New Hampshire
U.S. Senate GOP blocks bill proclaiming congressional support for abortion access • New Hampshire Bulletin
WASHINGTON – The U.S. Senate gridlocked over reproductive rights on Wednesday, when Republicans blocked Democrats from advancing a measure that would have expressed support for abortion access.
The failed 49-44 procedural vote was just one in a string of votes Senate Democrats are holding this summer to highlight the differences between the two political parties on contraception, in vitro fertilization, and abortion ahead of the November elections.
Maine Sen. Susan Collins and Alaska Sen. Lisa Murkowski were the only Republicans to vote to move the bill toward final passage.
“This is a plain, up-or-down vote on whether you support women being able to make their own reproductive health care decisions,” Washington Democratic Sen. Patty Murray said during floor debate. “It doesn’t enforce anything. It doesn’t cost anything. It’s actually just a half-page bill, simply saying that women should have the basic freedom to make their own decisions about their health care.”
Minnesota Democratic Sen. Amy Klobuchar said that women and their doctors, not politicians, should make decisions about abortion and other reproductive health choices.
“This is our current reality, but it doesn’t have to be our future,” Klobuchar said. “This is a pivotal moment for America: Are we going to move forward and protect freedom, which has long been a hallmark of our nation, or are we going to go further backwards in history – not just to the 1950s but to the 1850s.”
Michigan Democratic Sen. Debbie Stabenow urged support for the legislation, saying women should be able to make decisions about their own health care, lives and futures.
“That’s what this vote is about and we’re not going to give up until we have those freedoms fully protected,” Stabenow said.
No Republican senators spoke during debate on the bill ahead of the vote.
The two-page bill would not have actually changed or provided any nationwide protections for abortion access.
The legislation, if enacted, would have expressed a “sense of Congress” that abortion rights “should be supported” and that the nationwide, constitutional protections for abortion established by Roe v. Wade “should be restored and built upon, moving towards a future where there is reproductive freedom for all.”
The Biden administration released a Statement of Administration Policy earlier in the week, backing the bill.
“Today, more than 20 states have dangerous and extreme abortion bans in effect, some without exceptions for rape or incest,” the statement said. “Women are being denied essential medical care, including during an emergency, or forced to travel thousands of miles out of state for care that would have been available if Roe were still the law of the land. Doctors and nurses are being threatened with jail time.”
Trio of bills offered, blocked
The blocked procedural vote on Wednesday came just one day after Democrats went to the floor in an attempt to pass three other bills on reproductive rights through the fast-track unanimous consent process.
That involves one senator asking “unanimous consent” to pass legislation. Any one senator can then object, blocking passage of the bill. If no one objects, the bill is passed.
The maneuver is typically used to approve broadly bipartisan measures or for lawmakers to bring attention to legislation without moving it through the time-consuming cloture process that can take weeks in the Senate.
Nevada Sen. Catherine Cortez Masto on Tuesday tried unsuccessfully to pass her bill, which would have barred the government from preventing travel “to another state to receive or provide reproductive health care that is legal in that state.”
Forty Democratic or independent senators co-sponsored the legislation.
During brief floor debate, Cortez Masto said the bill “reaffirms that women have a fundamental right to interstate travel and makes it crystal clear that states cannot prosecute women – or anyone who helps them – for going to another state to get the critical reproductive care that they need.”
“Elected officials in states like Tennessee and Texas and Alabama are trying to punish women for leaving their state for reproductive care, as well as anyone who helps them, including their doctors or even their employers,” Cortez Masto said. “Why? Because for these anti-choice politicians, this is about controlling women.”
Mississippi Republican Sen. Cindy Hyde-Smith objected to the unanimous consent request, saying that while members of the anti-abortion movement “most certainly do not oppose any individual’s freedom to travel across this great country,” they do have concerns the measure would hinder prosecution of crimes, like human trafficking.
Bill would ‘take us backward,’ Budd says
Republicans blocked a second bill, sponsored by Murray, that would have blocked state governments from preventing, restricting, impeding, or disadvantaging health care providers from providing “reproductive health care services lawful in the state in which the services are to be provided.”
The bill was co-sponsored by 30 Democratic or independent senators.
