The members of the Harvard Republican Town Committee consist of enrolled members of the Republican Party who reside in the Town of Harvard. We are a voice for common sense in our community.

We are dedicated to gathering individuals together for the purpose of advancing a conservative agenda of small government, limited taxation, individual liberty and individual responsibility while protecting fundamental basics such as public safety and public education. We champion job creation, entrepreneurship, and small businesses.

We also will support candidates for town, state, and federal elections who share the ideals that government should limit its role to its constitutional responsibilities and promote individual rights as our founding fathers intended.

PDF Print E-mail

Making Them Own It

Denny’s Restaurant Franchisee Fights Back against the State

By: Repair_Man_Jack (Diary)  |  November 15th, 2012 at 11:30 AM

Florida based restaurant boss John Metz, who runs approximately 40 Denny’s and owns the Hurricane Grill & Wings franchise has decided to offset that (The Cost of Obamacare) by adding a five percent surcharge to customers’ bills and will reduce his employees’ hours.

If you still shake your head and wonder why Alabama Governor, Robert Bentley won’t set up a HIX or participate in the Obamacare Medicaid expansion, John Metz offers us some insight. No matter how much free health insurance you were promised; some poor sucker always gets left holding the bag.
Neither John Metz nor Robert Bentley got where they are in their respective careers by being foolish enough to pay the bill and bury the expense on behalf of someone else. Doing so would make each man’s life harder and offer the government the opportunity to claim they were handing out bologna sandwiches for free. Doing so would give Obamacare what Ayn Rand once described as The Sanction of The Victim. Leonard Peikoff defines this term below.
The “sanction of the victim” is the willingness of the good to suffer at the hands of the evil, to accept the role of sacrificial victim for the “sin” of creating values.

Restaurateurs have born the early brunt of Obamacare. Applebee’s and Papa John’s Pizza are also facing a dilemma that pits their balance sheets athwart their desire for political and social good will. The UK Daily Mail again reports news from the US that our own biased media refuses to touch.

Papa John’s came under fire this week when CEO John Schnatter floated a plan to cut worker hours to reduce spiking employee health care costs under the Affordable Care Act, otherwise known as Obamacare. Now, Applebee’s is being boycotted after a major New York area Applebee’s franchise owner Zane Tankel threatened a hiring freeze and possible layoffs as a result of the president’s healthcare plan.

This should come as no surprise to anyone with a background in managerial accounting. Restaurants are capital light and personnel heavy compared to manufacturing. They are vulnerable to things that make hiring and maintaining full time employees more expensive. The closer their material costs are to wholesale margin (think Denny’s or Applebee’s vs Ruth’s Chris or Musso and Frank’s) the more an unfunded Federal Mandate against their cost to maintain a full time employee bites. People like Metz, Tankel and Schattner do not get to charge you for ambiance. They also are not making up for it in material charges the way a Boeing or a General Motors would.

As Zack Tankel explains, ‘If you have 40 or 50 employees at a restaurant, and the penalty is $2,000, and you’re going to pay $80,000 or $100,000 penalty, there goes the profit in your restaurant.’
Mr. Metz puts his bill even higher, as he contemplates actually insuring his people under the inflated insurance costs caused by Obamacare.

‘But to pay $5,000 per employee would cost us $175,000 per restaurant and unfortunately, most of our restaurants don’t make $175,000 a year. I can’t afford it.’

When President Barack Obama initially sold Obamacare, He promised a much different scenario. Organizing For America offers the following description of Obamacare for public consumption propaganda.

None of these plans should deny coverage on the basis of a preexisting condition, and all of these plans should include an affordable basic benefit package that includes prevention, and protection against catastrophic costs. There are those who strongly believe that Americans should have the choice of a public health insurance option operating alongside private plans…

Wonderful! This sounds like what any health insurance purchaser would want for Christmas. The only thing our fearless leader neglected to tell us is that there is no such thing as Santa Claus. I commend the restaurant owners, governors and everyone else in America who are now reminding our President that Santa Claus does not exist and that somebody always gets stuck with the tab for any promised free lunch. Congratulations Mr. President! Denny’s just made you own it.

PDF Print E-mail

Interior proposal would limit commercial oil shale development on federal lands

By Zack Colman - 11/09/12 02:07 PM ET

The Interior Department on Friday issued a final plan to close 1.6 million acres of federal land in the West originally slated for oil shale development.

The proposed plan would fence off a majority of the initial blueprint laid out in the final days of the George W. Bush administration. It faces a 30-day protest period and a 60-day process to ensure it is consistent with local and state policies. After that, the department would render a decision for implementation.

The move is sure to rankle Republicans, who say President Obama’s grip on fossil fuel drilling in federal lands is too tight.

Read the entire article:

PDF Print E-mail

Re-elected Obama Pushes Anti-2nd Amendment Gun Grab

11/08/2012 06:54 PM ET

Second Amendment: Within hours of re-election, the administration fast-tracked a treaty in the United Nations that transcends borders and tramples our constitutional right to keep and bear arms. It was no coincidence.

