Tax Day Tea Party - Manchester, NH

Thursday I attended one of the hundreds of TEA party protests held around the nation. Turnout was around 1000, which was similar to last year's Tax Day TEA Party protest.

Of the myriad of speakers at the protest, only one was a sitting member of the House of Representatives and he was visiting from Michigan. A number of Congressional hopefuls were there, but none spoke, preferring to press the flesh and speak one-on-one with TEA party supporters. Not surprisingly, only GOP candidates showed up even though invitations were extended to candidates from all parties.

Three of the more inspiring speakers included former US Senator Gordon Humphrey (R-NH), Thom Thomson – son of the late New Hampshire governor Meldrim Thomson, and former New Hampshire Senator Greg Lovejoy.

Senator Humphrey related his experiences of serving in the Senate for two terms. (He promised when he was elected that he'd only serve two terms, then come home. He kept his promise.) The one thing he said that stuck in my mind was his comparison of Congress to “a pit of vipers.” He also warned that even those with the best of intentions when they arrive in Washington are eventually seduced by the power their office confers. It doesn't happen quickly, but it does happen, which is why he has supported term limits. He also led the call to “Throw the bums OUT!”, something the crowd quickly picked up and chanted with increasing volume. Humphrey said we shouldn't discriminate as there were plenty of Republican bums deserving to be thrown out as much as their Democrat colleagues.

Both Thom Thomson and Senator Lovejoy spoke about the fiscal problems visited upon the people of New Hampshire by both the legislature and the governor, with legislative Democrats willing to spend money the state doesn't have, implementing tax hikes that hit the people most affected by the recession, and attempting to 'appropriate' private funds from a medical malpractice fund in an effort to fund the runaway budget. The governor also failed to protect the taxpayers in the state by refusing to use his veto pen to stop the 30% increase in state spending over the past 2 budgets.

While other TEA party protests drew some number of infiltrators/agitators, the Manchester protest drew only one 'visitor' from the New Hampshire Democrat Party, and he pretty much just watched the activities.

All in all it was a great gathering with appreciative crowd all sharing the same message: “We're mad as hell and we're not going to take it any more!”

How To Fix It

Being an engineer and a long time amateur radio operator I have always liked seeing an interesting innovation used to fix a problem, whether the fix is temporary or permanent. I've used unorthodox fixes in both my vocation and avocation over the years. It's also fun seeing how others have dealt with solving problems with only the materials they had on hand.

That being said, I found a blog devoted entirely to showing interesting jury-rigged fixes to everyday problems.

(A big thanks to Eric the Viking)

Another Verizon Deal That Should Be Turned Down

It appears Frontier Communications has fallen further under the spell of Verizon's sales pitch, with the sale of Verizon's Oregon assets to Frontier being OK'd by Oregon's PUC.

But not everything is rosy. At least someone in one state is questioning the wisdom of the sale in light of the fate of other small rural-service telcos that bought what Verizon was selling.

The State Journal-Register newspaper in Springfield reports that [Administrative Law Judge] Lisa Tapia said in a 46-page report that allowing Frontier to purchase the Verizon lines in Illinois “will diminish Frontier’s ability to perform its duties to provide adequate, reliable, efficient, safe and least-cost public utility service.”

--snip--

Unfortunately for Frontier, they are caught up in the back wash of Verizon’s other local exchange divestments. Both FairPoint and Hawaiian Telecom completed similar transactions, and are both now in bankruptcy.

Both FairPoint and Hawaiian Telecom paid far too much for the assets they bought.

In northern New England FairPoint bought an increasing share of a decreasing market, always a formula for disaster. Wireline customers have been shedding themselves of traditional landlines and using either cell phones or VoIP services from their local cable companies for some time, both of which have been competitively priced compared to FairPoint. FairPoint lost over 13% of their customers since they took over operations from Verizon. And because of FairPoint's financial difficulties, its promise to expand broadband service to at least 95% of its service area has fallen by the wayside.

The best thing Illinois could do for telephone customers is to run from the Verizon-Frontier deal. In the end the only one such a deal helps is Verizon. Everyone else will be screwed. Frontier doesn't have the financial wherewithal to handle such a deal and will end up in the same situation as FairPoint and Hawaiian Telecom – in bankruptcy. That helps no one...except the lawyers.