“When I talk to abortion providers in Spokane, where they see a lot of patients fleeing restrictive abortion bans from states like Idaho, they are terrified that they could face a lawsuit that will threaten their practice and their livelihood, just for doing their jobs, just for providing care their patients need – care that is, once again, completely legal in my state,” Murray said. “We are talking about people who are following the law and simply want to provide care to their patients. This should be cut-and-dried.”
North Carolina GOP Sen. Ted Budd objected to the request, arguing the bill “would make it easier for unborn life to be ended.”
“The Supreme Court’s Dobbs decision brought renewed hope to Americans who believe in the sanctity of each and every life, including life in the womb,” Budd said. “But this bill would take us backward.”
Following Budd’s objection to passing the bill, Murray said his actions “made clear” that GOP lawmakers “have no problem whatsoever with politicians targeting doctors in states like mine, where abortion is legal.”
“I think that pretty much gives the game away,” Murray added.
Grant program
Democrats also tried to pass legislation from Wisconsin Democratic Sen. Tammy Baldwin that would have established a federal grant program to bolster the number of health care providers who receive “comprehensive training in abortion care.”
That bill had seven Democratic or independent co-sponsors in the Senate.
“For our top-ranked medical schools, a post-Roe reality sowed chaos as students and their instructors wondered how future doctors in our state would have access to the full slate of training necessary to safely practice obstetrics and gynecology,” Baldwin said.
Kansas Republican Sen. Roger Marshall, an OB-GYN, blocked the request, saying that the federal government “should not be spending taxpayer dollars to encourage medical students and clinicians to take life when their principal duty, their sacred oath, is to protect life and to do no harm from conception to natural death.”
Repeated attempts throughout 2024
Democrats sought to advance legislation on access to contraception and in vitro fertilization despite the 60-vote legislative filibuster earlier this year, and failed to get the necessary Republican support each time.
In early June, Democrats tried to advance legislation that would have protected “an individual’s ability to access contraceptives” and “a health care provider’s ability to provide contraceptives, contraception, and information related to contraception.”
A week later, Democrats tried again, this time with legislation that would have provided a right for people to access IVF and for doctors to provide that health care without the state or federal government “enacting harmful or unwarranted limitations or requirements.”
Collins and Murkowski were the only Republicans to vote to move the bills toward a final passage vote.
Alabama GOP Sen. Katie Britt attempted to pass an IVF access bill through the unanimous consent process in mid-June, but was unsuccessful.
That measure, which she co-sponsored with Texas Republican Sen. Ted Cruz, would have blocked a state from receiving Medicaid funding if it prevented IVF.
The legislation, which had three co-sponsors as of Wednesday, didn’t say what would happen to a state’s Medicaid funding if lawmakers or a state court defined life as starting at conception.
That’s what led IVF clinics in Alabama to temporarily shut down earlier this year after the state Supreme Court ruled that frozen embryos at IVF clinics constitute children under state law.
The Alabama state legislature has since provided civil and criminal protections for IVF clinics.
New Hampshire
Judge strikes down challenge to NH absentee voting law
A superior court judge has dismissed a lawsuit filed by a group of visually impaired New Hampshire voters who argued a newly passed absentee voter law violates the state constitution.
In a lawsuit filed this summer, the plaintiffs alleged the measure, which was backed by state Republicans, places a disproportionate burden on people with disabilities by making it harder to vote.
On Friday, New Hampshire Superior Court Judge David Ruoff dismissed the case, ruling that the new policies are reasonable.
The new law requires people requesting an absentee ballot to prove their identity in one of three ways: either mail in a photocopy of an ID, along with their ballot application; have their ballot application notarized; or show an ID at town hall prior to an election.
In his opinion, Ruoff said, “The identification requirements impose ordinary burdens on all absentee voters, and the possibility that it may cause additional burden on a subset of absentee voters does not render the entire statute unconstitutional.”
It isn’t clear if the plaintiffs will appeal the ruling to the New Hampshire Supreme Court.
“We appreciate the Court’s recognition that the identification requirements for absentee voters are reasonable, constitutional, and consistent with New Hampshire’s long-standing election practices,” said New Hampshire Attorney General John Formella, who defended the law in court.
