NH: Beleaguered radio hosts offer to underwrite secession drive

There are a series of steps that I have, for some time, felt would likely be most appropriate for moving New Hampshire independence forward. I have not taken them because of ethical constraints related to the issue of submitting things to the legislature. If you ask a rep to submit a bill or resolution, that is thought to cost about $2,000 of taxpayer money. Since I can’t afford to personally re-imburse taxpayers or the state government, it has been a matter of waiting until one or more people step forward and volunteer to do that part. Such a development, especially if it happens without me going out on a limb to fund-raise, would also indicate that the time for independence legislation is closer to being ripe. It would indicate things are beginning to “happen by themselves,” without any individual needing to overextend herself.

Last night, it happened…and as expected, it was unexpected. During a call to Free Talk Live I mentioned the above in passing…and in response two hosts (Aria DiMezzo and Ian Freeman) publicly volunteered to fund the reimbursement of taxpayers in some form or fashion.
Episode - July 13th 2021 | Free Talk Live

Despite, or perhaps because of, all the physical terror and financial loss Washington has inflicted on them, these two Crypto Sixers have taken without pause this decision. They have chosen to help strike back, at the root, at their own expense. Some steps may need to be taken to firm up or clarify their commitments, but these are not unreliable people and their representations are appreciated. A complete public agreement will likely be reached…and perhaps for the first time in New Hampshire history the taxpayers can be spared the cost of a legislative proposal.

As I understand it, there are roughly four alternative options by which we could engage/deploy the legislature. All four would probably start with me approaching a number of state reps and asking them to submit something for a vote. Just need one to say yes.

Option #1: The (simplest) option would be a House and/or Senate resolution. This is so simple, I’ve already written a draft version myself.
“We the undersigned members of the New Hampshire House of Representatives, do call upon the Federal government of the United States…to leave New Hampshire, that it may begin governing itself as a friendly independent nation.”

  • The advantages of this option are that it is probably the hardest one to screw up and is probably still enough of a move forward… to generate buzz and put NH in roughly the #2 spot. By that I mean we’d be the state which is second-furthest-along on the independence highway…a significant and potentially lifesaving achievement. It also possibly takes an approach that has not be taken much before by calling on them to leave us rather than us to leave them…at a time when they are leaving Afghanistan. This might provide a new path for small entities to trod away from big ones.
  • The disadvantages in this are that it would be non-binding, would not go to a vote of the general public and would not begin addressing the details of our independence.

Option #2: The second option (maybe) would be a constitutional amendment, perhaps reading very roughly as follows: “All provisions of the New Hampshire Constitution, and all New Hampshire state laws empowering Federal rule over New Hampshire, are nullified. New Hampshire declares itself an independent nation.”

  • The advantages of this option are
    ) It eventually could go to a vote of the general public
    ) It might help get around the problems a law would have… i.e. it presumably could not be trumped by the constitution or overruled by the NH supreme court.
    - The disadvantages are:
    ) It requires a yes vote from 2/3rds of those voting…possibly including all the politicians it would have to go through before getting to the ballot.
    ) I’m not sure it could be done this way… can a Constitutional amendment worded along these lines …overrule a law or constitutional provision that preceded it? Or would some other complex series of “constitutionalisms” and repeals have to be undertaken to avoid failure?

Option #3: The third (slightly more complex) option would be legislation “creating a study committee to make recommendations regarding the most effective and expeditious method by which New Hampshire may attain the status of an independent republic on friendly terms with the United States”

  • The advantages of this option are:
    ) We have a roadmap and stateside precedent in the form of the Texas secession-study-committee legislation: 87(R) HB 1359 - Introduced version - Bill Text
    ) The committee would be inclusive of our ideological adversaries, allowing them and their allies exposure to their own nascent concerns about Washington.
    ) It would see problems and maybe solutions that you and I don’t
    ) It could provide a lot more knowledge regarding the nuts and bolts of how independence could be done.
  • The disadvantages of this option are:
    ) The study committee would probably not come into existence at all on the first try…I think it would require a majority vote of the whole House and maybe Senate. Voting on a “leave NH” resolution might be more interesting to the public than voting on a study committee.
    ) It would require a lot of “care and feeding” (of the watchdog variety) over perhaps years.
    ) It might be non-inclusive of our ideological allies.
    ) It might get nowhere, as committees tend to do

Option #4: The Fourth (probably most complete) option would be legislation along the lines that state rep Caleb Dyer was proposing around 2017…a package of legislation and/or constitutional amendments which, taken together, would repeal all of the legislative or constitutional provisions which enable Federal rule over NH.