Gun Control: Hittin' What You're Aimin' At

While I understand the Brady Campaign's goals, namely gun control, I have a real problem with the premise of their campaign, that being heavily restricting ownership of guns by law abiding citizens will somehow stop gun violence. There are far too many examples both here and overseas of why this premise is false, showing that where the citizens are banned from owning guns crime goes up, and particularly violent crime. The other flaw in their premise is that criminals will abide by gun laws, which is naïve at best.

The Brady folks recently came out with their list of states and their gun control ratings, with '0' being the worst and '100' the best. New Hampshire scored a 6, meaning the Brady folks believe our state's gun laws are too lax. The socialist paradise of California scored a 79. Utah scored a 0, supposedly with the worst gun restriction laws in the nation. But one thing the Brady campaign has chosen to ignore: crime rates in those states as compared to the laxity of their gun laws.

As Bogie states:

Hmm, last I checked, there was less gun deaths in those scoring lowest as to highest (NH is #8 lowest for [percent] by population with a 6.1 versus 10.2 US average). Oh look, as of 2008, NH was the second lowest in murders at 50 (out of 51) versus California being a 12 (51 is lowest, 1 is highest on the scale). Also, last I checked, pointy objects were the cause of as many deaths as guns in NH (4 a piece with general beating deaths just behind at 3).

Around here gun control and registration means something entirely different from how the Brady Campaign defines it:

Gun Control (New Hampshire Dictionary): Hitting what you're aiming at.

Gun Registration (New Hampshire Dictionary): 1.) Making sure the trailer you use to haul your gun collection is registered. 2.) Ensuring your scope is aligned properly so your round goes where it's supposed to at 500 (or 1000) yards.

New Hampshire Supreme Court Tells State "Keep Hands Off Of Private Funds"

It appears that for once in a long while, the New Hampshire Supreme Court got it right in the case of the Georgia Tuttle, MD et al vs. the New Hampshire Medical Malpractice Joint Underwriters Association et al, where the state legislature tried to raid $110 million of JUA premium surpluses to fill a budget deficit.

The state failed to make its case during its first attempt, the Belknap County Court deciding in favor of the plaintiffs, clients of the JUA, stating the State of New Hampshire had no rights to those funds even though the state created the JUA to begin with because the JUA is not a state agency. The state provided no tax monies, no state personnel, and no facilities to the JUA. The JUA was a state sanctioned private entity created in 1975 to ensure malpractice insurance was available to all physicians and other medical personnel in New Hampshire. All funding came through premium payments to the JUA. The law that created the JUA clearly states that surplus premiums balances must be returned to the policy holders past and present or used to reduce premiums to those it served.

The New Hampshire Supreme Court decided 3-2 that the state could make no claim and had no rights to the JUA funds, upholding the lower court decision and denying the state the right to take the funds. (The complete text of NHSC decision can be found here.)

The basis of the decision dealt more with the Legislature's passage of the bill that would have 'acquired' over two-thirds of the JUA's surplus funds in violation of the contracts the JUA entered into with their policyholders, stripping from them the disbursements of surplus funds as guaranteed in their policies. And since both the lower court and the Supreme Court agreed the JUA is not a state agency, the state had no rights to the proceeds of judicious investment and policy disbursements by the JUA, particularly in light of the fact that even state agencies cannot violate contracts with private individuals at the behest of the Legislative or Executive branches of government.

While the dissenting opinion was strongly worded, I believe the Supreme Court made the right decision. Had the decision gone the other way it would have possibly opened the door for other state seizures of surplus finds from insurance companies (they are all licensed by the state) or other state licensed businesses without due compensation as guaranteed in both the New Hampshire and US constitutions. And don't believe for a minute the Democrat-controlled Legislature wouldn't do exactly that if they thought they could get away with it. After all, they have ever more profligate and wasteful spending to fund.

Run, Carol! Run!!

It appears the New Hampshire First Congressional District Representative Carol Shea-Porter (D) is considering a run for the US Senate to replace retiring Republican Senator Judd Gregg.