New Hampshire residents who vote in person are already required to show an ID at the polls when requesting a ballot. Supporters of the new law say the same safeguards should be in place for those voters who request an absentee ballot.
New Hampshire
Reduced federal funds to boost broadband in New Hampshire – Valley News
Despite some angst that the Trump Administration might vaporize the money, funds are coming to New Hampshire to expand broadband internet access throughout the state, although the amount isn’t what was originally allocated.
The recently announced funding is $18.6 million, significantly less than the original $196.5 million.
The news was, nevertheless, greeted with bipartisan enthusiasm.
“New Hampshire is proud to be No. 1 in the nation for internet connectivity, and this new federal funding we have secured will help us reach our goal of delivering reliable broadband access to everyone in our state,” Republican Gov. Kelly Ayotte said in a statement.
“Having worked on the broadband provisions in the bipartisan infrastructure law, I know how important internet connectivity is for small businesses to grow and compete, for students to learn and thrive and for those in remote areas to access health care,” said Democratic U.S. Sen. Jeanne Shaheen.
The broadband funding is $18.6 million. It comes from the Broadband Equity Access and Deployment Program (BEAD), part of the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act of 2021, bipartisan legislation passed and enacted during the President Joe Biden administration.
Originally, the state was slated to get $196.5 million from BEAD for 9,527 locations across the state, especially in rural areas where access to broadband internet can be difficult because of distance, terrain and lack of infrastructure.
With the arrival of Donald Trump in the White House, given his disdain for the Infrastructure Act, he signed an executive order that paused a disbursement of all funds related to the bill, pending a review by his new administration.
Subsequent policy changes from the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA), an agency within the U.S. Department of Commerce, worried the state’s Democratic congressional delegation that the changes could derail the disbursement of the state’s $191 million in BEAD funds.
“The administration has now removed discretion from state and local communities, instead requiring that BEAD funds be allocated solely to the lowest-cost projects — even if those projects deliver extremely low-quality internet service to rural areas. This change is especially harmful to rural Granite Staters, who may now be limited to slow, weather-dependent internet,” the delegation wrote in August to U.S. Secretary of Commerce Howard Lutnick.
And, indeed, the changes meant that the $191 million originally slated for the Granite State had been trimmed to the newly announced $18.6 million, reducing the new broadband locations from 9,527 to 5,250.
The Trump Administration saw the policy changes as a means to distribute the money in a more cost-effective manner. That was recognized by the administration with the completion of the state’s application process for the funds.
“Congratulations to New Hampshire for getting their BEAD Final Proposal over the finish line,” said U.S. Department of Commerce Assistant Secretary for Communications and Information and NTIA Administrator Arielle Roth. “The state’s commitment to cutting excessive costs and technology diversity resulted in a strong deployment plan that will achieve universal connectivity across the Granite State.” Roth’s statement was provided by the governor’s office.
The state’s approved plan accelerates the timeline for implementation, with the hope that the state will be fully broadband wired by the end of next year.
The state’s proposal for upgrades includes a mix of coax, fiber, and satellite connections provided by Comcast, Consolidated Communications, New Hampshire Electric Co-op, and SpaceX.
Contracts for the work still have to be approved by the governor’s Executive Council.
Congressional Democrats at least seem happy that they got what they could get. And everyone seems to be putting a happy face on the news of the reduced funding.
“Everyone deserves access to high-speed, reliable internet no matter where they live,” said U.S. Sen. Maggie Hassan. “I worked with my colleagues to negotiate and pass the bipartisan infrastructure law to help expand access to reliable internet, and am glad to see our state one step closer to ensuring that everyone has access to broadband. I will continue to push for federal funding that supports Granite state families and small businesses and ensures that communities across our state, including in rural areas, can grow and thrive.”
“Under the bipartisan infrastructure law, Congress worked together to approve critical investments that are making our communities safer, stronger, and more prosperous. Access to high-speed internet is a necessity for every city and town, and it helps businesses compete, ensures students can learn, and allows patients to see a provider. This funding should never have been threatened or delayed, and I’m relieved that it will soon be delivered to New Hampshire,” said 1st District U.S. Rep. Christopher Pappas. “I will continue working to secure resources that modernize our infrastructure and improve Granite Staters’ quality of life.”
