We learned that we had around 101 bills to tackle between today and the next day, plus whatever got pulled off consent. So everyone knew it was gonna be a looooong 2 days. Wednesday’s session began with 188 Republicans and 145 Democrats in the House. Of course Republicans still had more legislation on the agenda fulfilling campaign promises outlined the “Contract with New Hampshire” (https://www.nhhousegop.com/press-releases/contract/). Again, notably missing from the chamber today was the Democrat crying baby… however, towards the end of the day as we got into Education bills, House Democrat outbursts continued. More about that later. We did manage to cruise through the day such that we were able to get about 10 bills into the “Part Two” calendar.
We learned that we passed HB467 (314Y-14N), a bill allowing for the establishment of “social districts”. In social districts, people can publicly enjoy alcoholic beverages wherever they choose in those districts. HB467 benefits small businesses and gives more freedom to both patrons and business owners. We then passed HB198 (208Y-125N), relative to legalizing certain quantities of cannabis and establishing penalties for the smoking or vaping of cannabis in public. This bill legalizes the possession, consumption, and transferring of a limited amount of cannabis if the individual is at least 21 years of age or older. In order to assuage certain concerns, the bill also instituted new penalties to ensure responsible consumption of cannabis, penalizing public smoking or vaping of cannabis. That being said, the opposition said that the bill should be ITL’d because it was clear that not only would the Senate kill it, but that the governor has no intention of signing any bill legalizing any amount of cannabis. Some House members who voted against this bill said there weren’t enough guardrails and that we did not need to further decriminalize cannabis in NH, nor create any more opportunity for drug addiction. Just like in our gardens, the weed issue continues to come back. Let’s see what the Senate does with it.
We learned in a related bill, HB466, that the House flipped the committee recommendation to OTP. Instead they voted 120Y-216N to overturn the OTP and then voice voted ITL. This bill would have increased the loss of license penalty from 180 days to 1 yr if a person under arrest for any violation or misdemeanor under RSA 265 or RSA 215-A refuses upon the request of a law enforcement officer, authorized agent, or peace officer to submit to physical tests or to a test of blood, urine, or breath. The Department of Safety requested this bill. The House agreed that our state must take steps to lower the rates of impaired driving, but they didn’t think that it was a good idea to increase the punishment if a person refused to surrender their right under the Fourth Amendment to resist an unwarranted search. This legislation does not criminalize drunk driving but rather criminalizes the assertion of a constitutional right, and the majority in House chambers did not like that at all.
We learned that we had several bills in election law. We voice voted the passage of HB154 that made it clear that the legislature allows individual voters to choose to have their ballot be hand counted in municipalities that use ballot counting machines. We also had two bills that proposed to change the state primary date. HB408 would have changed it to the 4th day of August. That bill was Tabled 190Y-147N. HB481 moved the primary date to the 2nd Tuesday in June. The amendment 1360h passed with a whopping 337Y-1N (we don’t know who the one was in this Division vote), and then the bill with its amendment passed OTP/A on a voice vote. Then we voted on HB514 – allowing private persons to sue for violations of election laws. The bill passed 186Y-152N and establishes a clear and efficient process for individuals to seek judicial redress if they are harmed by violations of election law procedures, including the denial of their right to vote. Under current judicial precedent, individuals are prohibited from suing under RSA 659, leaving voters and election participants with no direct recourse when election laws are violated. This bill corrects that by creating a formal complaint process with the Department of Justice (DOJ) while ensuring that the DOJ does not have the final say on election law violations. We also voted on HB600 – enabling Ranked Choice Voting in Municipal Elections. That died simply and cleanly in a roll called vote of 194Y-145N.
We learned also that HB152 was Indefinitely Postponed (190Y-140N), that motion was made by yours truly because I honestly do not want to see this bill return next year in any form in my committee. HB152 would have prohibited the sale and use of adhesive-based rodent traps in NH. Proponents of the bill feel that glue traps are “cruel”. In testimony, where they called rodents “little people”, they also think that cats chasing mice is cruel. They’d prefer us to use exclusion techniques or mouse/rat birth control in baiting stations. While those are also part of an integrated pest control management plan, they are not as effective as glue boards to catch, and monitor for, rodents. The people who are always screaming that we shouldn’t use poisons also want to take away a non-chemical means of rodent control. Glue boards are used in places where food is prepared and stored, and where there are elderly residents and children. Banning glue traps would be problematic in those spaces. Glue boards are also used to catch pests like cockroaches, so how can you ban it for one use and not another? You also can’t control if people buy it over the internet or go across state lines to buy it. For people who don’t like glue boards because they are “cruel” – well, they can choose not to buy it and to use other means of rodent control. For everyone else, there should remain this choice – and I’ll stick to that notion!