Second Congressional District Representative Paul Hodes (D) doesn't appear to be drawing the support he'd hoped for, with polls showing him behind the two front-runner GOP candidates.

Personally, I hope Shea-Porter runs.

I have two reasons for this.

First, it means she won't be running for re-election in the First Congressional District and, second, she's likely to lose the Senate race because the Second Congressional District is more conservative than the First, Hodes presently filling that seat in the House notwithstanding (he's far more responsive to all his constituents, unlike Shea-Porter).

Shea-Porter has shown her condescension towards her constituents, particularly her Republican constituents, more than once and quite publicly. She has also shown us she's arrogant, ignoring the wishes of her constituents because “she knows better”. She follows every dictate of her fearless leader, Nancy Pelosi, voting against the best interests of the State of New Hampshire far too often. That won't play so well in the Second District.

So, “Run, Carol! Run!”

Mea Culpa

Normally I don't use the Weekend Pundit blog to comment directly about the post of one of the WP team members, but in this case I feel I must. But first, I have a confession to make.

I don't always read what others post here on Weekend Pundit.

It isn't that I'm lazy, but rather that there are evenings where I don't even post my own scribblings until very late in the evening because it's the only time I have free to sit down uninterrupted. That leaves me little time to read my own blog. However that's no excuse. It's my blog and, in the end, it's my responsibility for what's posted here.

That said, I have to say that I failed to read Brent's post from the morning of November 25th titled The Benefits Of Affirmative Action. I wasn't aware of the tone or the subject of his post until Gilford Police Chief John Markland brought it to my attention Tuesday evening. When I got home that evening I read it and I can honestly say I was dismayed and disgusted.

Brent, What. The. Hell. Were. You. Thinking?! Do you really believe Officer Janero Sankey was hired due to affirmative action? You certainly imply that's the case. Knowing both Chief Markland and Deputy Chief Kevin Keenan as well as I do, I can tell you your implication is way off base. If Officer Sankey wasn't qualified he would have never even gotten an interview, let alone hired. To say otherwise is an insult to Officer Sankey, the Gilford Police Department, and the town of Gilford.

To Officer Sankey, Chief Markland, Deputy Chief Keenan, and the rest of the Gilford Police Department, I offer my sincere apologies.

(Cross-posted from Weekend Pundit)

It Can't Get Much Worse, Can It?

Here's yet another non-surprise in regards to FairPoint Communications and their ongoing financial and operations difficulties: The New York Stock Exchange delisted FairPoint today. Their stock fell to a little over 10¢ per share after the NYSE's action.

And the hits keep on coming.

Let this be a lesson for Frontier Communications, a firm that spent far too much money for some more of Verizon's rural wireline assets. That's what caused FairPoint's problems. I have a feeling Frontier will end up in the same boat.

Color Me Surprised...NOT.

The question was only in the timing: How long until FairPoint Communications files for bankruptcy?

Now we know.

FairPoint filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy, citing its $2.7 billion (that's billion with a 'b') debt. It hopes to reduce that debt by $1 billion.

The three states most affected, Maine, New Hampshire, and Vermont, are likely to seek protection as well. New Hampshire has already said it will intervene in the reorganization of FairPoint to protect New Hampshire's interests.

On more than one occasion I and others have warned that the deal that sold Verizon's wireline assets in northern New England to FairPoint was a bad idea. Even the three state's utility regulators had doubts. But the deal went through and now we'll all be paying for it.

Can you hear me now?

State Employees Union Shoots Self In Foot

It's amazing how union members will vote against their own best interests, particularly when a 'yes' vote will preserve the jobs of fellow union members. In this case the State Employees Association of New Hampshire voted to turn down a two year contract that would prevent the layoff of 250+ state employees by requiring state workers to take 19 days of unpaid furlough over a period of 2 years.

With the rejection of the contract, layoff notices will be going out before the end of the month. At a time when the state has financial problems and needs to reduce spending, taking a course of action that ensures the loss of jobs seems counter to the union's purpose, doesn't it?

What did the union want that caused the union leadership to urge a 'no' vote on the contract?