Less than 24 hours after President Obama's re-election, the U.S. Mission to the United Nations helped move the U.N.'s Arms Control Treaty a step closer to enactment. America joined 157 other nations in voting Wednesday to finalize the treaty in March. None was opposed and there were 18 abstentions.
U.N. delegates and gun-control activists had complained that talks collapsed in July largely because Obama feared attacks from Republican rival Mitt Romney if his administration was seen as openly supporting the pact. But once the election was over, the Obama administration had more flexibility to pull the trigger on supporting the pact.

The Obama administration, which reversed long-standing U.S. opposition to the treaty in 2009, says the treaty does not threaten our Second Amendment rights and applies only to international arms trade. But its record of opposition to private gun ownership and its deference to international bodies and their authority give us pause.

So does a paper by the U.N.'s Coordinating Action on Small Arms. It notes that arms have been "misused by lawful owners" and demands that the "arms trade therefore be regulated in ways that would ... minimize the misuse of legally owned weapons."

Is an American defending his home against intruders just such a "misuse"?

Even if the treaty applied only to transfers of small arms between nations, would that mean restrictions on our ability to aid allies such as Israel and Taiwan? Would we be forbidden from supporting resistance movements around the world that rise up against the very dictators who support this treaty?

The treaty establishes a bizarre moral equivalence between countries that trade arms to defend freedom and those that do so to suppress and extinguish it.

Interestingly, just as the world's worst human rights violators sat on and often chaired the U.N. Human Rights Council, Iran, arms supplier extraordinaire to America's enemies, was elected to a top position at the U.N. Conference on the Arms Trade Treaty that was held in New York in early July.

The U.S. is one of the few countries that has anything like a Second Amendment, our Founding Fathers enshrining the right to bear arms in our founding principles in recognition of it being the ultimate bulwark against tyrannical government. They were guns owned by civilians that freed us from British tyranny. The fact that tyrants, dictators, thugs and gross human-rights violators want to control small arms worldwide is hardly a surprise.

In June, 150 members of Congress sent a letter to Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton warning that the treaty is "likely to pose significant threats to our national security, foreign policy and economic interests as well as our constitutional rights."

Addressing the Conservative Political Action Conference recently, National Rifle Association Vice President Wayne LaPierre accused the president of working behind the scenes with the U.N. on a "treaty that could effectively ban or severely restrict civilian ownership of firearms worldwide."

Private ownership of firearms is a cornerstone of American liberty. If the people of places such as Sudan and Syria had gun rights protected by their government and courts, would they be oppressed and slaughtered? We think not.

Under the Constitution, any treaty must be ratified by two-thirds of the Senate. But this is an administration that has shown more respect for the United Nations Charter than to our sacred founding document. Our Second Amendment rights are being jeopardized by a vague and misguided treaty.

PDF Print E-mail

Big Stories The Media Will 'Discover' After The Election

Investors Business Daily – 11/07/12

Congress and the White House will have to deal with that just as they're trying to avoid the fiscal cliff.

• ObamaCare isn't what it was cracked up to be. After two years of ignoring health reform's fundamental flaws, the press will likely admit that ObamaCare is fundamentally flawed.

Reports are sure to appear pointing out the law's lack of cost controls, its adverse impact on doctors and hospitals, and the fact that, after spending $1.76 trillion, it will still leave 30 million uninsured.

• Obama's deficit-cutting plan won't work. The press let the president get away with one of the biggest whoppers yet — that his tax hikes on "the rich" would be enough to pay for his spending binge and bring down the deficit $4 trillion.

Obama's own budget proved this wasn't the case. And after the election, you can bet the media will be "shocked" to find that his numbers didn't add up.

• Questions about Benghazi still demand answers. After almost two full months spent burying the Benghazi story, expect the mainstream press to wake up and notice that, as the Washington Post admitted in an editorial last Friday, "a host of unanswered questions" remains.

So far, only Fox News has bothered to pursue this story, but we expect that other outlets will pick up on it after the elections.

We could go on. But you get the idea.

PDF Print E-mail



Good Morning (Well, maybe not so good this morning).

Thank you all so very much for your efforts this election season. While the results didn't turn out the way we hoped and worked for, you have much to be proud of. Your participation in standouts, at the Flea Market,, at candidate rallies, through your monetary contributions, and most importantly your turnout to vote, communicated to our town the Republican presence and enthusiasm that exists here.

I want to specifically recognize the Seeleys for their leadership in providing our presence at the Flea Market this past October. And to Julie for her work on our website and her emails reminding us of the various Republican Candidate events taking place.

Don Graham, our Republican Town Committee Vice-Chair, also deserves our thanks for his work on providing signs and for setting up and managing our on-line standout schedule.

I want to commend our Bromfield Young Republicans for their participation in our standout yesterday. I believe they opened some eyes as to how strongly they support the political process and Republican ideals and goals.

