July 17, 2019, MassGOP
July 17, 2019, MassGOP
A bill currently before the state Legislature fails the feeblest standard for a decent and humane society.
Under the radical infanticide bill, absolutely nothing would be done to protect or even comfort a baby who survives a late-term abortion.
In addition, the extreme infanticide bill removes all practical limitations on aborting unborn babies. These abortions are frequently referred to as late-term or partial-birth abortions.
Another radical measure in the bill eliminates family communication. Teenage children are conferred with complete autonomy in the realm of abortion. Instead, a child ages 12 through 17, or any age, would be permitted to have an abortion, without ever discussing the options with a parent, loved one, or family member.
Everything is done in secrecy. Even the payment to the abortionist would be made with taxpayer funds without parental consultation or consent.
Can it really be that a decision by someone under 18 to have an abortion is less significant or traumatizing than smoking a cigarette, drinking a beer, or visiting a tanning salon?
Have we really come to this?
Let’s not go down this extreme and dangerous path. Let’s follow a higher road and join together to protect, rather than reject, the least of those among us.
– Massachusetts Republican Party Chairman Jim Lyons
RE: House Bill (H3361) “Asian Dis-Aggregation”
The Westford Republican Town Committee has been made aware of pending Massachusetts House Legislation (H3361) entitled the “Asian Dis-Aggregation” bill. If passed this bill would require all persons of Asian descent to identify their ethnic origins in more specific detail on all public forms and documents requiring the disclosure of ethnic information in Massachusetts. Concerns have been particularly heightened because the purpose of this information remains unclear. History shows that the gratuitous collection of this type of information can easily lead to its abuse and has all too often formed the basis for discrimination. The Westford Republican Party supports national and state policies that make no distinction among people according to their race or national origin. For this reason, we do not support this bill in its current form.
(This position was adopted by unanimous vote of the WRTC, taken on November 11, 2017.)
Each year, Massachusetts’s residents have the opportunity to get involved in legislative ballot initiatives. You may see petition gatherers in various public spaces such as grocery stores, post offices, and filling stations. The petitioners simply ask passersby whether they want to sign a petition that will place the measure on the state ballot.
A ballot initiative to help stop taxpayer funding of abortion is currently being circulated. Many taxpayers are adamantly opposed to abortion and even those in favor of abortion don’t want to pay for them via taxes. This initiative seeks to amend the Massachusetts Constitution to include the simple phrase, “Nothing in this constitution requires the public funding of abortion.” 65,000 signatures are needed to get the measure on the 2020 Massachusetts ballot, allowing the citizens to vote on whether they wish their tax dollars to fund abortion or not.
Massachusetts General Law defines abortion as “the knowing destruction of the life of an unborn child.” To get a picture of the number of unborn babies being destroyed, the Commonwealth of Massachusetts Department of Public Health reports that 18,570 abortions took place in Massachusetts during 2015. Based on available state-level data, an estimated 908,000 U.S. abortions took place in 2015. Since 1973, in the U.S., almost 60 million unborn babies have been destroyed.
The ballot initiative has a fast-approaching deadline of November 22, 2017. If you would like to sign the petition or help gather signatures, please call 781-312-8755, email Bernadette@StopTaxpayerAbortion.org, or visit Facebook.com/StopTaxpayerAbortion.
– Kathy Lynch
To say that the United States is divided today is almost an understatement. Some might say that we are at civil impasse. While our national tension may seem very new and frightening, history shows that its roots extend back to the ratification of our Constitution.
By 1787, our nation had cast off the chains of foreign oppression. The taste of victory was very short lived because Americans immediately found themselves thrust into a crucial debate over how they would govern themselves.
This debate involved two opposing factions, the Federalists and the Anti-Federalists. The Federalist supported the establishment of a strong central government. Often described as “monied” men, their ranks included; large land owners, merchants, planters, and creditors. They promised security through a strong national constitution that gave the government the power to raise an army and impose taxes.
Having just experienced the oppression of Great Britain, the Anti-Federalist were suspicious of such a government. Largely comprised of small farmers and debtors, the Anti-Federalist recoiled at the notion of an army. They feared that the Federalists would use it, along with the power of taxation and the authority of the federal court, to create an aristocracy, resulting in their bondage.
Ratification of our Constitution was never guaranteed. This uncertainty provoked a compromise. The fruit of that compromise was the “Bill of Rights” . Ten amendments established explicit rights to freedom of the press, of religion, to assemble, to be secure in person. It prohibited self-incrimination. In short, it banned all the tools of oppression with which our founding generation were very familiar. It also granted the right to keep and bear arms. Common people could now defend themselves against threats in their daily lives, and if necessary against a government gone out of control.
Today’s supporters of the second amendment trace their legacy back to the Anti-Federalist, and share their concern over centralized government power. Unlike liberals and progressives, they are cautious, if not wary of government authority. To them the history of human society is largely the story of government abuse and oppression. To those who view these reservations as unfounded, they would pose this question? What has changed about human nature, that would reasonably warrant someone to believe that free people should ever relinquish their right to defend themselves?