A guarantee there would be no layoffs.

Excuse me?

Since when does any state provide guaranteed employment? Since when can any union tie the hands of the state, particularly when the economic situation is unstable and there's no way to forecast the state of the economy 6 months, a year, or a year and a half from now? If the economic situation worsens and the state needs to make further cuts, why should their hands be tied, preventing them from balancing a budget in deficit?

Such is the arrogance of the union that they think they should be immune from the effects of a bad economy.

Just When I Thought They Couldn't Get Any Stupider.....

I'm not sure what's stupider; the two miscreants in this story or some of the commenters lamenting the fact these two idiots were arrested for breaking the law.

Two men were arrested this morning after police said they gave officers a lot of attitude, cranked up the volume on a car radio after being asked to turn down the blaring music and challenged police to a fight.

"You want some of this?" passenger Nicholas Gamache, 23, of 5 East Haverhill St., Apt. 2. Lawrence, Mass., told the officers. He allegedly followed that up with a string of profanities.

The incident happened about 1 a.m. at a red light on Elm Street. Officers on patrol heard extremely loud music coming from a car and pulled up along side it at the traffic light.

That's stupid thing number one, compounded by the fact the idiots were in possession of cocaine. Stupid thing number two was this comment:

At what point did playing music too loud become a crime? Just curious. Glad that policing noise is what our public servants are paid for. Thank God they were on the job.

Maybe the fact that it was 1AM in a heavily populated area might have had something to do with it.

Need I say more?

A Message To New Hampshire Taxpayers

Something to remember come the 2010 elections.

From Bruce.

Thugs And Other Disparagements

It appears Carol Shea-Porter (D-NH1)has caught a bad case of history revisionism.

While decrying the tone and tenor of a number of town hall meetings around the nation and the mood of the electorate, it appears she's forgotten some of her appearances at similar events before she was elected to the House of Representatives.

At one particular event that took place back in 2005, she and another woman were removed from event by Portsmouth police officers. But she denies she and her friend were ever asked to leave.

Two officers of the Portsmouth, New Hampshire Police Department removed Carol Shea-Porter and Susan Mayer from a February 2005 town hall event hosted by then-President George W. Bush at the request of the owner of the property, a spokesman for the Police Department tells NowHampshire.com.

The revelation contradicts statements made by Congresswoman Carol Shea-Porter as recently as this week that she was not removed from the event.

“[T]here were no disruptions and no rudeness and I wasn’t removed. If it happened, don’t you think there would have been photos or video or news stories from that day? There aren’t because it didn’t happen,” Shea-Porter told the Portsmouth Herald this weekend.

According to Capt. Tim Brownell, who responded to a Freedom of Information request from NowHampshire.com, Detective Sergeant Michael Ronchi and Detective Tom Grella removed the two women from the Pan Am hanger of the Portsmouth International Airport in Portsmouth, NH after being asked to do so by a representative of Pan Am.

You mean she lied about what happened? Say it ain't so!

But wait, there's more!

“My friend (Mayer) and I sat respectfully and quietly though the whole event. After it was over and we were leaving, I was grabbed by someone, a thug,” Shea-Porter the Portsmouth Herald this weekend. “My friend told the person to stop grabbing me and he let go. It may have been a security person, but to this day we don’t who it was. I was there, so I know what I’m talking about.”

Capt. Brownell declined to comment on Shea-Porter’s characterization of the officers involved in the incident as “thugs”. But not all members of the law enforcement community were silent. Retired Manchester Police Sergeant Lloyd Doughty reacted with astonishment.

“For someone of her stature, as an elected official, to say that about members of law enforcement is so distasteful and so disrespectful I can’t even think of a word that describes how I feel. It’s ridiculous,” Doughty told NowHampshire.com.

So police officers doing their jobs are “thugs”?

Let's remind ourselves where Carol Shea-Porter stands on a number of issues, some which I've covered before: the only people allowed to protest are those who agree with Carol Shea-Porter and are against anything Republican; those of us within her Congressional district that did not vote for her are not her constituents; she holds the Blue Star and Gold Star Mothers of New Hampshire in contempt; town hall meetings are only for those of her constituents that agree with her; she's afraid to face any us that may not agree with her leftist philosophy in an open town hall meeting where we can actually ask her questions; she thinks police officers are “thugs”; and she walks lock step with Nancy “Tea Party protesters are Nazis” Pelosi.

