I've written somewhat regularly about the 2002 efforts to jam the Democrats' phone lines during the 2002 election here in New Hampshire. The last time, the judge in the matter was debating the punitive damages to be inflicted on the Republicans.
Well, there hasn't been a ruling yet, but the judge is showing some indications of where he's leaning.
In brief: he's tossed the Republicans' low-ball figure out the window, but said the Democrats' pie-in-the-sky dream number is no good either. And he's looked at the Democrats' sole "expert witness" and found his work solely lacking -- apparently the guy just took the number the Democrats fed him and said "yup, sounds good to me."
As a previous commenter pointed out, there really isn't a solid, indisputable way to set a dollar figure on the damages in this case. But I think my earlier formula strikes a fair balance. And if that doesn't work for some people, take the annual salary of a United States senator ($162,100), multiply it by six for the length of the term of office ($972,600), double it to balance out that it very well might have swayed the election and paid unfairly to Republican John Sununu and not Democrat Jeanne Shaheen ($1,945,200), and round it up to reflect the intangibles lost and you'll get my $2,000,000 figure again.
(When I'm "selling' at my day job, I point out that if the client does the job in-house, they should not only calculate what they're paying their person, but double it -- because that person is NOT doing the job they would normally. The same principle applies here.)
Yeah, it's gonna hurt the New Hampshire GOP, and they're already reeling from getting thoroughly stomped in the last election (failed to re-take the governorship, lost both US house seats, and lost both houses of the legislature). But as the old saying goes, "don't do the crime if you can't do the time."
Permalink | Linking Blogs | Sphere: Related Content | Digg this! | FARK It!
Filed under:
Politics
Comments (7)
If you factor in what a Sen... (Below threshold)1. Posted by Stephen Macklin | November 30, 2006 9:02 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
If you factor in what a Senator likely collects in gifts and graft over the course of a term, you would have to double it again.
1. Posted by Stephen Macklin | November 30, 2006 9:02 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on November 30, 2006 09:02
2. Posted by Moly, Holy | November 30, 2006 9:09 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Seems reasonable, Jay Tea. I'd wager dollars to donuts that the judgement is higher than that, if only slightly, but it's nice to see a conservative commentator say something about stuff like this other than "But Democrats are also bad!"
2. Posted by Moly, Holy | November 30, 2006 9:09 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on November 30, 2006 09:09
3. Posted by LJD | November 30, 2006 9:43 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
'Yeah, it's gonna hurt the New Hampshire GOP...'
Somehow I think it's going to hurt me and my property tax bill (and potentially income tax) more directly.
3. Posted by LJD | November 30, 2006 9:43 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on November 30, 2006 09:43
4. Posted by Jay Tea | November 30, 2006 10:42 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
LJD, if the Repubs somehow find a way to pass on this bill to the taxpayers, THROUGH the Democratic majorities, they will hear my screams of outrage in Ohio.
And I'm not even the loudest.
J.
4. Posted by Jay Tea | November 30, 2006 10:42 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on November 30, 2006 10:42
5. Posted by nogo postal | November 30, 2006 10:48 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Anyone know what the mood of NH was in 2000? Was this kind of BS necessary?...I remember all the crap Nixon Inc. pulled and it wasn't necessary for his 1972 Landslide...I still think NH guys falling on the sword for Rove Inc.
Considering the alleged cost of the lawyers was $5 millon..perhaps your $2 mil figure is a little low..although you arrived at it in a reasonable manner.
5. Posted by nogo postal | November 30, 2006 10:48 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on November 30, 2006 10:48
6. Posted by LJD | November 30, 2006 11:10 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Actually, I was referring to the resultant Democratic sweep, and what it is going to cost me, due to their policy.
I work a lot with various State offices, and for some time now we have seen more restrictive behavior.
I have also been reading in the newspapers a lot about groups, from environmental to historical, with their hands out.
Yes, this 'mistake' by the Republicans is going to cost me (a registered Independent) a LOT of money.
6. Posted by LJD | November 30, 2006 11:10 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on November 30, 2006 11:10
7. Posted by Herman | November 30, 2006 9:25 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Phone-jamming is soooooooooo old, the Republicans have moved on to clever new immoral tricks!!! The new Republican tactic is to robocall an individual repeatedly (REPEATEDLY!!), stating the name of the Democratic candidate that you're out to get at the start of the call, start describing the candidate, and hope that a disgusted recipient of the call hangs up before it's announced at the very end of the recorded message that the call came from Republicans! The hope is that the recipient will blame the Democratic candidates for the harrassment!
Hell, we've known since 2000 when the Miami-Rent-a-Mob strived hard to disrupt the manual recount going on that the Republicans will use any filthy, wicked means necessary to win, democracy be damned!!!
7. Posted by Herman | November 30, 2006 9:25 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on November 30, 2006 21:25