Winnipesaukee Forum - View Single Post

Skip · 02-12-2006, 01:27 PM

Since FJ insists on dragging me back into this endless debate by calling me out by name, forgive me Don....but

There are lies, damn lies…..then there are statistics

Mark Twain

The question put to the respondents in reference to the poll in question:

Do you favor or oppose a law that would impose speed limits for boats on large lakes in New Hampshire?

In my opinion, the poll results were to be as expected, what “reasonable" person would oppose what appears to be a common sense framed safety question?

Where the issue in debate invokes the philosophy contained in Twain’s quote is its application by proponents to HB 162. A strict reading and application of the question posed by the American Research Group would have resulted in legislation that invoked enabling legislation for the appropriate State authorities to implement speed laws, much as our current motor vehicle laws allow the setting of various speed limits across the State.

What the poll question did not do was establish any credence to the claim by Fat Jack and his group at Winnfabs is that support of the ARG question is tantamount to support of HB 162. If indeed Fat Jack & Winnfabs were sincere in measuring support for a blanket 25/45 MPH speed limit, then the question put to the respondents would have been:

Do you favor or oppose a law that would implement a 25 Mph nighttime speed limit and a 45 Mph daytime speed limit for boats on large lakes in New Hampshire.

So why was the question not framed as to match the legislation proposed? Simple, the customer (Winnfabs) had the question tailored to maximize the results it wanted.

Let me give you another example. Say I head a group of concerned citizens that want total abstinence to rule when it comes to alcohol and boating. I hire a company to poll New Hampshire residents, telling them I want the results of the poll to show overwhelming support for laws regulating drinking and boating, but I don’t want to let people know that we want to have a near zero tolerance for alcohol.

Easy, a company like ARG could then formulate the following type of query:

Do you favor or oppose a law that would regulate operating a boat after consuming alcoholic beverages on large lakes in New Hampshire?

Naturally the expected response of safety minded respondents in New Hampshire would mirror or exceed the responses found in the speed limit question. Next, my group has a lawmaker sponsor legislation that implements a maximum BAC (blood alcohol content) for boat operation in all of New Hampshire at .02 % (the average person one hour after having a drink or two). My group then claims that all voters in New Hampshire support this proposed law and cites the poll question as irrevocable evidence of proof.

Get it? See how special interest groups use statistical data to influence political debate?

Bottom line, Mark Twin had it right many decades ago. Politicians & political groups routinely skew statistical data to fit agenda of their particular mantra.

HB 162 has by far (except for educational funding issues) been the messiest bill to go through the House this year. The legislators I spoke to at both the Rockingham & Strafford County delegation meetings were embarrassed by the actions and statements that took place on the floor that day. The misinformation in the House was both disturbing and unnecessary. Case in point, applicability on the ocean. Remember when Fat Jack told us all that the bill did not include the seacoast, that these were federal waters? Wrong (again) and much needless debate centered on how to remove these waters from the Bill. As worded, the passed amendment regarding this issue is as clear as mud! This type of misinformation was aggravated by the bill not having adequate public hearing across the State, as it was always advertised and hearings specifically held as a Winnipesaukee only solution!

In closing, it is clear to me that many residents in New Hampshire desire some type of speed laws on waters in the State. It is my hope that the members of the State Senate listen to all sides of the debate and implement legislation that is stipulated and embraced by the law enforcement community, accepted as a fair compromise by all sides of the boating community and, most importantly, can be adjudicated fairly by the Courts.

In my opinion HB 162 as submitted fails all that criteria.

Skip

(Personal note for FJ….I never spent a day in the Coast Guard, my 12 years of service, as clearly annotated in my posts, were with the Navy & Naval reserve. When will you take the time to research your background material appropriately ???)

02-12-2006, 01:27 PM	#16
Skip Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: Dover, NH Posts: 1,615 Thanks: 256 Thanked 514 Times in 182 Posts	Mark Twain said it best..... Since FJ insists on dragging me back into this endless debate by calling me out by name, forgive me Don....but There are lies, damn lies…..then there are statistics *Mark Twain* The question put to the respondents in reference to the poll in question: Do you favor or oppose a law that would impose speed limits for boats on large lakes in New Hampshire? In my opinion, the poll results were to be as expected, what “reasonable" person would oppose what appears to be a common sense framed safety question? Where the issue in debate invokes the philosophy contained in Twain’s quote is its application by proponents to HB 162. A strict reading and application of the question posed by the American Research Group would have resulted in legislation that invoked enabling legislation for the appropriate State authorities to implement speed laws, much as our current motor vehicle laws allow the setting of various speed limits across the State. What the poll question did not do was establish any credence to the claim by Fat Jack and his group at Winnfabs is that support of the ARG question is tantamount to support of HB 162. If indeed Fat Jack & Winnfabs were sincere in measuring support for a blanket 25/45 MPH speed limit, then the question put to the respondents would have been: Do you favor or oppose a law that would implement a 25 Mph nighttime speed limit and a 45 Mph daytime speed limit for boats on large lakes in New Hampshire. So why was the question not framed as to match the legislation proposed? Simple, the customer (Winnfabs) had the question tailored to maximize the results it wanted. Let me give you another example. Say I head a group of concerned citizens that want total abstinence to rule when it comes to alcohol and boating. I hire a company to poll New Hampshire residents, telling them I want the results of the poll to show overwhelming support for laws regulating drinking and boating, but I don’t want to let people know that we want to have a near zero tolerance for alcohol. Easy, a company like ARG could then formulate the following type of query: Do you favor or oppose a law that would regulate operating a boat after consuming alcoholic beverages on large lakes in New Hampshire? Naturally the expected response of safety minded respondents in New Hampshire would mirror or exceed the responses found in the speed limit question. Next, my group has a lawmaker sponsor legislation that implements a maximum BAC (blood alcohol content) for boat operation in all of New Hampshire at .02 % (the average person one hour after having a drink or two). My group then claims that all voters in New Hampshire support this proposed law and cites the poll question as irrevocable evidence of proof. Get it? See how special interest groups use statistical data to influence political debate? Bottom line, Mark Twin had it right many decades ago. Politicians & political groups routinely skew statistical data to fit agenda of their particular mantra. HB 162 has by far (except for educational funding issues) been the messiest bill to go through the House this year. The legislators I spoke to at both the Rockingham & Strafford County delegation meetings were embarrassed by the actions and statements that took place on the floor that day. The misinformation in the House was both disturbing and unnecessary. Case in point, applicability on the ocean. Remember when Fat Jack told us all that the bill did not include the seacoast, that these were federal waters? Wrong (again) and much needless debate centered on how to remove these waters from the Bill. As worded, the passed amendment regarding this issue is as clear as mud! This type of misinformation was aggravated by the bill not having adequate public hearing across the State, as it was always advertised and hearings specifically held as a Winnipesaukee only solution! In closing, it is clear to me that many residents in New Hampshire desire some type of speed laws on waters in the State. It is my hope that the members of the State Senate listen to all sides of the debate and implement legislation that is stipulated and embraced by the law enforcement community, accepted as a fair compromise by all sides of the boating community and, most importantly, can be adjudicated fairly by the Courts. In my opinion HB 162 as submitted fails all that criteria. Skip (Personal note for FJ….I never spent a day in the Coast Guard, my 12 years of service, as clearly annotated in my posts, were with the Navy & Naval reserve. When will you take the time to research your background material appropriately ???)