I can't wait until 2010 when we can finally fire her.

It's Too Cold For Global Warming

The early fall warmth has fled New England for the time being, with chilly day time temps in the 40's being the rule in the northern half over the next few days. There's even the possibility of sleet or snow in the forecast for northern and central portions of Maine, New Hampshire, and Vermont some time in the next few days.

For the first time since last April we started a fire in the woodstove. We've never had to use the woodstove this early. Usually it isn't until late October/early November that we start using it to heat The Manse. Yet here it is, the last day of September, and it's already being used.

The Farmer's Almanac has predicted a colder than normal winter in the Northeast, as well as most of the rest of the country.

The sun is experiencing an extended solar minimum (meaning minimal or no sunspot activity) and decreased luminosity. The start of next sunspot cycle is over two years overdue and solar astronomers expect this extended minimum to last for at least the next 30 years. The last time that happened we experienced a Little Ice Age.

Does anyone want to tell me about global warming again?

FairPoint On The Brink

For those contemplating the effects of the sale of some of Verizon's rural landline assets to Frontier Communications, one needs only look at what's happening with FairPoint Communications in northern New England to see it might be biting off more than it can chew.

As the October deadline gets closer for FairPoint Communications to make an interest payment on the $1.92 billion it borrowed to buy Verizon's landline assets in northern New England, FairPoint's CEO seems to be taking his company's perilous situation lightly, acting as if there will be no problem even if it ends up in bankruptcy. I doubt FairPoint needs that kind of laissez faire attitude in its chief executive.

For a man whose company may be heading into bankruptcy court any time now, FairPoint Communications CEO David Hauser exudes a surprising amount of confidence in his company and its prospects.

"I think the debt comes to a head one way or another in the next couple of months," Hauser said.

For a company that's seen its stock price plummet from $9.02 on the day of the acquisition to $0.46 per share (today's closing price) and is in danger of being de-listed from the New York Stock Exchange, the attitude is puzzling. But the state regulators of at least one of the three northern New England states has been taking it far more seriously.

The company's financial health was always a concern, New Hampshire regulators said.

"We thought that FairPoint would be overleveraged, that they would have too much debt and that they were being overly optimistic," said Meredith Hatfield of the Office of the Consumer Advocate.

FairPoint paid far too much for a business that's been on a slow decline for years as competition increased and wasn't worth what they paid for it. It's one of the quickest ways to go broke.

FairPoint has also been behind schedule for bringing broadband to underserved and unserved areas in the three states, which means it will start accruing penalties for failing to meet its targets for deployment. What's worse is the broadband technology it is deploying (DSL) can barely be considered broadband as the maximum data rates are far lower than that available through cable and Fiber To The Home. DSL is also distance limited, meaning maximum data rates are available only if the customer is close to the central office or local concentrator. The farther away, the lower the maximum data rate available. With some of the newer services available on the Internet, like streaming video and online gaming, FairPoint's DSL-based broadband won't be adequate to meet the bandwidth requirements for those services.

In short, FairPoint hasn't lived up to its promises, hasn't provided the services expected by its customers, hasn't been able to respond in a timely manner to its customers' needs and requests, and has managed to lose about 10% of its customers since it took over operations from Verizon back in February. On top of that they are on the edge of defaulting, and if reorganization fails and debt payments cannot be rescheduled, they will be forced into bankruptcy.

This is not what the consumers in Maine, New Hampshire, and Vermont signed on to when Verizon sold its landlines to FairPoint.

Carol Shea-Porter Can't Be Bothered With The Facts

It appears Representative Carol Shea-Porter (D-NH-1) has no problem with stating an outright lie as truth if the lie serves the purposes of her masters (Pelosi and Obama).

During both of her town hall meetings to 'debate' health care reform, she stated that tort reform wouldn't help health care costs and tried to use the 'failure' of tort reform in Texas as an example.