We learned that we passed on a roll call HB520 – relative to authorizing hearing officers of the department of education to issue subpoenas (193Y-155N). This bill grants authority to Department of Education hearing officers to issue subpoenas at the request of the commissioner or commissioner’s designee relative to educator code of conduct violations for certified educators. The Judiciary committee heard testimony that in the case of a former special education teacher at a Concord school, who was convicted of child rape and indecent assault and battery of a student of the middle school, the department was unable to get copies of necessary documents, slowing the process of suspending his educator license. While in the majority of cases, the department has been successful in receiving necessary documents needed, it was felt that this bill was needed. All but 1 Democrat voted against this bill. You don’t need a subpoena to find out who that was.
We learned that another committee recommendation was flipped from ITL to OTP. HB142 would designate the “Honor and Remember Flag” as the state symbol of remembrance for those who died in the line of duty or as the result of service. It would require the flag to fly over the State House for no more than five designated days of the year including Gold Star Mother’s Day. Opponents of the bill felt that the Governor already set aside a day and time to remember Gold Star Mothers and those who died in the line of duty, and that allowing this flag to fly would open up the doors for other flags to fly on other dates as well (flags like the satanic flag, the trans flag, etc.). The House voted against the ITL with a roll call vote of 125Y-226N, and then passed an amendment which made further specifications regarding flying the flag. Then we passed the whole thing on a voice vote. Rep. Skip Rollins (R-Newport) gave a heartfelt speech in favor of the bill and in memory of his son, Army Specialist Justin Rollins, who at age 22 serving in Iraq was killed after a roadside bomb hit.
We learned that the taxpayer-funded lobbying bill (HB456) was Indefinitely Postponed 187Y-163N. This was a hotly contested bill and a lot of misinformation was floating around about it. There was a non-germane amendment 0908h which passed (178Y-170N) that prohibited taxpayer dollars from being used for lobbying efforts. Current law (RSA15:5) says if a municipality wants to use professional lobbyists you need to pay them with non-state funds and physically segregate state funds from other funds. That requires TWO CHECKING ACCOUNTS. This bill would have prohibited local taxpayers money from also being used for that purpose. To complete the protection of taxpayers and how their money is to be spent, an annual specific vote acknowledging the purchase of the lobbying services would be required. The bill did NOT limit speech for anyone, and it made crystal clear that anyone can still come testify at the statehouse. The problem is that taxpayers money is used as dues to pay municipal (and county) membership into various organizations that provide help and guidance to members, but they also pay for lobbying efforts. This is a problem when your taxpayer dollars are used to lobby for positions that you may not agree on. It ends up being a vote against YOU, the taxpayer. Case in point, NH Municipal Assoc. (NHMA) lobbied against HB511 and in favor of sanctuary cities. There are many cases like this. Unfortunately, this bill died and perhaps NHMA lobbied hard enough and sent enough misinformation to legislators about it stifling free speech, which resulted in this bill’s demise.
We learned that two bills having to do with the Article V convention of states were Tabled. The first HCR3, applying for the convention of states under Article V of the Constitution of the United States, was Tabled 267Y-76N. That’s a strong rebuke against this concept if you ask me! Then HCR5 was Tabled 176Y-168N. This would have rescinded HCR40 passed in 2012, asking that Congress call a convention of states under Article V. Monied interests have been pushing the Convention of States under Article V – even former Sen. Rick Santorum came to NH to lobby for this. Apparently, a free lunch at Tandy’s wasn’t enough to buy votes here.
