Also on today’s menu:
No More Untreated Wastewater In Lamprey River
State Follows Through On Effort To Erase History
The Thorny Issue Of Free Speech vs. Civil Rights
Families where both parents must work in order to cover their cost of living are facing a dilemma when it comes to child care: It is expensive, reducing the net gain from that additional working parent, and there is a shortage of day care facilities because they operate on their own shoestring budgets. Senate Bill 237 would address both problems by having the state invest more than $17 million in assistance to both families and providers.
Currently, families whose income falls at or below 220 percent of the federal poverty level are eligible for government assistance for child care costs, but the state pays only for the number of days the student actually attends, so if the child is sick, the center does not receive that money — yet it still has to pay its staff. Many day cares find that is not sustainable and they close.
Jake Leon of the Department of Health and Human Services cited a pilot study that found an enrollment-based model in which the center would be able to count on a steady income would increase the number of centers that accept scholarship students and decrease the costs for parents.
Representative Ross Berry (R-Manchester), who operates a child care center in Epsom with his wife and serves as chair of the House Special Committee on Childcare, said, “The child care provider side of me loves the enrollment model,” but worries about “waste” if the state were paying for days a student was not in day care. He suggests one solution is to require a doctor’s note to prove a scholarship student’s absence is due to sickness. “I’m not just gonna sit back and be like, ‘We’re going to throw more money at child care centers.’ That is not gonna fix the problem,” he said.
SB 237 also would increase the per pupil amount the state pays providers and expand the eligibility to families with 85 percent of the state median income or less. For a family of three, that would increase the income cap from about $50,600 a year to about $86,200. The co-payment amount would be eliminated for families at or below the federal poverty level and the copays for families just above the poverty level would be $5 per week. The Senate Finance recommended covering that cost with federal Temporary Assistance for Needy Families rather than using state funds.
No More Untreated Wastewater In Lamprey River
The town of Epping is under order from the United States Environmental Protection Agency to end its practice of dumping partially treated wastewater into the Lamprey River by the end of the year, and town officials need to tell state regulators how they plan to address the problem by the end of this month.
Epping installed a new membrane bioreactor filtration system in late 2021, but it did not work as anticipated and the town started collecting wastewater in two lagoons at its treatment facility. When the lagoons became full, the town started mixing some of it with fully treated wastewater and discharging it into the river.
The town now has to issue a public notice whenever it bypasses the treatment facility and it is required to test the bacteria levels in the river to make sure they have not increased. By the end of the year, the town must stop discharging partially treated wastewater and submit a long-term plan to federal and state regulators.
State Follows Through On Effort To Erase History
State officials have removed the historical marker chronicling the life of Elizabeth Gurley Flynn, a labor organizer and Communist who was born in Concord in 1890, and state officials have revised the policy for such markers in the wake of Republican objections to such commemorations. Flynn, known as the “Rebel Girl” for her activism, died while visiting the Soviet Union in 1964.
The marker’s removal follows a new trend, also embraced by liberals who have championed the removal of statues depicting historical figures such as Confederate soldiers, that attempts to remove reminders of political figures whose stances run contrary to contemporary values — or at least the values of those in power.
By coincidence, my former colleague, Gail Ober, brought to my attention the July 12, 1963, attack on a statue of Queen Victoria in Quebec City in which terrorists from the Front de libération du Québec placed a bomb beneath the statue. The statue was decapitated as it fell, and the monarch’s head was found 100 yards away. A spokesman for the Rassemblement pour l'independance nationale, precursor of the Parti Québécois, said at the time, “Within a year, there won’t be any of these statues left in Quebec City.”
Phil Gurski, president and chief executive officer of Borealis Threat and Risk Consulting Ltd. and program director for the National Security program hub at the University of Ottawa’s Professional Development Institute, wrote of such attacks,
Whether this is a useful tactic or merely symbolic (dare I add illegal?) is a debate for another time. What is interesting is that there are those out there who think that any dead figure who had any role in what is seen now as unacceptable behaviour should not be seen in public and most certainly should not be memorialised in a statue (or a street name).
The Thorny Issue Of Free Speech vs. Civil Rights
A 17-year-old Weare resident who vandalized John Stark Regional High School with swastikas and racist language will have to complete 100 hours of community service and produce a 3,000-word paper on the impact of racism after being found guilty of violating New Hampshire’s Civil Rights Act. The sentence issue this week avoids a proposed $3,500 fine.
The teenager was one of three students who allegedly participated in the vandalism. Another 17-year-old who reached a settlement in January agreed to similar terms and was ordered to pay a civil penalty of $2,000, with all but $500 suspended for one year. The third teenager’s case is confidential “due to the defendant’s age.”
The Concord Monitor reported that the parents of the student who was targeted in the graffiti believed there was an inadequate response from school administrators.
Such acts are difficult to deal with, due to the First Amendment that guarantees free speech. Laws such as those created in the Civil Rights Act and hate crime legislation are philosophically problematic because they elevate certain motivations above others. A murder is a murder, but if it is determined to be a “hate crime” the penalties are enhanced, as if that homicide is any more devastating than any other homicide. Similarly, placing graffiti on a public building constitutes vandalism, but if the graffiti is determined to violate the Civil Rights Act, the crime is deemed to be greater.
Yes, the aim is deterrence, but is it effective?
Do you have a story to tell?
The News Café is a virtual meeting place where, each weekday, we discuss the news of the day: local, statewide, national, and international.
Subscribers can share their knowledge, thoughts, and questions about any topic, and we may select some of those subjects for more in-depth analysis.
If you’re unable to pay but still want to receive all of the free public posts in your in-box, click the Subscribe button and select a free subscription.
Visit us at www.libertymedianh.org
Join in the conversation through chat or notes by downloading the Substack app or going to the online site.
Also see our new Substack news site, By The Way.