There's only one problem with her claim: it's a complete and utter falsehood.

On NHPR, she said of the Texas reform, "It didn't drive down costs." In Manchester on Saturday, she said it accomplished "nothing."

That would be news to Texans. The Dallas Morning News reported in 2007 that because of tort reform, "(t)he number of doctors applying to practice in Texas every year has increased more than 50 percent, relieving desperate shortages in some rural areas."

The cost of malpractice insurance dropped an average of 27 percent, according to the Texas governor's office. Shea-Porter pretends that didn't help patients because health care providers did not immediately lower their prices. It's true, they didn't.

"Instead, they're reinvesting the savings in more and better health care," the Dallas Morning News reported.

When confronted by a woman at the town hall meeting in Manchester about the inaccuracy of her claim, she told the woman to sit down and be quiet.

So much for polite discourse or reasoned debate.

Carol Shea-Porter Versus Frank Guinta - A Study In Contrasts

Carol-Shea Porter may have met her match, at least when it comes to town hall meetings and debate about health care reform. As we posted yesterday, Shea-Porter has proven she can dish it out but can't take it. On more than one occasion she has shown her contempt for her constituents.

The comes along her presumed Republican challenger for her seat in the 2010 elections, Manchester mayor Frank Guinta, holding his own town hall meeting. The dichotomy between the two sets of town meetings couldn't be any broader.

Some observations by someone attending both meetings:

First let me start by saying, I don't believe for a minute, CSP would have scheduled a town hall meeting if Mayor Guinta hadn't scheduled one first.

With only an HOUR to ask questions of the Holy one, oops, I mean Congresswoman CSP, and with CSP taking up 20 minutes of that hour to sell us on how awful the insurance companies are, a rare few individuals were able to ask a question. We were limited to 2 minutes and people like me were denied the opportunity to follow up our original question with facts that contradicted her answer.

After CSP mislead everyone at the meeting on tort reform in Texas, he knew I had information that contradicted what she had just said to a woman who questioned her on cutting healthcare costs. His ticket was pulled and he let me go up and confront her on her misleading information.

In stark contrast, Mayor Guinta's town hall meeting was open to as many people who showed up.We were "allowed" to ask our questions without any time constraints and we didn't have to HIT the LOTTERY in order to ask a question.

Mayor Guinta took questions for the first hour then decided to extend his meeting another hour to accommodate the others who still wanted to raise concerns or ask a question.

At the end of the second hour, it was time to end the meeting, however he again graciously told the crowd he would remain in the hall and those who still wanted to talk to him, could do so.

Shea-Porter couldn't be bothered to answer questions that disagreed with her 'vision' on this matter, but her challenger took on all questions and stayed until everyone had a chance to talk with him.

Of the two approaches, I prefer latter, not the former. It's too bad Carol Shea-Porter prefers the former.

Do you think she'll get the message after she's voted out of office.

Shea-Porter Shows Her True Colors

You know someone's in deep doo-doo when even Glenn Reynolds is piling on.

In this case Representative Carol Shea-Porter (D-NH1) is on the receiving end of tactics she used against her predecessor, former Congressman Jeb Bradley. Her reactions show she can dish it out but obviously can't take it, having a constituent arrested at one of two town hall meetings she held recently.

This is a curious re-election strategy, especially for a Representative who made her name by bird-dogging her former Congressman at his town-hall forums. Consistency isn’t Carol Shea-Porter’s strong suit, apparently, as she demonstrates in [a] clip from the meeting she finally held with constituents after dodging them for most of the month. When one of her constituents challenges the presence of union enforcers in the crowd, Shea-Porter asks for police intervention.

[-snip-]

I’ve watched this video a couple of times, and I still can’t figure out why the police took this man out of the room. He was actually less disruptive than the woman behind him. He challenged Shea-Porter on the appearance of SEIU protesters in the room, one of whom got up and disrupted his question. When the first man then challenged the residency of the SEIU rep, police swooped in and removed him.

Now Hampshire also reports that the man they removed is Carl Tomanelli — a retired policeman.

