While we ponder the questions the left isn’t asking about the reaction to Operation Pillar of Defense Granite Grok is still there and keeping an eye on some questions that have yet to be answered about the late election, first the stats:

First, in a town with 5000 plus voters there were 630 new registrations for this year’s election.

The law give NH citizens the ability to see public documents

New Hampshire State law (91-a) allows the citizen to review, examine, or inspect, any public document that is available. They can even take pictures of it, or make their own copies or abstracts as long as the document(s) are on site and it occurs during regular business hours.

Granite Grok however reports that there was a slight issue when a citizen wanted to see the form concerning these 630 new registrations…

These 630 new voters piqued the interest of a Barrington resident, who decided that they wanted to get a copy of this public record, but when they asked the Town clerk said it would cost him $300.00.

The Grok folks have some questions about this, but wanting to be fair to all concerned I called the Town Clerk’s office myself. I spoke to a very nice lady who asked me if I could submit those questions via an e-mail to make it easier. So I did, providing a link to the Grok article quoted above with the following questions:

Per said article I have the following questions

1. Is the record of the voter rolls in Barrington available to be viewed by the public

2. Is there a separate record of new registrants and/or same day registrants available?

3. Did a person come in to obtain said records?

4. If so was said person told it would be $300 for said records?
4a. If there is such a fee, is that set by the city or state? Is it a standard fee for records?

5. The GROK article states that such public records are available under state law saying the following:

New Hampshire State law (91-a) allows the citizen to review, examine, or inspect, any public document that is available. They can even take pictures of it, or make their own copies or abstracts as long as the document(s) are on site and it occurs during regular business hours.
5a Is this correct and if so can said person make their own copies without charge?

6. Will said records be available electronically (in PDF format etc) and available either to the public on request or on the Barrington site eventually?

7. If I came down to see said records would they be available for viewing?

Any help in answering these question would be appreciated

Thank you.

That was on Wednesday November 14th when I first wrote this post but held back posting awaiting a reply and while I’m sure Barrington NH can be a busy place I think five days is plenty of time for it to come.

By an odd coincidence while I haven’t received a reply the day after I sent that request Granite Grok’s person went back to the town hall and was told the following:

Our intrepid checklist warrior went back to the clerk armed with 91-a and was informed that they didn’t actually have the list prepared yet. He was told that it would be a few weeks but that they would give him an electronic copy of the new list when it was complete. Skip has encouraged him to go back and ask for the existing list, which they used for election day, and which we now know is available in electronic form. For free, apparently.

Amazing how things change after an e-mail from a guy with 50,000 watts behind him isn’t it?

Maybe it’s just me but if you multiply this question by small town after small town in NH and you get a margin of victory that doesn’t show up in polls.

That’s apparently a question our friends on the left aren’t asking, but we will.

Update: Apparently Barrington replied to my questions promptly but due to an e-mail glitch I missed their e-mails (along with 7 weeks of them from a particular account) until December 29th.

My apology post is here, and the e-mail responses from Barrington follow below:

Dear Peter “DaTechGuy” Ingemi,

My answers are listed below:

1. Is the record of the voter rolls in Barrington available to be viewed by the public YES

2. Is there a separate record of new registrants and/or same day registrants available? NO, PER Secretary of States Office

3. Did a person come in to obtain said records? YES

4. If so was said person told it would be $300 for said records?NO, the fee would be actually be $379 which is the rate for the current MARKED CHECKLIST, which is based on our current photocopy fee per page, which is $1/page.

4a. If there is such a fee, is that set by the city or state? Is it a standard fee for records? For a marked checklist

the fee is what the Town or City charges for a copy.

5. The GROK article states that such public records are available under state law saying the following:

New Hampshire State law (91-a) allows the citizen to review, examine, or inspect, any public document that is available. They can even take pictures of it, or make their own copies or abstracts as long as the document(s) are on site and it occurs during regular business hours.

5a Is this correct and if so can said person make their own copies without charge? A person may view and takes notes on the marked checklist, but NO there will be no copies made without a charge, PER NH STATE LAW (91-a;IV)

“If a photocopying machine or other device maintained for use by a body or agency is used by the body or agency to copy the public record or document requested, the person requesting the copy may be charged the actual cost of providing the copy, which cost may be collected by the body or agency.”

6. Will said records be available electronically (in PDF format etc) and available either to the public on request or on the Barrington site eventually? An electronic copy will be available upon request after the Supervisors of the Checklist have entered and scanned the checklist and new voters into the statewide database for a fee of $26.50.

7. If I came down to see said records would they be available for viewing? YES

I have answered all your questions to the best of my ability, if you have any further questions please

feel free to contact the New Hampshire Secretary of State at 271-3242.

Kimberly Kerekes

The latest Rasmussen Reports poll on political affiliation and there is good news and bad news for our friends on the left:

The good news is that after a very bad August Democrat party affiliation has not only improved but is at its highest rating of the year at 34.2% of the voting pubic. That is the best figure for Democrats since November of 2011 which was the last time they lead in the party affiliation numbers

The bad news for our friends on the left is that even through the GOP has dropped from its all time high of 37.6% last month, the 36.8% figure is still higher than any other figure since December of 2010. Additionally the September figure is a full 3.7% over September of 2010 and the same figure in 2010 month in 3.4% over September of 2008

Meanwhile even the modest increase democrats puts them a full 7.2 points behind election day 2008 but a half a point behind election day 2010 the worst drubbing the party has taken since Reagan’s re-election in 1984 or the Gingrich revolution of 1994

Put simply for all the grand pronouncements of the MSM over the last few weeks, for all the crowing of polls and the declarations that Mitt Romney is in bad shape with two months to go till election day party affiliation in the united states continues to be majority GOP and by a 2.6% margin.

What does that mean to national polling? That means if this poll is anywhere near accurate (and as I’ve already shown in trends it has matched the election right along since 2004, Democrats in General and Barack Obama in particular are in not only in serious trouble, but if the gap between the GOP and Democrat match they best gains of the year for the next two months till election day they will STILL be behind the GOP

BTW if you won’t believe Rasmussen will you believe the liberal Guardian Newspaper

A Guardian survey of six of the most crucial swing states upon which the outcome of the presidential ballot is likely to depend has found that new voter registrations recorded between January and August this year are markedly down compared with the same period in 2008. The drop is particularly pronounced in several states for the Democrats – a likely indication that Barack Obama’s re-election team has been unable to match the exceptional levels of voter excitement generated by his candidacy four years ago.

The six states included in the Guardian survey – Colorado, Iowa, Florida, Nevada, Ohio and Virginia – are all being bitterly fought over by Obama and his challenger Mitt Romney. Backed by their respective Democratic and Republican parties, both candidates have sought to maximise turnout by running registration drives in an attempt to attract new voters to their cause.