We also learned that HCR10, calling for the repeal of the Jones Act, passed 172Y-171N. That was the closest vote of the day. This concurrent resolution sought to recommend repeal of the protectionist Jones Act, which many claim increases costs, hampers interstate trade, discourages competition, and degrades our ship-building capabilities. The minority opposition stated that they agree with President Trump on this issue. They believe that repeal compromises New Hampshire jobs, weakens our borders, impedes military readiness, takes away American control over our own supply chain, and openly invites Chinese maritime dominance. The Jones Act mandates that cargo moved between US ports be transported on vessels owned by US companies, built in US shipyards, and crewed by US mariners. The US towing industry comprises the largest segment of the 40,000-vessel-strong Jones Act fleet, which plays a crucial role in the nation’s supply chain.
We further learned that HB461 passed 187Y-159N in a roll call vote. This bill asserts that all training and testing materials provided by the Dept. of Motor Vehicles be printed in the English language. Rep. Thomas Walsh (R-Hooksett) said “Thank You” in Swahili, and also said that our road signs, directional signs, and emergency electronic signs are all written in English. Common sense dictates that anyone issued a New Hampshire driver’s license would need a basic understanding of the English language. Why should we print training and testing materials in any other language? Having our materials translated and printed in other languages is also a huge cost to the state. RSA 3-C1 states that the official language of New Hampshire is English. House Democrats argued that people should take these tests and have materials in the language that they are comfortable with. They felt passage of this bill would drive residents out of our workforce, out of our businesses, and out of our community. House Democrats support sanctuary cities and harboring illegal aliens in the US. If those people get drivers licenses, then they can also vote in our elections. Ahhh… now you get the picture?
We also learned that HB553 was a really bad bill and was sent to the Table to die with a vote of 342Y-1N (we don’t know who that 1 was). Originally, the bill had come out of Children and Family Law Committee with an Ought To Pass with Amendment motion. Upon further inspection, the bill was an awful idea. The bill expanded the definition of abuse to include vague terms like “emotional, or psychological” abuse. Since these terms are somewhat subjective, the net result will be more children taken from their parents. It was even more alarming because if DCYF disagreed with a parent’s parenting style or philosophical outlook on things such as transgenderism or homeschooling, those parents could be charged with abuse.
We learned that HB316 passed 250Y-85N. House Commerce Committee Chair John Hunt (R-Rindge) said, “This legislation addresses the ongoing crisis in emergency medical services by standardizing ambulance reimbursement rates, prohibiting balance billing, and creating a commission to explore an all-payer model”.
We further learned that HB191 passed 180Y-164N after much debate regarding two offered amendments. Amendment 0756h passed and the other (1311h) was killed. House Democrats were in an uproar over this bill. This bill was in response to an event where a school employee drove a kid to get an abortion without parental consent. And while this bill was not about abortion, it was about parental rights and knowing what is going on with your child. This bill as amended makes it unlawful for any adult to transport a minor for any surgical procedure without the written consent of the parent or guardian. The bill limits the requirement to actual surgical procedures and not emergency good samaritan situations. In recent years there have been stories of minors being transported by adults within and without the state for medical procedures without their parents knowledge and consent. Whether it be an abortion, gender reassignment, or plastic surgery, parents and guardians must be involved in these important decisions. Surgery performed without their knowledge can end tragically. The minor’s caregivers know what medications they take and what allergies a child may have. Furthermore they must know what to look out for in the hours and days after a surgical procedure. Secretly performed surgeries can result in postoperative infection and other complications going unnoticed, leading to death. Also important, is a parent’s absolute right to decide what is best for their children. The bill requires notarized permission which is easily obtainable. Surgical procedures where a parent requires someone else to transport their child would be extremely rare and scheduled months in advance. House Democrats, of course, voted against this bill too.
