Marie Lozito

October 21, 2012

Marie Lozito is a Registered Nurse, Licensed Massage Therapist, wife, mother, grandmother and life-long conservative. She wrote a text on medical massage and taught at New York College of Health Professions.

Interested in, and observing politics since 1960, she ran for elected office in 2010.



Every 10 years we have changes in our election districts. The districts are redrawn in such a way as to have each district have as close as possible to the same number of residents. This is done every 10 years, after census results are tabulated, in order to keep the people’s representation in government as even as possible. 

Here in New Hampshire both the Representatives' districts and the Senators' districts have changed considerably. For instance: there used to be five State Representatives in Concord for the city of Claremont and the two towns of Unity and Lempster; this year, and for the next 10 years, there will be four State Representatives for the city of Claremont – one for each ward and one for the entire city (a floterial district). Unity has been joined to Newport and will have two representatives. Lempster is joined with the towns of Acworth, Goshen, Langdon and Washington for one representative as well as being represented by a second representative from a larger floterial district. Claremont’s Senate district also changed. Bob Odell has been Claremont’s Senator in Concord since 2002. Now he is running for Senate in District 8 and Claremont is now in District 5. So, when you go to the polls (and I hope everyone qualified to vote WILL go to the polls and vote!) you may well find that you are no longer in the districts you used to be in.

You can easily know who the candidates are in your new districts by observing the political signs posted, reading the papers or checking online at the Secretary of State website. To be a responsible voter you should also check the candidates’ positions on issues and choose the candidates whose views are closest to yours. 

Unfortunately, some candidates don’t tell the truth and distort "facts" while trying to convince you to vote for them. Sometimes this works and the people get fooled into voting for someone who does not do what he said he would do. If the candidate has been in office, you can check his voting record. As the old saying goes, actions speak louder than words!

A great resource is Project Vote Smart. This organization provides access to information on both federal and state candidates as well as on issues. If the candidate has been in office and is running for re-election, you can access their voting record and see how various associations have rated the official. For instance, Representative Joe Osgood is running for Senator in NH Senate District 5. He is running against a Democrat who is also a current Representative. I can see that I like Joe Osgood’s voting record and that he has very high ratings in several areas of interest to me. These high ratings are from: Americans for Prosperity, NH Business & Industry Association, NH Lodging & Restaurant Association, NH National Federation of Independent Business and NH Families for Education. 

Joe Osgood’s ratings by these groups on issues like budget, spending, taxes, business & consumers and education range from 100% to 83%. His opponent has pretty low ratings in all of the same areas of interest. The highest his opponent gets is a 40% from the NH Lodging and Restaurant Association. Using this resource makes it easy to see who I want to vote for in the upcoming election!

Also this year there will be three questions about the New Hampshire State Constitution to be voted on. One of the questions comes up periodically – do you, the people of New Hampshire, want to have a Constitutional Convention to amend or revise the state constitution? I see no reason for a Constitutional Convention. Any problems with the present Constitution can be handled easily enough through the amendment process.

There are two proposed Constitutional Amendments. The first one deals with a state income tax. I hear a great deal of inaccurate advertising about this proposed amendment. The ads talk about how unfair our current tax system is and that this amendment would prevent ever having a state income tax. Wrong! I thought that what Representative Steven Smith from Charlestown wrote about the amendment was very clear and logical, so I am including part of it here. 

"…When you’re talking about enacting an income tax… a fundamental shift in NH policy and increase to your financial burden… shouldn’t it be hard to pass?"…

"Shouldn’t we have to go through a few steps to make sure that we are really sure that we want the tax? In November, don’t vote for whether you want an income tax. Vote FOR the amendment if you want to require your government to exercise all due caution should they ever try to pass an income tax. Vote FOR the amendment if you want to make sure that your government has to run it by you before they ever enact an income tax."… Without this amendment, "it is possible for 215 people to get together and levy an income tax on the entire state. Without the amendment, if you have: 201 Representatives, 13 Senators, and one cooperative Governor, then they can enact an income tax.  Shouldn’t it be more difficult?"… "For voters who are on the fence regarding CACR 13,"… "don’t ask them if they want to ban an income tax.  Ask them if they want it to be really easy for their government to enact one. If they say no, then they should support the amendment."

The second proposed Constitutional amendment also has special interest opposition. This opposition is from judges and lawyers who don’t want to have the courts’ rulings bound by the law. We have all seen activist judges twist interpretation of laws and, at times, even rule against laws. This Constitutional amendment simply states that the Constitution and Statutes (laws) prevail over Justice’s rule. I approve of this amendment too. The courts are supposed to interpret and apply the laws. Laws are made by the legislature. This fact needs to be clarified and enforced by this amendment since we have justices who think they are empowered to make their own laws by court rulings. They do not have this authority and this amendment makes that clear.


Contact Marie Lozito with your comments.

Top of this page

Front Page Archives Great links

Contact: kenschuster x (replace "x" with "@")