten rounds. This will help law enforcement and the public to disarm a mass shooter, and it will give people a better chance to escape a madman.

I support President Obama’s call to close loopholes in gun trafficking laws, and to beef up law enforcement in communities. Let’s also step up mental health services, and work together to encourage a reduction of violence in video games and television and movies. All of these ideas should be the easiest to enact. There is another step, an assault weapon ban, that will require more political debate, but these ideas listed here are common-sense ideas that should have no political test of courage attached to them. Can’t we at least get this done now? Let’s get it done now. It already has been a long and deadly wait.

The President, three days ago:

I would like you to pause for a moment and consider the incredible courage of that event. Our president, who is vilified every single day by some of the most reprehensible and irresponsible voices our freedom of speech allows, made the choice to confront our nation’s gun violence problem. Made the choice to open up an issue Democrats chose to bury for over a decade for the sake of winning elections. Made the choice to honor the murdered children of Newtown properly.

The President:

These are a few of the 23 executive actions I am announcing today. But, as important as these steps are, they are in no way a substitute for action from members of Congress. To make a real and lasting difference, Congress too must act. And Congress must act soon. And I’m calling on Congress to pass some very specific proposals right away.

New Hampshire Rep. Carol Shea-Porter did not hesitate, meeting the President’s courage with her own a few hours later:

“I agree with the President’s comprehensive approach to addressing gun violence,” said Congresswoman Shea-Porter.  “I will not and cannot forget the never-ending scenes of families and communities in shock and mourning, and I will not ignore the calls of our citizens to do something to help stop the violence.  I support responsible gun ownership because Americans have a right to hunt or defend themselves, and they also have a right to expect to be safe as they go about their daily lives.”

As of this writing, we haven’t yet heard from the rest of our federal delegation - from Senator Jeanne Shaheen, from Senator Kelly Ayotte, from Rep. Annie Kuster, or even Governor Maggie Hassan on the President’s plan.

Again, the President:

In the month since 20 precious children and six brave adults were violently taken from us at Sandy Hook Elementary, more than 900 of our fellow Americans have reportedly died at the end of a gun — 900 in the past month.  And every day we wait, that number will keep growing.

I don’t get involved in symbolic, unwinnable fights. The common sense legislation proposed by the President enjoys widely popular support. The major gun profits group opposing these measures is dwarfed by the President’s list of supporters. We have a majority in the Senate, and the Republican House majority has in a very short time shown twice that it will bend to popular pressure.  We owe it to the safety of our nation’s children to try. And if action is ultimately blocked this time, another election is right around the corner, with our President in office another two years.

Again, the President:

I will put everything I’ve got into this, and so will Joe. But I tell you, the only way we can change is if the American people demand it.

Demand it.

The murder of twenty young children and their teachers at school is, rightly, forcing the United States to come to terms with its gun problem.

Yesterday we moved past the purgatory of the “we should do something” phase into the “we are doing something” moment.

Which brings this reminder: while we may like some of our public servants, do not let that affection weaken your bargaining position as a voting citizen of this country.

New Hampshire is a small state. As a result political activists and advocates tend to be more familiar with our elected officials.

This familiarity can come at a cost to good public policy. In this case - murdered children - the cost is too high.

No matter how much we may like them, always remember - our public servants by definition work for us. And every two years we get to hold many of them accountable for their service.

Tell Barack Obama, Jeanne Shaheen and Kelly Ayotte, Carol Shea-Porter and Annie Kuster that the moment to do something meaningful to prevent gun violence is now. Do it publicly. Refrain from money and support until you are satisfied with their efforts. Ditto for our state level government.

Don’t be bullied by “the House is GOP controlled” or “SCOTUS will just overturn it” or “the next election is the most important of our lifetime.” Don’t accept the empty gestures and theater that Washington DC is so expert at. When public opinion is on your side, and matched with public will, there is nothing that cannot be accomplished in a democracy.

Being a little rude to those who serve us is a far smaller price to pay than a country that isn’t safe for five-year olds.

- photo from @joshrogersNHPR

Two years ago we faced a genuine emergency - a veto-proof supermajority led by an ambitious radical eager to manipulate the most extreme among them for his personal notoriety.

A lot of people who hadn’t the time, energy and money went above and beyond the call of duty and put their time, energy and money into restoring common sense to Concord. Some have notable names - most don’t.

If you, even to a slight degree, went out of your comfort zone and did something to help return O’Brien to backbencher status, thank you.

November 2012:

I am happy to follow up on an earlier mention that Ovide Lamontagne, post-election, got himself a nice consolation prize: a 12 point buck. Here he is with his dad, showing it off. This ended a 6 year streak of no deer for Ovide.

November 2010:

In the New Hampshire Senate race, Palin threw her support behind the establishment candidate Kelly Ayotte rather than a Tea Party favorite who tried to endear himself to Palin by sending her a photograph of himself alongside the carcass of a deer he had just shot.

So which is it?