  • I do not understand this option well enough to articulate its advantages or disadvantages. However, we do know that when Dyer started down this path it came to nothing. He achieved angry pushback and grief without so much as a committee hearing or major media article I’m aware of. On the other hand, it might not be appropriate to dismiss what amounted to his initial best judgment as a libertarian legislator closer to the scene than most of us are.

All of the options above except perhaps #4 would I think be guaranteed committee hearings, committee votes and votes of at least the full House… so long as one state rep submits it, does not withdraw it, and orders it removed from the consent calendar before the general vote.

A couple of observations from successful secessionists have guided this post: One of the Quebecois activists pointed out that merely having a vote on Quebec independence was a big success… and he’s right. Quebec has wrung all kinds of concessions out of the Canadian central government. The Texas nationalists had impressive success just by getting legislation to a committee that killed it. They made this real and did it with charm and style.

So there is a case to be made that just taking one step forward is the most important thing. For me I guess that one, most important step is getting something in front of a committee and hopefully on some front pages. We should also bear in mind the importance of timing…NH independence probably will happen, but it will mostly not be up to us. The central government will make it happen by doing something terrible that puts the public in a desperate state or on our side…historically speaking,
modern-state secessions tend to go from very-unlikely to very-likely… in a very short period of time. Look how far Slovenija and Estonia were from independence in 1985…but they were independent 6 years later. The hyperinflation which preceded their independence is probably coming to us as well…but perhaps not in 2022. Perhaps we are early and should bear that in mind. On the other hand, we are at a moment where there is a GOP legislature and a Dem FedGov. That will help and it would be reasonable to expect that things only align that way about once every 10 years. Lastly, speaking of Estonia, independence came when the Moscow government officially agreed to it. That is one path perhaps we do have open…focusing on Washington’s disposition toward NH rather than NH disposition toward Washington.

So: Now that I have probably sealed my eventual fate by moving forward with this proposal-good-for-NH-but-unhealthy-to-its-proposer…
Which of these options do you think is best and why?
What problems and miswordings do you see that I have not seen?
Is there an Option #5?

Here is background discussion of the issue:

2 Likes

I like any options that lead to a public vote best.

Dave could you audio record a version of this post and post it to the NHexit podcast? (or should we record one where we talk through your ideas?)

2 Likes

This is fantastic, Dave.
Can I publish this post on The Liberty Block as an article???

my preference would be a conversation rather than a dictation of the above post. however i could do both. Alu you never need my permission to republish my stuff! ty!

Update: We have a third donor pledged to the process, again without going looking for one… When I called Free Talk Live again to update them about the post above…Angie, one of their co hosts…volunteered another $2,000 even though we don’t necessarily need it. Aria on the same show today…advocated pushing all four legislative paths above…even if that means it costs $8,000 to re-imburse taxpayers. Ian Freeman has just voiced his support for option 2, the constitutional amendment, on the grounds that it would (after passing many other hurdles) provide the public a vote.

Regarding the taxpayer re-imbursment…what are the best options? How would that best be done? What are each of you willing to do as part of the independence process?

I should probably articulate what I am and “AMMent” planning/willing to do myself…I’m going to be contacting state reps, probably until one of them says yes I will sponsor this…or until I have contacted 15 of them and throw my hands up… whichever comes first.
I can probably make Bitcoin Gandhi available for publicity stunts if I can get a ride that isn’t goign to turn me into Typhoid Mary, and I will probably do some solo publicity stunts. I expect I’ll be reaching out to media via this email list: Media contact list

I can’t promise I will be at the hearings or votes; I will likely not do fundraising par se, and I do not want to handle anyone else’s money. I don’t like setting up events and having to invite a bunch of people…can one of you do that?