In the event I have missed other's contributions to our efforts, I humbly apologize. Please do not hesitate to let me know.

Finally, today is a day we can feel bad, commiserate, grouse about what happened, get angry, and all the other things when things don't go our way. However, tomorrow we put it all behind us and reinvigorate ourselves to what we believe in: love of country; the power of the American individual to make a difference, to care for himself and his fellow man; the role of government to be involved in such issues as absolutely necessary. All of these and more as articulated on our HRTC website.

Many years ago I came across some words in a speech by Teddy Roosevelt that have served me well, especially at times such as these. I'd like to share them with you:

"It is not the critic who counts, not the man who points out how the strong man stumbled, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs  to the man who is actually in the arena; whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood; who strives valiantly; who errs and comes short again and again; who
knows the great enthusiasms, the great devotions, and spends himself in a worthy cause; who, at the best, knows in the end the triumph of high achievement; and who, at the worst, if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who know neither victory nor defeat."

Keep the Faith!

See you next Wednesday evening, 11/14.

HRTC Chair

PDF Print E-mail



All Massachusetts conservatives know what it feels like to work hard and long on campaigns we believe in, only to come up short. Being right in this Commonwealth is not always the same thing as being victorious at the polls. But our principles are too important to discard, our beliefs too critical to this country's well-being and security to abandon, our commitment to Republican values too crucial not for us to come together and renew our efforts in the next election cycle.

But as the vehicles which will ultimately carry these principles and beliefs forward to victory, the Massachusetts and National Republican Party are too critical not to reevaluate. It is often been said that elections have consequences. With respect to yesterday's voting, I trust that is not entirely true. But with respect to the Massachusetts GOP, the November 2012 campaign results must be highly consequential. We cannot simply shrug off these results as unavoidable in this Commonwealth in a presidential year; we have to begin championing candidates and policies which will win elections in all seasons.

In order to become a competitive political party again, the Massachusetts GOP – from its rank-and-file all the way to its leadership – are now obliged to conduct a fearless and all-inclusive self-evaluation. As the national GOP is going to have to do, the Massachusetts Republican Party must figure out a way to become more welcoming and appealing to women, Hispanics, and youth. Above all, we must find a way to prove to the people of this Commonwealth, that the Republican Party is their only true and lasting champion.

I look forward to discussing these themes with you all over the next two years and to working with you to a rebound victory in 2014.

Brian P. Burke, Esq.
Middlesex and Worcester District Republican State Committeeman

PDF Print E-mail

Six Enormous Stakes In Presidential Election

11/01/2012 06:31 PM ET

Should Obama be re-elected, he could have the chance to replace any one of these justices and shift the court to a liberal majority, potentially for decades to come.

On the other hand, liberal justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen Breyer will be 83 and 78, respectively, in 2016.

Should Romney win, he might have the chance to strengthen the conservative bloc.

• Higher taxes. Obama has already signed into law a raft of new taxes under the guise of ObamaCare — many of which will kick in next year if he is re-elected. He's also promised higher taxes on the "rich" and higher taxes on energy producers.

But none of these tax hikes is enough to fill the budget gap, leaving a 10-year deficit totaling $6.7 trillion, according to Obama's own budget plan.

And even that assumes strong economic growth and that health costs don't "unexpectedly" explode.

As a result, Obama is virtually certain to start pushing for higher taxes in his second term, and not just on the rich, to cut the deficit and pay for all his new spending programs.

Romney's plan is to enact revenue-neutral, pro-growth tax reforms that, combined with spending restraint, have the potential to lower the deficit without raising any new taxes.

• A regulatory tsunami. As IBD has catalogued recently, a second Obama term will bring with it a tidal wave of massively expensive new regulations.

There are more than 4,000 federal rules in the pipeline, with just the 13 biggest imposing $515 billion in compliance costs over four years.

And that doesn't include the regulatory costs from ObamaCare and Dodd-Frank, both of which still require vast amounts of rules to be written.

Romney has promised to eliminate "all Obama-era regulations that unduly burden the economy," gut Obama's costly global warming regulatory agenda, and require congressional approval of all new "major" regulations.

• A weaker America. Obama's budget calls for reducing defense spending as a share of the economy to 2.9% by 2017, the smallest share devoted to national defense since just before World War II.

Should Obama win re-election, he will be able to claim a mandate to downsize the military while beefing up the nation's entitlement programs.

Romney, on the other hand, promises to protect the military from this huge budget ax.

Given all this, anyone who thinks it doesn't really matter whether Barack Obama or Mitt Romney wins next Tuesday is, to put it bluntly, delusional.


PDF Print E-mail

Why I am voting for Mitt Romney by Democratic Columnist Michael Goodwin

October 29, 2012

...He failed as president because he is incompetent, dishonest and not interested in the actual work of governing. His statist policies helped consign millions of Americans to a lower standard of living and his odious class warfare further divided the nation. He had no intention of uniting the country — it was his Big Lie...

Read the entire article at:


Page 3 of 10