From CNN:

Ron Paul finished a close third, according to the state GOP. Texas Gov. Rick Perry, who placed fifth, said late Tuesday that he would return to his home state to consider whether his campaign would continue.

Romney, a former Massachusetts governor, had 30,015 votes. Santorum, a former U.S. senator from Pennsylvania and an upstart challenger who just weeks ago polled in the single digits, had 30,007, the state GOP said.

Each had roughly 25% of the vote in Iowa, the first state to vote in the 2012 presidential caucus and primary season. Paul, a U.S. representative from Texas, had 21%. Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich was at 13%. Perry was at 10%, Rep. Michele Bachmann of Minnesota had 5%, and former Utah Gov. Jon Huntsman had 1%.

State GOP officials said certified results will be released in two weeks.

Because the race was initially too close to call, many candidates spoke to their supporters before the final tally was released.

“Game on,” said Santorum, to a crowd gathered in Johnston, Iowa. “What wins in America are bold ideas, sharp contrasts and a plan that includes everyone. A plan that says we will work together to get America to work.”

Even Romney praised Santorum’s efforts when speaking at his celebration party. “This has been a great victory for him and for his effort,” Romney said of Santorum. “He’s worked very hard in Iowa. We also feel it’s been a great victory for us here.”

The focus of the race will now shift to New Hampshire, which holds its primary on Tues., Jan. 10.

Photo: 2012 GOP presidential candidate Mitt Romney (Flickr/Gage Skidmore)

2012 GOP presidential candidate and former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney (Photo: Flickr/Gage Skidmore)

Jacksonville’s Susie Wiles, the former campaign manager for Gov. Rick Scott, has joined the team of would-be GOP presidential nominee Mitt Romney. Wiles was working closely with Romney opponent Jon Huntsman until July, when she left her position as campaign manager.

At the time, Wiles said “it was just time” to leave the Huntsman campaign, saying she had only signed up “to get [the campaign] started.”

Wiles has now been named as a co-chair of Romney’s Florida advisory council.

Wiles’ husband, veteran Republican advance man Lanny Wiles, remained with Huntsman until August, when he also left the campaign. Though he said at the time that he remained “an avid supporter of Governor Huntsman,” he, too, now appears to be backing Romney.

Via Politico:

President Barack Obama aboard Air Force One (Pic by The White House, via Flickr)

North Dakota is on its way to becoming the first state in the country to have an operating health insurance exchange program. Each state is required by the Affordable Care Act to have some infrastructure in place by January 2013 for an exchange. Florida remains one of the lone states dragging its feet.

The Grand Forks Herald reports that North Dakota is on track to pass legislation that would set up its state exchange.

According to the Herald:

House Bill 1474, drafted by the Health Care Reform Review Committee after the regular legislative session ended this spring, would create a North Dakota health insurance benefit exchange system.

Under the federal legislation, all states must have an operational health benefit exchange by Jan. 1, 2014 or the secretary of Health and Human Services must create one.

Pam Sharp, director of the North Dakota Office of Management and Budget, said the key component of the exchange would be a new website that would allow residents to compare costs and benefits of affordable health insurance plans.

The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities released a report (.pdf) that said as of “August 17, 2011, 39 states and the District of Columbia have introduced some form of legislation promoting exchange implementation.”

“Among the 34 states where the legislation would fully establish a state exchange program, ten states enacted such bills into law,” the group reports.

Only 11 states, Florida among them, have not introduced any legislation to establish a state exchange program.

Florida is among only five states not using federal grants meant to help the state plan and research for an exchange. The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities says that “Florida, Kansas, Louisiana, New Hampshire and Oklahoma reportedly will return exchange grant funds.”

This week, health advocates touring the state warned that Florida had done “virtually nothing” to follow the law’s mandates. The groups also warned that the state would cede their authority to the federal government if the state did not meet the deadlines.

On Election Day 2011, when Mississippians voted down the “personhood” amendment that would have criminalized abortion and, potentially, common forms of birth control, the political arm of Planned Parenthood Federation of America (PPFA) launched the Women Are Watching (WAW) campaign, a social-media project intended to educate and engage Planned Parenthood supporters throughout the country.

According to a press release, the Planned Parenthood Action Fund (PPAF) will run online banner ads highlighting “Champs” and “Chumps” of reproductive rights.

Current “Chumps” featured include GOP presidential candidates Mitt Romney and Texas Gov. Rick Perry, as well as U.S. Reps. Steve King (R-Iowa), Allen West (R-Fla.), Denny Rehberg (R-Mont.) and Todd Akin (R-Mo.). “Champs” include President Obama, U.S. Sens. Jon Tester (D-Mont.), Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.); and U.S. Reps. Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.), Shelley Berkley (D-Nev.); and former Iowa First Lady Christie Vilsack, who is running for Congress as a Democrat.