“Access to reliable, high-speed internet is not a luxury. It is a lifeline and economic driver for hardworking families, small businesses, farmers, and rural communities across our state,” said 2nd District U.S. Rep. Maggie Goodlander. “I look forward to seeing these federal dollars put to work quickly and effectively to deliver for New Hampshire.”
Ayotte pointed to a recent report that shows New Hampshire is the No. 1 internet connected state in the country.
Reviews.org used census data and reported in October that 95.37% of all households in the Granite State are connected to the internet.
“Expanding broadband will help keep our communities safe, grow our economy, improve access to health care in our rural communities, and more. I thank the Department of Commerce for helping us continue to get more Granite Staters connected,” Ayotte said in her statement.
The state’s broadband application process and oversight are the work of the state Department of Business and Economic Affairs (BEA).
“This investment is critical in reaching the last mile in bringing high-speed service to rural towns, which will support small businesses, enable remote work, and increase access to educational opportunities, healthcare, and other facets of our quality of life,” said Matthew Conserva, program manager of the BEA Office of Broadband Initiatives.
These articles are being shared by partners in The Granite State News Collaborative. For more information visit collaborativenh.org.
New Hampshire
Hudson, NH Police arrest four following drug trafficking investigation
HUDSON, N.H. — A monthslong investigation into drug trafficking resulted in multiple arrests, the seizure of various narcotics — including fentanyl and methamphetamine — and the recovery of firearms.
The Hudson Police Department announced in a press release on Thursday that the four charged were Kenny Eustate, 40, of Hudson; Matthew Williams, 42, of Manchester, New Hampshire; Sarah LaFond, 36, of Manchester, New Hampshire; and Karen Makela, 41, of an unknown address.
On Oct. 30, the Hudson Police, working alongside the Drug Enforcement Administration and the Southern New Hampshire Special Operations Unit, executed a search warrant at a residence in their town. Police said officers discovered fentanyl, methamphetamine, prescription medications, firearms, and other evidence linked to drug distribution.
Three individuals were taken into custody at the scene, including Eustate, arrested on active warrants for sale of controlled drugs and failure to appear. Police said that evidence recovered during the search led to additional charges levied against Eustate, including being a felon in possession of a deadly weapon.
Williams and LaFond were both arrested on outstanding burglary and theft warrants issued by the Manchester Police Department.
The investigation continued, leading to the arrest of Makela on Dec. 3. Makela faced charges of sale of controlled drugs and two counts of breach of bail. According to police, at the time of her arrest, she was found in possession of fentanyl and methamphetamine, resulting in additional drug possession charges.
Makela was arraigned on Dec. 4 in the 9th Circuit Nashua District Court and held on preventative detention.
Eustate was also arraigned in the 9th Circuit Nashua District Court and held on preventative detention.
Williams and LaFond were booked by the Hudson Police before being released to authorities in Manchester.
“The Hudson Police Department would like to thank the DEA, and the Southern New Hampshire Special Operations Unit for their continued assistance and support throughout the investigation,” police said in the release.
Follow Aaron Curtis on X @aselahcurtis, or on Bluesky @aaronscurtis.bsky.social.
-
Alaska1 week agoHowling Mat-Su winds leave thousands without power
-
Texas1 week agoTexas Tech football vs BYU live updates, start time, TV channel for Big 12 title
-
Washington5 days agoLIVE UPDATES: Mudslide, road closures across Western Washington
-
Iowa1 week agoMatt Campbell reportedly bringing longtime Iowa State staffer to Penn State as 1st hire
-
Miami, FL1 week agoUrban Meyer, Brady Quinn get in heated exchange during Alabama, Notre Dame, Miami CFP discussion
-
Cleveland, OH7 days agoMan shot, killed at downtown Cleveland nightclub: EMS
-
World7 days ago
Chiefs’ offensive line woes deepen as Wanya Morris exits with knee injury against Texans
-
Iowa1 day agoHow much snow did Iowa get? See Iowa’s latest snowfall totals