– Dennis J. Galvin
Prompted by the violence and hatred that manifested itself in Charlottesville VA last month, during a clash between white supremacists and protesters, the Massachusetts Republican State Committee overwhelmingly approved a resolution condemning racism and political violence, at their quarterly meeting held at the Newton Marriot, Aug. 13.
State Committee member Brock Cordeiro from Plymouth presented the resolution, which specifically condemned the actions and beliefs of white supremacists, Nazis and the Ku Kux Klan. The resolution was amended by member Dennis Galvin of Westford who broadened the condemnation to include: “any group that uses violence to achieve political ends.” Galvin also added a provision that committed the Republican Party to “the preservation of constitutional liberty.”
In offering his amendment, Galvin said that it was fully supportive of the “spirit and intent” of Cordeiro’s resolution but felt that it needed to be broadened. Both the amendment and the full resolution passed the 80 member state committee with only one dissenting vote.
In other business, the Committee approved rules for the 2018 Republican state convention, to be held in Worcester. A controversial proposal to increase the number of super-delegates was withdrawn prior to the meeting. The delegate selection process will continue to rely heavily on city ward and town caucuses. However, a limited number of super-delegates will be allowed; the number will remain consistent with past years. Delegates will also be able to cast a ballot for a “no preference.” These so-called “blank ballots” will be counted as part of the total votes cast, which could have an effect on candidate eligibility. State law allows candidates to challenge one another in statewide party primaries provided they obtain a minimum 15 percent of their convention vote.
The tragedy that occurred in Charlottesville Virginia, is a watershed moment for the nation. For the past few years we have experienced increasingly hateful rhetoric, and acts of violence in our politics. What occurred in Charlottesville was a national disgrace, and it should serve as a warning to all those, who respect Democratic values and traditions that the time has come to say enough!
The first step in this process is to respect the rule of law. While every person in this nation has a fundamental right to express their opinion, no matter how repugnant, no one has the right to resort to violence to make a political point. Police officials must allow protests from all sorts of groups. They do not have to stand by and watch them taken over by thugs. As soon as any manifestation of violence occurs; such as, the refusal to obey permits, the wearing of helmets, the carrying of shields, clubs or other armaments, the police should shut down the event and disperse the crowd. This was not done in Charlottesville and it hasn’t been done in other locations as well.
The second step is for law abiding people to explicitly condemn violence by whatever group perpetrates it. There is nothing that can justify political violence in a nation of law, where civil rights are guaranteed. There are too many people taking sides in these incidents, attempting to justify the actions of one group over another. Anyone who resorts to violence to advance a political agenda is a threat to all of us. To make distinctions among thugs is the height of absurdity.
People who engage in political violence are fascists, regardless of their political views. In 1938 when the Nazis joined with Communists in signing the non-aggression pact, Soviet Ambassador Sergei Molotov commented that “fascism is simply a matter of taste”. If you are prepared to hit someone with a club, because you think your political beliefs are more justified than theirs, you are a fascist. The true mark of political extremism is the willingness to commit violence. It is time to end this once and for all!
– Dennis J. Galvin
State Senate Bill #1305 would make our Commonwealth a Sanctuary State for undocumented immigrants. It would prohibit police officers from engaging in immigration enforcement, from sharing immigration information with Federal officials and require that our officers block Federal officials from conducting interviews with immigrant detainees.
The bill attempts to address the concerns of undocumented immigrants living in Massachusetts, who are apprehensive about their vulnerability arising from possible federal immigration action. While the horrendous state of our immigration system must be addressed, this bill compromises our homeland security.
The bill would impose a ban on state participation in any immigration enforcement run in concert with federal authorities. It would eliminate the state’s ability to participate in the Joint Terrorism Task Force and Fusion center set up following Sept. 11. These invaluable partnerships with the Federal government, have led to the interdiction of numerous terrorist acts in Massachusetts. The sharing of immigration information and the right to detain suspected terrorist and gang members on immigration violations is a pre-emptive capability that would be lost.
State law enforcement officers would face an ethical conflict if this bill were to pass stemming from their oath of office. They swear to defend both the US and State Constitution. Provisions which require our police to block interviews between federal immigration authorities and undocumented individuals would obstruct the enforcement of federal law. This interposition is unconstitutional.
The bill would grant fourth amendment protection to the undocumented, a measure that exceeds the Commonwealth’s constitutional authority. In so doing, the rights of American citizens living in the state would be infringed. This restriction, would weaken immigration enforcement efforts in Massachusetts making the state vulnerable to charges that it is violating the equal protection clause (14th Amendment) of our Constitution. All U.S. citizens are entitled to the equal protection of federal law.
The ultimate and most dangerous effect of this bill would be the creation of a safe haven for the nefarious. The bill’s protections would attract an assortment of individuals to this state, many bent on doing us harm either through terrorism or criminal activity. This bill was ill-conceived at the outset. It is a dangerous political stunt and should be rejected by our legislature and any rational American citizen.