In an editorial for the Huffington Post published Tuesday, PPFA President Cecil Richards wrote:

Over the past year, we have witnessed the most aggressive legislative attacks on women’s health and rights in a generation. The 2010 elections dramatically changed the U.S. Congress and state legislatures nationwide, leading to a wave of efforts to restrict access to vital women’s health care, including lifesaving cancer screenings and birth control. … [M]ore than 1,000 reproductive health bills have been introduced in legislatures across the country, the majority of which seek to undermine women’s health.

These attacks on women’s health are unacceptable and we’re putting anti-women’s health candidates from both parties on notice. Women Are Watchingwill work to ensure that politicians who play politics with our health are defeated and to support candidates who fight for the care women need to stay healthy.

Planned Parenthood saw victory Tuesday night with Mississippi’s “personhood” rejection and with Democratic victories in Kentucky (Democratic Gov. Steve Beshear was re-elected), Iowa (Democrats retained control of the state Senate) and New Jersey (Democratic control expanded in the state Senate).

However, Virginia is now completely controlled by the Republican Party, which won seats in the already GOP-majority House of Delegates and appears to have tipped the balance of power in the state Senate from Democrat to Republican, with the election of Republican Bryce Reeves over incumbent Sen. R. Edward Houck of District 17. The national anti-abortion-rights group the Susan B. Anthony List claims to have spent $25,000 in radio, TV and mailer ads against Houck’s reelection.

Planned Parenthood is also watching various states in 2012, including:

• Pennsylvania: Bills have been introduced to enforce new regulations on abortion clinics and to require women to receive state-mandated information about abortion.

• Florida: In 2012, Floridians will vote on a ballot initiative that would amend the state constitution to prohibit public funding of abortions, which is already illegal, but more significantly the bill would “prohibit the State Constitution from being interpreted to create broader rights to an abortion than those contained in the United States Constitution” — thus rolling back a constitutional privacy right in the state constitution that currently provides more protection for women than the U.S. Constitution does. A “personhood” amendment just like Mississippi’s will also be on the ballot.

• Planned Parenthood is also “watching” New Hampshire, which severed a decades-long family-planning contract with Planned Parenthood of Northern New England this year; Ohio, which introduced the controversial “heartbeat bill;” and Texas, which slashed the state’s family-planning budget from $111 million to $38 million and passed a mandatory ultrasound bill (many of the provisions of this law were struck down by a federal judge).

Rep. David Bates (R-Windham) told AP on Tuesday that amending the constitution would be a lengthy process, and he would rather the state Legislature focus on the repeal bill.

From AP:

Bates said he did not want to risk having lawmakers choosing between two measures: the bill and a constitutional amendment.

“It would complicate the decision for legislators if there was another alternative out there,” he said.

The legislative process seems the appropriate way to decide the issue, he said. If a constitutional amendment is used, millions of dollars in out-of-state money would flow into New Hampshire on both sides of the issue, he said.

“I don’t think that’s the way people want it decided,” he said.

Bates’ legislation calling for a marriage-equality repeal moved forward last week, receiving a favorable vote by the House Judiciary Committee.

The National Organization for Marriage’s New Hampshire campaign has attempted to show that a majority of New Hampshirites support repealing same-sex marriage by using manipulated photos of large crowds unrelated to same-sex marriage in New Hampshire. However, a poll conducted by the University of New Hampshire last month showed proponents of repealing same-sex marriage in New Hampshire are outnumbered 2 to 1.

New Hampshire Gov. John Lynch has promised to veto the repeal law if it passes next year.

At a campaign stop in Manchester, N.H., last Friday, GOP presidential contender Rick Perry endorsed the marriage-equality repeal.

Perry was quoted by Reuters:

“I applaud those legislators in New Hampshire who are working to defend marriage as an institution between one man and one woman,” Perry said, adding that he supported the “sanctity of traditional marriage.”

In a blogpost titled “The Great Photo ‘Controversy,’” NOM President Brian Brown addressed the Flickr photo used, but not the photo originally credited to Reuters photographer Jim Young. Brown’s defense for using the public domain photo of a rally for Barack Obama in Ohio in 2008 rather than a photo related to repealing same-sex marriage in New Hampshire in 2012 was that it “symbolizes the tens of thousands of New Hampshire voters who are part of our effort.”