If this thing is too reliant on me, it will fail… appearances aside, I am not Gandhi; I cannot effectively organize people or be everywhere. And I’m no salesman. This will need to play out a bit like the birth of the Free State Project played out… bottom up, with the instigator playing only a limited part.

1 Like

I’m wondering if a better and more effective approach to this might be to simply prohibit persons working for the federal government from operating on New Hampshire soil or within NH air space AND anyone acting in connection thereof. It wouldn’t ban federal agents from the state, but it would effectively ban operations from occurring on NH soil (no more FBI raids, no more FCC, no more state law enforcement surrendering people to federal authorities, no more federal taxes provided you remain within NH). This might work better in that it doesn’t declare independence- but it would ensure state and local law enforcement could not work with the federal government, assist the federal government, or operate within the borders of New Hampshire. The other aspect that would be important is that there be significant penalties to those who violate the provision- and/or order others to ignore the law. There is also one more thing we would need. We need to enable private prosecution of these individuals (this should be restricted to this law as private prosecutions can be easily abused by those with money) who violate this statute since the government itself (law enforcement and prosecutors) won’t prosecute itself. We could look to the UK for this as the UK has a law that enables private prosecutions of individuals at the criminal level.

2 Likes

I like this Penguin… I’d been trying to think of something similar…but how would enforcement of the penalties be underwritten without taxpayer expense and/or acts of violence? We need to eliminate physical violence (like arrests of Federal folks) as a method for gaining our objectives.

Also we now have a suggested state rep to bring this forward. Things movin’ fast. Fires the blood, but be ready for a grind.

1 Like

The copyright cartels have used privately funded investigations and prosecutors to go after individuals for fraud and copyright related offenses in the UK. I don’t know all of the details, but there is clearly example legislation one can look at, even if it’s going to need to be tailored to NH.

Effectively I believe the way it would work is you (or a non-profit organization setup to do this and there could be more than one even) would hire a lawyer (and investigator if need be to gather evidence) if you had reason to believe an agent of the state was violating this law. It would probably be very similar to a civil case, but criminal, and follow criminal law and standards. You would probably need a provision that enabled individuals, lawyers, or someone to act as law enforcement in making an arrest and filing the appropriate paperwork to jail them as well. I’d imagine that once jailed they would be put before a judge and a judge would have to make a decision about bail, like based on risk of flight, danger to society, etc.

The Constitutional Amendment path seems to be getting the most support so far, " There are two paths to altering the New Hampshire Constitution: A legislatively referred constitutional amendment or a constitutional convention.

Part II, Article 100 says that a legislatively referred constitutional amendment can go on the ballot if approved by a 60 percent vote in each house of the New Hampshire General Court.

Once on the ballot, a proposed amendment must be approved by two-thirds of those voting in order to become part of the state’s constitution.

Article 100 says that a constitutional convention can also be called to propose amendments or revisions to the constitution.

A question about whether to have a convention can be put on the ballot through a majority vote in both houses of the New Hampshire legislature.

A question about whether to have a convention also goes on the ballot automatically every 10 years.
In each case, the wording of the question is, “Shall there be a convention to amend or revise the constitution?” A majority of those voting must approve it. Delegates to that convention can propose amendments by a 60 percent vote. A two-thirds supermajority vote of qualified voters is required to adopt any such proposed amendments."

-ballotpedia.com

I do not know how to carry this out and do not trust myself with this level of detail. So to start down this path, I would need a volunteer to publicly commit to doing the research and handling the initial wording proposals. I would not need a volunteer to start option #1, the House Resolution.

1 Like

Yea, this seems wayy beyond me, and seems unlikely to gain traction, but I’m for trying anything if there is someone whose got the time and energy to put into it. Sometimes it’s the trying that gets the medias attention which drives things forward even if it doesn’t have an immediate realistic path of getting anywhere in and of itself on its own.

I’ve read the original post into an audio recorder at Russell’s request so it can be podcasted, having trouble finding the cable that will let me hook it up to my computer.

