It would have been much more helpful to me, and others that have "commonly held misconceptions", for you to have explained what you think they are.
I know I for one have not questioned your qualifications and I generally consider what you write as probably a correct interpretation, but remember what I do as well, by profession I am a cynic and question things and if the answer doesn't make sense or is incompete I question some more.
So without prompting another peek into your resume, how am I incorrect in saying that with no additional funding or manpower, that this new law will result in the diversion of crews? It's my understanding that a radar post on the water needs to be
"static" 
so that means while radar is in use a safety patrol is NOT underway.
The political reality is "it is what it is" to quote some coach so you will be seeing these Winnipesaukee radar posts in 2009. What will be very interesting to see, now that you pointed it out, is what the impact of the new law will be on the boating families throughout New Hampshire that don't normally travel fast but might not want to put their license on the line for violation of...say rafting rules... .
And what's been lost in this debate is the Homeland Security mandate that coastal states, including NH, develop and implement a program getting recreational boaters involved in port security. That will also require manpower.