We further learned that HB50 passed 183Y-157N on a roll call vote. This bill The amended bill replaces the original which eliminated our anti-Critical Race Theory provisions. It now enhances those provisions and supports the Attorney General’s defense of them in federal court. As amended, this bill allows a person aggrieved by the intentional or knowing violation of the prohibition on teaching discrimination to initiate civil action against the offending school or district. As amended, this bill deems the intentional or knowing violation of the prohibition by an educator a violation of the educator code of conduct and enhances our anti-discrimination statutes. The state is defending these laws in the courts and these enhancements are intended to address a lower court’s criticism. These statutes are termed the “Prohibition on Teaching Discrimination” statutes and include provisions such as prohibiting instruction that one’s age, sex, race, physical disability, etc. is inherently superior to people of another age, sex, race, physical disability. The bill specifies that any violation of the section by an educator must be “intentional or knowing.” It also reinforces that nothing in the law prohibits discussion by educators of historical existence of ideas and subjects as part of a larger course of academic instruction. It also states specifically that the intent of the section is to equally protect all New Hampshire citizens from discrimination, regardless of race. House Democrats were vehemently against this bill and sought instead to repeal the 2021 law which they feel is unconstitutional. They say that repealing the law would reinstate the ability for teachers to teach the “honest, and accurate, and the sometimes painful truth in our history without fear for their jobs”. No one is preventing the Holocaust or the Civil Rights Movement from being taught in our schools in an honest and accurate way. What this law prevents is teaching a child that his parents are the white oppressors and racists, or that white males are to be despised, or that all black people are oppressed, etc. How can House Democrats be against anti-discrimination laws?
We also learned that the last and most contentious bill of the day was HB324. It passed 183Y-148N. This bill prohibits obscene or harmful sexual materials in schools. The House Democrats were beside themselves in protest of this bill which they equated to “book banning”. These books are awful and contain incest, sex between adults, cutting, suicide, violence, and more. These are clearly age inappropriate materials that need to be left out of our school libraries. House Democrats believe this crap is “culture” and have “educational value”. Rep. Hope Damon (D-Croydon) got up and lauded the book, “Speak” and said books like this should be taken “as a whole” and not just pieces of it. Rep. Glenn Cordelli (R-Tuftonboro) read a passage from a book called “Tricks” and Rep. Damon got up an objected citing that we are not allowed to read other people’s material at the well… which isn’t true and actually has been done numerous times. In any case, her objection was over-ruled. As Rep. Cordelli continued to read selected obscene passages from these books, Rep. Paige Beauchemin (D- Nashua) yelled. “Stop… Enough”. Apparently, she was triggered… as were other Democrats who left House Chambers because they couldn’t bear to hear the words and language that they are fighting so hard for our 4th graders to read and have in our school libraries. It really is astounding that these people can’t stand to hear these depictions of violent rape, or sexual encounter but they think it’s OK to have your kid exposed to it in school. They consider it “unnecessary overreach”, and that the state should not dictate to local school libraries and that “parents should make decisions of what their kids should read and not the legislature”. I have news for them… our constituents want this crap out of our schools! Furthermore, it is not “banning books”, as any parent can order this garbage over the internet or buy it at a bookstore if they so choose. No one is stopping these House Democrats from ordering this trash for their own kids, or as birthday gifts. If you want to know the truth, the American Library Association also pushes this garbage to be in our libraries. I don’t understand what is so difficult about limiting school libraries to age appropriate materials. We are supposed to be protecting our kids, especially at an early age, from obscenity, violence and depiction of sexual acts. There will be plenty of time for them to see this stuff in their life. 4th graders do not need this – or transvestite story hour – or other fetish trash in their libraries.
Finally – we learned that we had a unanimous consent speech from Rep. Lily Foss (D- Manchester) who discussed the concern of some people regarding “the safety of CIS-Gendered women” to which she said (as if she was another Greta Thunberg) and looking right at Rep. Jonah Wheeler (D-Peterborough), “How Dare You”. She was, of course, reacting to the vote about protecting women’s spaces and not allowing biological men to be in women’s sports or locker rooms, etc. She said, “How dare you use my body as a cudgel against others… How dare you use ME as one of those tools (of oppression to others)”. She continued, “As a CIS gendered woman, as a queer woman, as a disabled woman, as a woman who lives paycheck to paycheck and depends on social services, my existence is politicized against me every day”. After a few minutes of this blather, someone rose to remove consent, and we then voted to allow the member to continue. The vote was 239Y-16N, as people decided to let her continue her harpie rant. We all knew she was talking not just at us Republicans, but specifically to Rep. Wheeler. This bullying tone and harassment, and histrionics from a member of the party who preaches tolerance, “Be Kind”, and no bullying, continued on and can be viewed from the livestream (8:20:50). I won’t be nominating her for any Academy Awards for her “brave outspokeness” (eyeroll), although she probably thinks she deserves one.
So, kids… that was our Wednesday in the NH House. I will cover the next day in my next article. Thursday was a doozy. Stay tuned.
