A legislative service request (LSR) has been filed in the New Hampshire House for legislation that would amend the state laws governing which types of people could hold office as a state representative. Though only the title of the bill is currently public, sources have provided The Liberty Block with the language for a bill filed by one of the most controversial members of the New Hampshire House.

Over the course of a few weeks leading up to the September filing period for legislation, a group of pro-independence activists and state representatives held weekly work sessions to strategize the proposal of the landmark legislation. The meetings involved Rep. Mike Sylvia, Rep. Matt Santanastaso, Rep. Tom Ploszaj, and a few activists, including myself. All of the strategy sessions took place in video meetings that were posted for the public to see. We have all been totally transparent throughout this process because we have nothing to hide. We simply want to sever all ties to DC, and we have over 80 good reasons for supporting independence. 

Ultimately, Mike Sylvia stepped up as the prime sponsor, and eight other representatives have since signed on as co-sponsors. If passed by 60% of the House and 60% of the Senate, the CACR would be placed on the ballot next November for the people to vote on. If 66% of NH voters supported the measure, New Hampshire’s Constitution would officially be amended, adding an article stating that it peacefully separates from the union and becomes an independent, self-governing state. 

At the same time, a state representative who lives near Sylvia – but whose views on liberty could not possibly be farther away – was proposing another bill relating to state independence. As a former doctor (ophthalmologist) and current advocate for corona-fascism, Marsh has become quite controversial in New Hampshire over the past year. As his embrace for medical tyranny grew stronger, Republican voters throughout New Hampshire were growing frustrated with the rapidly expanding authoritarianism encouraged by Dictator Sununu and legislators like Marsh. 

On September 14th, Marsh officially changed his party affiliation from Republican to Democrat. He told NBC that he supported corona-fascism too much, and NH Republicans were far too libertarian for him. “I cannot stand idly by while extremists reject the reasonable precautions of vaccinations and masks…”The faction that’s currently dominant in the Republican Party in the House in New Hampshire opposes vaccines and masks and mandates of any kind, and are of the opinion that public health measures are unconstitutional…I believe Supreme Court case law shows that not to be the case.”

Of course, the vaccines are largely not necessary, not as safe as they’d like you to believe, and not very effective. And masks don’t work. I wrote dozens of articles and a whole book about corona-fascism and the lies involved in it. 

In addition to supporting vaccine mandates and opposing individual liberty, Marsh strongly opposes peaceful separation from DC, and believes that the government should use force to keep New Hampshire under the rule of DC politicians. He supports DC politicians so much that he does not even want to allow the people of New Hampshire to have the opportunity to vote on independence. But he went much further than simply refusing to support Sylvia’s common-sense legislation, which would put independence on the ballot if passed by the legislature. Marsh proposed a bill titled: ‘Relative to Qualifications for Office’. 

According to a source, the text of his bill adds to the list of persons who are not qualified to hold office in the New Hampshire legislature, and reads: 

1) Amend RSA 652:12 by adding VII to read as follows:

VII. Is determined by the General Court [the legislature] to have engaged in insurrection or rebellion, or given aid or comfort to the enemies of the state, in violation of RSA 655:1-a. This shall be determined by the house of representatives in the case of a member of the house of representatives and by the senate in the case of a member of the senate.

2) Amend RSA 655 by adding RSA 655:1-a to read as follows:

RSA 655:1-a Insurrection or Rebellion Prohibited.

As provided in Article 14, section 3, of the federal constitution, a person who engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the United States, or who gave aid or comfort to the enemies thereof, shall be ineligible to hold elective office in the state, unless Congress, by a vote of two-thirds of each House, shall have removed such disability. For the purposes of this subparagraph, “insurrection or rebellion” shall include any action intended to separate New Hampshire from the United States, and “aid or comfort” shall include any action facilitating such intent.

3) Effective upon passage.

I find this bill extremely interesting for a few reasons: 

  1. This bill certainly seems to be directed at Sylvia and the co-sponsors, and potentially at any other legislator who supports or votes for the legislation.
  2. Although he is a new Democrat, Marsh seems adept at using dog-whistles for radical leftists. He uses the term ‘insurrection’ three times in his short bill. 
  3. This bill is highly illegal because it violates the New Hampshire Constitution’s protections of free speech. 
  4. Sylvia laughed about the bill and strongly believes that Marsh will withdraw it once he realizes how pathetic and doomed it is.
  5. Marsh and the Democrats are clearly threatened by the New Hampshire independence movement, which is growing much stronger each day. 
  6. The New Hampshire Constitution’s Article 10 very clearly protects and encourages revolution against tyrannical government: “…whenever the ends of government are perverted, and public liberty manifestly endangered, and all other means of redress are ineffectual, the people may, and of right ought to reform the old, or establish a new government. The doctrine of nonresistance against arbitrary power, and oppression, is absurd, slavish, and destructive of the good and happiness of mankind.”
  7. Despite supporting the colonists’ rebellion and secession against the tyrannical King George (who was much less tyrannical than modern DC politicians), Marsh also opposes secession so fiercely that he wants to ban secessionists from holding office. Hilariously, Marsh’s website states that he enjoys “marching in Wolfeboro’s Independence Day parade and shooting my musket”.

Update: The bill number is HB1007

1 Comment

J. · October 7, 2021 at 2:57 pm

Also see Part I, Art. 30 of the N.H. constitution: “[Art.] 30. [Freedom of Speech.] The freedom of deliberation, speech, and debate, in either House of the Legislature, is so essential to the rights of the people, that it cannot be the foundation of any action, complaint, or prosecution, in any other Court or place whatsoever.” This is NH’s codification of the concept of “parliamentary immunity” or “parliamentary privilege,” which goes back centuries, to English common law. Even if someone could be disqualified from office for rebellious _actions_, debatable in and of itself, trying to punish a legislator for merely submitting a bill, is beyond the pale.

Comments are closed.