Shea-Porter has also shown her true stripes, disparaging protesters outside her town hall meeting venues as “tea-baggers”, a sexually explicit term no member of Congress should use to describe constituents. She has also made known she didn't consider military families that support the war in Iraq as her constituents, nor those of us that didn't vote for her. So much for representing the people in her congressional district. (She's made the mistake of pissing off the Blue Star and Gold Star Mothers here in New Hampshire. That won't go over well come the 2010 elections.)

I'm sad to say this condescending effete snob is my representative. On more than one occasion I have written to her (using both snail-mail and e-mail) with my viewpoints on certain issues going before Congress and not once has her office responded. I guess I'm just one of “those people”, one she figures she can ignore because I'm not really one of her constituents. I didn't vote for her and I support the war in Iraq and Afghanistan, which means she figures she can safely ignore me and those like me.

She's wrong.

Cross Border Tax Grab Fails Again

It appears there are still some common sense jurists still presiding in the People's Republic of Taxachusetts.

Earlier today the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court ruled the Commonwealth could not force New Hampshire retailers to collect Massachusetts sales tax on tires sold in New Hampshire to Massachusetts residents.

The court's decision was another shot fired in a long standing 'feud' between the two states, one specifically dealing with sales taxes. Massachusetts has a 6.25% sales tax while New Hampshire has none. The recently raised sales tax (from 5% to 6.25%) has goaded even more Bay Staters to cross the border into New Hampshire when they make purchases of higher priced goods to avoid paying the tax.

The Massachusetts Department of Revenue filed suit against Town Fair Tire, demanding the new Hampshire outlets collect Massachusetts sales tax on all sales to Massachusetts residents. Both Town Fair Tire and the State of New Hampshire responded, with the state legislature passing legislation making it illegal for other states to force New Hampshire retailers to collect taxes on sales to their residents.

The Massachusetts Department of Revenue's argument before the court used as evidence 313 sales invoices from the 'offending' Town Fair Tire outlets as proof of tax liability. But the court, in its wisdom, said the invoices “weren't enough under state law to presume the tires were used in Massachusetts.”

The text of the court's decision, minus footnotes and case citations, can be seen at the first link above (scroll down).

FairPoint's Troubles Just Beginning

FairPoint Communications is in the news again, and not in a good way.

Local news outlets report an anonymous e-mail from a FairPoint “insider” alleges FairPoint “misrepresented test data” showing they were ready to take over operations from Verizon in northern New England.

FairPoint's cut-over to its independent systems began Jan. 30, 10 months after it acquired the landline business from Verizon in the three northern New England states. It leased computers and equipment from Verizon during the transition period leading up to cut-over. After the cut-over, FairPoint experienced delays in answering consumers' phone calls and processing orders for wholesale customers. There were also billing problems and other concerns.

An e-mail to the Vermont Public Service Board alleged that tests observed by Liberty Consulting Group on behalf of the three northern New England states were fakes -- not real-time, live demonstrations.

The attorney general offices of all three northern New England states are investigating the allegations.

Considering the troubles FairPoint customers have suffered since the cut-over from Verizon I have little problem believing the allegation. Customers haven't been receiving bills, have been unable to add, change, or terminate their phone service. Service calls takes weeks, if not months to complete. These problems have caused FairPoint to lose 13% of their customers over this past year.

The anonymous e-mail states FairPoint wasn't really ready for the cut-over.

In his original e-mail, sent Aug. 14 to regulators, the writer, who called himself "David Unavailable," wrote:

"As January neared and it appeared to everyone on site in Atlanta that there would be another delay, suddenly Peter Nixon (FairPoint's president) and Gene Johnson (its then-CEO) made the announcement that the cut to the new systems would take place at the end of January and the relationship with Verizon would end. Most people were stunned as it did not appear feasible."

In his later note to the AP, the writer said FairPoint had a strong incentive to complete the cutover: It was paying monthly fees to Verizon for continuing to use its system after the sale between the two companies closed. This was confirmed by a report filed by Liberty with state regulators.

If these allegations are true, then the people of northern New England were taken for $2.3 billion (the sale price of Verizon's landline assets) and will end up paying the price for the duplicitous actions of FairPoint's executives.