A spokesperson from Reuters told The American Independent that Reuters is currently looking into the matter and investigating whether NOM actually purchased the photo or was otherwise given permission to use it. NOM has not responded to TAI’s .requests for comment.

Not only did Brown not address the Reuters photo, but he did not identify the source of the news story, which was Good As You. Instead, he credited the discovery of the altered photos to “Rachel Maddow and her friends on the left.” (Good As You’s Jeremy Hooper said NOM has been instructed never to respond to him or Good As You).

An excerpt from Brown’s blogpost:

Neither Maddow nor her friends at the Human Rights Campaign can defend imposing same-sex marriage on New Hampshire with no vote of the people. So they issue “reports” and press releases criticizing NOM over a photo collage! They object to us using a photo of a crowd scene, which symbolizes the tens of thousands of New Hampshire voters who are part of our effort. They’re upset that the photo was not taken at a NOM rally. Seriously?! NOM using a common use photo in the public domain is considered a great scandal, yet they can redefine marriage—the most important social institution of society against the wishes of New Hampshire voters—and nobody is supposed to object? It’s as if the institution of marriage gets mugged, and they complain about speeding in the neighborhood when someone rushes it to the hospital!

The New Hampshire primary is particularly important for Johnson’s long-shot candidacy. He is pro-abortion rights, supports marriage equality and marijuana legalization, positions that make him anathema to Iowa’s social conservative caucus voters. His campaign has counted on performing well in New Hampshire, which is known for its libertarian bent.

In his most recent debate performance, Johnson gained brief national attention for joking that his neighbor’s dogs have created more shovel-ready jobs than President Obama. He also repeatedly touted his proposal for a balanced budget amendment, no doubt in the hope that Republican voters would respond more to his fiscal conservatism than to his social liberalism.

According to Democracy in Action, Johnson has spent more time in New Hampshire than any other GOP presidential candidate, a total of 18 visits and 70 days total. His presence in the state has eclipsed even fellow former Gov. Jon Huntsman (Utah), another candidate distrusted by social conservatives who has spent a total of 42 days in New Hampshire.

The New York Times’ Michael Shear notes that had the early winter storm predicted for the East Coast this weekend “swept in 24 hours earlier, Mr. Johnson might have found himself out of luck.”

UPDATE: The National Organization for Marriage has since removed from its website the image that is the subject of this article.

A photo doctored by the National Organization for Marriage (NOM) in a new campaign to overturn marriage equality in New Hampshire suggests a lack of public support for the repeal, said political commentator Rachel Maddow on her MSNBC show Tuesday.

On Monday, the LGBT news blog Good As You discovered NOM used Photoshop to alter a photo taken from a 2008 rally in Columbus, Ohio.

The Obama rally photo, which, according to Good As You originated from a Nov. 3, 2008, article posted by the political action committee Upper Arlington Progressive Action*, currently exists on the homepage of NOM’s New Hampshire for Marriage website, but was manipulated to look like NOM President Brian Brown was presiding over the reportedly 60,000 people who gathered in support of Obama three years ago. Good As You also revealed another photo, taken by a Reuters photographer, which NOM altered and put on its New Hampshire website. The photo has since been removed.

A screenshot from the National Organization for Marriage's <a href="http://www.nhformarriage.com/#">New Hampshire for Marriage campaign website</a>

On Tuesday, the New Hampshire House Judiciary Committee approved a GOP-backed bill that would repeal same-sex marriage in the state. In reporting the story on her show, Maddow said Good As You’s findings prove that NOM and Republican legislators are faking support for a repeal in light of recent polling data and reports that suggest most New Hampshire citizens do not want to repeal marriage equality.

“The people who want to repeal same-sex marriage in New Hampshire are clearly out-numbered here, but not if they fake some more supporters,” Maddow said.

She then compared the doctored photo to its original, all the while narrating what the hypothetical crowd in NOM’s photo might have been saying:

“‘Who are you calling outnumbered 2 to 1? New Hampshire’s got thousands of people rallying for their lawmakers to take away existing rights.’

Unless those people are not actually there in New Hampshire cheering to take away gay people’s rights. Unless that fire-up crowd is actually at a different place, like say at a speech for then-candidate Barack Obama, in downtown Columbus, Ohio, before the 2008 election.

The people watching him that day in Columbus had no idea through the magic of uncredited, anti-gay Photoshopping, they would become part of a campaign against gay rights in a state 600 miles away in 2011. … The National Organization for Marriage is just making it up. They in the Republicans in the New Hampshire Legislature do not actually have popular support to take a nice picture of for taking away marriage rights currently enjoyed in New Hampshire.

So because they don’t have it, they are faking it instead. Caught you.”