– Dennis J. Galvin
As an organization who believes in Fiscal Responsibility, Government Transparency and Honesty in applying the mandated and proven processes for Westford, and since it is bad for Westford, we must urge the Westford voters to defeat the 2 1/2 Override on 2 May 2017.
Approval of the Override would be bad for Westford – The School Committee created a misleading drive resulting in the Override ballot question to reward our school’s teachers with a significant raise that breaches the 2018 and beyond budget thresholds causing a significant increase in property owner’s taxes forever and ignores the process for securing raises by public employees. The Town Meeting resulted in a heavily recruited, biased approval that was subsequently agreed by the Selectmen to place the Override question on the 2 May ballot.
The Override proponents established a pro-teacher website that includes School Committee members that implies the School Committee, who is elected to represent the Westford citizens is not working in behalf of its voters who elected them, but rather, the Teachers Union. In this Override they are subverting objective negotiations under the established collective bargaining process. Despite the proponent’s alleged myth-bashing, the Override provides precedence for other Town employees to use similar tactics to increase their pay AND RAISE OUR TAXES! It also lacks transparency by shielding the Westford citizens from insight into the internal working of the salary processes and bypasses the Town’s budget and collective bargaining processes.
If you ask “What is Good for Our Schools”, it’s NOT the Override – it’s the normal process that allows the Superintendent together with the School Committee’s input to establish a comprehensive budget without creating a tax increase that includes all school employees whose individual salaries are determined by collective bargaining within the confines of the school budget and established salary tables. The product – our students’ future – is already successful because our school ratings are among the highest in the Commonwealth – Let’s keep our schools at the top without raising taxes or compromising our principles.
It is time for the voters of Westford to stand up against the continued subversion of our processes and lack of transparency by using tactics that raise our taxes and cause us all to be suspicious of the leaders and committees who we elect to represent us! VOTE NO on the May 2nd ballot Override.
In 1926, speaking about the Declaration of Independence on its 150th anniversary, President Calvin Coolidge noted the unique philosophy behind the creation of the United States: “We cannot continue to enjoy the result, if we neglect and abandon the cause.”
Speaking at a news conference in Baton Rouge, Louisiana, following the murder of three police officers and the wounding of three others, East Baton Rouge Sheriff Sid Gautreaux said, “…this is not so much about gun control as it is about what’s in men’s hearts. And until we come together as a nation, as a people, to heal as a people, if we don’t do that and this madness continues, we will surely perish as a people.” Considering the anti-police rhetoric coming from so many groups and individuals, he is right. The question is how do we heal men’s hearts? Isn’t that the primary calling of the clergy?
Since the 1960s when one of the popular slogans of that rebellious generation was “question authority,” the United States has plunged into an era of licentiousness, looking out for No. 1 (a popular book title in the ’70s) and the pursuit of prosperity, ignoring higher things like tradition and history, which have proved better for individuals and nations.
The divisions have become so strained that some are at war against law enforcement, which, if it doesn’t cease, will end in anarchy.
Donald Trump has positioned himself as “the law and order” candidate. The left may be playing into his hands, as did those in 1968 who rioted in the streets and at the Democratic National Convention in Chicago, sealing the election for Richard Nixon.
When it comes to national defense and domestic unrest, Republicans have been the preferred party to strengthen the country and restore domestic tranquility. But people looking for guidance on how to restore a sense of personal peace and order need look no further than the Bible, the guidebook found in many homes and in most hotel rooms.
One doesn’t have to endure a sermon — if that is unfamiliar territory — to be struck by the power of ancient truths. Start with Psalm 9:17, “The wicked will go down to the grave. This is the fate of all the nations who ignore God.”
How about this one: “When people do not accept divine guidance, they run wild. But whoever obeys the law is joyful.” (Proverbs 29:18)
One more to confirm the point: “When the righteous are in authority, the people rejoice. But when the wicked are in power, they groan.” (Proverbs 29:2)
The nation is groaning. One doesn’t have to be religious to understand the principle of cause and effect. If you jump off a tall building the cause of your rapid descent — gravity — will produce the effect of your death when you hit the ground.
In our post-modern, post-Christian era, we have ignored the moral gravity that once kept us grounded, the boundaries that kept us safe. And now we are suffering the consequences.
We are suffering as a people because we have neglected and abandoned the cause of our strength, peace, order and prosperity. There is a way back, but the road is not through the next election and it certainly is not through Washington, which is part of the problem.
In “The Gulag Archipelago 1918-1956,” Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, wrote: “If only it were all so simple. If only there were evil people somewhere insidiously committing evil deeds, and it were necessary only to separate them from the rest of us and destroy them. But the line dividing good and evil cuts through the heart of every human being. And who is willing to destroy a piece of his own heart?”
It doesn’t have to be destroyed. It can be renewed, but that is up to our individual will and a higher power which politicians do not possess.
Cal Thomas writes for Tribune Content Agency.