Also, sent this to the three FTL hosts who have announced they are willing to underwrite the taxpayer re-imbursment

" Aria/Ian/Angie: Before I contact our first state rep with secession proposals , I would like to make sure we are on the same page regarding how this taxpayer reimbursement process should be handled so as to ensure that the hearing(s) for our legislation-type-proposal(s) do not constitute an act of aggression against them. My preference would be to avoid handling any money myself and let the donors like you distribute it both lawfully and directly…either to the public somehow or back to the state government. So, I would let you handle the details. If you were to decide how to do this, what would you decide to do?

This path helps enusre I don’t become a central point of failure and cannot be suspected of embezzlement or self-enrichment. Additionally, there’s a reason I haven’t burned out after 20 years of activiz-manic, and that’s because I generally refuse to do anything I really dislike.

Is all this workable for you , and how much can you publicly pledge to donate?

cc: Angie from Free Talk Live, via telegram ( she has also volunteered to donate but again nothing has yet been firmed up) "

Lastly, I have completed a draft note ready to send a state rep, once the taxpayer reimbursement issue is firmed up.

1 Like

Sent to Ian Freeman and Aria D. and Angie… the three folks who have come forward to help re imburse taxpayers for this:

"Aria/Ian/Angie: Before I contact our first state rep with secession proposals , I would like to make sure we are on the same page regarding how this taxpayer reimbursement process should be handled so as to ensure that the hearing(s) for our legislation-type-proposal(s) do not constitute an act of aggression against them. My preference would be to avoid handling any money myself and let the donors like you distribute it both lawfully and directly…either to the public somehow or back to the state government. So, I would let you handle the details. If you were to decide how to do this, what would you decide to do?

This path helps enusre I don’t become a central point of failure and cannot be suspected of embezzlement or self-enrichment. Additionally, there’s a reason I haven’t burned out after 20 years of activiz-manic, and that’s because I generally refuse to do anything I really dislike.

Is all this workable for you , and how much can you publicly pledge to donate?

cc: Angie from Free Talk Live, via telegram ( she has also volunteered to donate but again nothing has yet been firmed up) "


more than awesome. Will you be able to find someone (not named ridley! ) who can handle returning Ian’s money as well as aria’s and angies to taxpayers and/or the state government?

as i’ve announced on shire society forums, another thing i will not try to do is further research regarding the legal requirements a constitutional amendment would have to be worded to be binding… there is a chance it would require a complex package of repeals and even sister legsilation, we may discover it is beyond the capabilities of the independence movement and its legislative allies. I’ve put out a request for a volunteer.

aria in answer to your question about how money would be returned to taxpayers, i guess if i were doing it i’d probably just hold a publicity stunt in a central New Hampshire busy downtown area handing out small amounts of silver to random people. other options would be contacting the depart ment of revenue administration and handing it directly to them, maybe by handing them a giant check in a pr stunt. this would tend to have the effect of improving relations between the state government and the liberty movement… when was the last time they got a donation. very nice poeple in that office last time i was there but i hear it has gotten more cranky over the years.

also aria, if the constitutional path proves to be beyond our means are you up for backing just the resolution? it may not be ideal but at least I know we can make it happen . if your answer is yes then that is enough for me to move forward with state rep requests.

I’m sure aria’s idea of handing out the 20 dollar bills is on the right track…ideally direct taxpayer re imbursement probalby is better than reimbursing the state but is subject to our own bias. though again i favor precious metals or goldbacks . bear in mind if you did it so soon, its possible you will be re imbursing taxpayers for just a house resolution at this point…we’ll know more later as to whether the more ambitious constitutional thing is really an option. Also how does this get handled if you and ian get taken out before distributing the reimbursemtn? Angie is interfacing directly with aria. do we have an Annie involved as well ?

thank you all…THIS is how people should react when targetted.

I’m interested in doing the Bitcoin gandhi trip. what day? can you get me in contact with the correct people… give them my email addie and (redacted) if you like "


Sent to a suggested state rep. If he fails to answer I’ll just move on until we get a yes or I’ve contacted 15 of them:

"Dave Ridley here from Winchester. Stars have aligned this year enabling us to pursue some sort of secession legislation, CACR or resolution. The guys at Free Talk Live suggested you might be interested in sponsoring it.