Watch the video:

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

The National Organization for Marriage was not immediately available for comment and has not made any mention of the doctored photo on its constantly updated blog. The subject of NOM’s latest blogpost is about how New Hampshire Gov. John Lynch “lied to the people.”

Correction: TAI previously reported (and attributed to Talking Points Memo) that the Obama rally photo featured on Maddow’s show was taken by Reuters. In fact, a different photo of another Obama rally, in St. Louis, produced by Reuters, was also modified and used by NOM for the same website. Both photos have since been removed from the New Hampshire for Marriage website.

In an 11 to 6 vote, the committee approved House Bill 437, which would ban same-sex marriage and instead offer a form of civil unions for any unmarried adults. The committee rejected a second proposed bill that would just repeal gay marriage without offering any legal benefits for unmarried couples.

State Rep. David Bates (R-Windham), sponsored HB437 and said the legislation would not apply to currently married gay couples, which has amounted to approximately 1,500, according to AP.

Standing Up for New Hampshire Families, a pro-marriage-equality coalition that comprises Democrats, Republicans, citizens, business owners and civic leaders, released a statement following the House committee’s decision.

“The Bates proposal is bad for freedom and bad for families,” said Craig Stowell, Republican co-chair of Standing Up for New Hampshire Families. “We did not send lawmakers to Concord to revisit the marriage law,” said Stowell, a former Marine. “But a fringe group of lawmakers are squarely focused on taking away freedom and liberty from their constituents and fellow Granite Staters.”

From the proposed legislation:

The vast majority of children are conceived by acts of passion between men and women – sometimes unintentionally. Because of this biological reality, New Hampshire has a unique, distinct, and compelling interest in promoting stable and committed marital unions between opposite-sex couples so as to increase the likelihood that children will be born to and raised by both of their natural parents. No other domestic relationship presents the same level of state interest.

The bill notes that “no man shall marry his mother, father’s sister, mother’s sister, daughter, sister, son’s daughter, daughter’s daughter, brother’s daughter, sister’s daughter, father’s brother’s daughter, mother’s brother’s daughter, father’s sister’s daughter, mother’s sister’s daughter, or any other man.” The same rule would apply (genders reversed) to women.

However, there is an age discrepancy when it comes to New Hampshire’s marriage law: Women can be as young as 13 to become legally married, but men have to wait until they are 14.

The repeal bill is expected to go before a vote in the House early next year. Even if it has enough votes to move on to the state Senate, New Hampshire Gov. John Lynch has promised to veto the bill, reports AP. Lynch signed the marriage-equality bill in 2009 and the civil-unions bill it replaced in 2007.

Earlier this month, ahead of the House committee vote on the repeal, the University of New Hampshire Survey Center conducted a poll (PDF), showing 62 percent of Granite Staters oppose repealing the same-sex marriage law (50 percent “strongly oppose” the repeal; 12 percent “somewhat oppose” repeal).

In July the National Organization for Marriage’s former chair Maggie Gallagher announced New Hampshire was next on its list of marriage equality states to target. NOM registered the domain name www.nhformarriage.com in October 2010, according to the domain name registrar GoDaddy.com.

On the website, New Hampshire for Marriage states its goal “is to repeal the state’s same-sex marriage law by turning the tide against out-of-state special interest money that fueled its passage and corrupted our political and legislative process.”

The blog Good As You this week discovered that NOM has spliced and misrepresented pictures of a packed Obama rally from 2008 to make it look like NOM attracted 60,000 supporters at a rally. The picture appears on the homepage (in a section labeled “Who We Are”).

In a press release from Bachmann’s New Hampshire team issued Monday, the candidate’s national team was described as “rude, unprofessional, dishonest, and at times cruel. But more concerning was how abrasive, discourteous, and dismissive some within the national team were towards many New Hampshire citizens.”

It also said voters in the state were “treated…more as a nuisance than as potential supporters.”

The New Hampshire team was “never involved in shifting strategy discussions,” the release continued, and was “repeatedly ignored for simple requests, sometimes going weeks with little or no contact with the national team.”

Alice Stewart, spokeswoman for Bachmann’s campaign, told NBC there was poor dialogue with the New Hampshire team. But she said Iowa has always been the campaign’s focus:

… Stewart brushed off those charges, saying, “I’m not going to comment on the personal attacks that they made.”

Stewart pins the fallout on local disappointment with a campaign strategy that puts Iowa before New Hampshire.

“We’ve been clear all along our focus is Iowa,” Stewart told NBC. “There’s only so many days to be in Iowa, and she has to take advantage of every single one of them, and be there.” …