I have an ethical constraint of not requesting legislation myself unless I or others can re-imburse taxpayers in some way, for the ~$2,000 cost of hearing a bill. On July 13 Aria DeMezzo and Ian Freeman volunteered to underwrite this expense, then a third donor from Westmoreland came forward.

The GOP domination of NH government coupled with Dem domination of the central government, plays to our advantage this session and easily might not happen again for 10 years. A Soviet style Federal collapse or hyperinflation event seems to be in the offing, plus we have a recent and spectacular grievance in the form of those FBI Bitcoin raids around the state. Brexit and other developments have made the issue relatively mainstream. Lastly, the Texas and California secessionists have had some small successes and have completely surpassed the NH independence movement in their level of progress. This is potentially dangerous for the state… history indicates that usually the safest path is to be the first one out the door. Estonia did way better than Chechnya; Slovenija did way better than Bosnia. We are a lot like Estonia and Slovenija but only if we take action.

A secession drive is the root-striking Hail Mary pass which does not have to be caught…just making legislative or electoral progress in the direction of independence should cause Washington to become more cautious in its level of misbehavior here. Look at all the concessions Scotland and Quebec have wrung from their central governments with their “unsuccessful” secession drives.

We have begun a public discussion at NH: Beleaguered radio hosts offer to underwrite secession drive
regarding which type of legislation or not-exactly-legislation would be best. You’re invited and…are you ready to ride this train?

Best,

Dave
NHexit.com "

1 Like

On NHexit.com the House Resolution path is getting support, but so is CACR amandment in equal measure I think. I’m not sure which path I favor but something else to keep in mind about the House Resolution path is that I think folks may be underestimating just how seriously the Feds seem to take the slightest pushback from state governments, it just has to be symbolic. Remember that time the Montana governor was getting hassled by a homeland security bigwig over Real ID and he told the guy ok lets go on 60 minutes and discuss this … DHS backed down. Same thing largely with local marijuana decrim, without a government even needing to really stand up to them. Not saying any of this will be easy , but if we got just 30 percent of state reps present voting yes on a non binding “Feds should leave” resolution… it should have a dramatic effect. And the mind-losing, self-shaming process people will go through to intimidate the reps, find a free stater under every bed may generate more publicity than a complex constitutional process which at this state we are only capable of screwing up.

Actually I guess there is the other consideration that I can’t think of a case where a CACR went repeatedly to the voters before succeeding, would we only get one shot at this? How would we have any hope of getting through the 60 percent of each legislative house?

That said, majority of respondents favor the constiutional amendment, and if this remains the case after full discussion I will probably back their recommended “go for the gold” play rather than my own.

How are the rest of you feeling about Penguins proposal above regarding Fed law enforcement bans from operating in the state, etc?

1 Like

There’s so much writing… Who is number one? Does it say somewhere in the pile of words?

It’s good.
The journey of 1000 miles doesn’t not happen without taking one step first.
Also it’s the power of suggestion.
The idea must be suggested, that is another step one.
Putting a idea fourth makes it become
a reality

1 Like

The first state rep I contacted said yes, he wants to sponsor something like this. That’s a good sign. Details to follow hopefully.

Irving i think the idea getting the most support is the
constitutional amendment,
followed by the resolution,
followed by a ban on Fed law enforcement activity
followed by the study committee and the legislative package approach.

July 21 update: I sent a reply to the state rep above asking if he is ready for me to publicly name him. But I haven’t heard from him for the last two days… so I’m starting to contact other reps. Looks like filing house bills has to be done during a one week period in mid September but can anyone verify or refute that? Is there a different procedure for CACR’s and resolutions in the House?

Contacted 3 more reps requesting a sponsor.
Additional discussion occurring at Redirecting...
and NHexit on Telegram

1 Like

you can also grab the rss feed for the podcast if you want to catch up on past ones

I’ve now contacted 4 state reps total…the first one (who initially said yes I’d like to sponsor something like this) I have not heard back from again…for about 4 days. One of the other three has said no. Two have not responded yet. So I’m now contacting another four reps which will make a total of 8 contacted.