My votes in the NH House session
of March 13, 2025

So many losses today. At dinner with three other Democratic state representatives afterward, I toasted the Washington Generals.

HB 639-FN

This is a Republican priority bill. They really like blockchain, especially in its application for cryptocurrency. I was among the few shouting “Nay” in the voice vote. I had two concerns. First, the bill prohibits government from interfering in using digital assets to purchase goods or services. I plan to introduce a bill this fall that would limit how much cash one can put into a digital currency ATM. Much to the surprise of my fellow Democratic legislators, New Hampshire has Bitcoin ATMs. They are used to scam the unsuspecting, especially the elderly. Indeed, an elderly person whom I know well (not in New Hampshire) was elderscammed and found by police after putting $20,000 into a Bitcoin ATM.

My second concern is about the power requirements of crypto mining. If power sources are not built near the mining operations, then we’re looking at large transmission line increases. We would all pay for that.

HB 159-FN

This bill would authorize the state to report mental health data for firearms background checks and also create processes to confiscate firearms following certain mental health related court proceedings. We’ve had similar bills in the past. This one would ensure that anyone subject to being reported is already prohibited from owning firearms. The prime sponsor of this bill is Rep. Terry Roy, chair of the Criminal Justice and Public Safety Committee and a strong second-amendment advocate. He’s just not able to pull the Republican caucus along with him.

HB 592-FN

This bill undoes the bail reform that we passed and enacted last year. If this bill is enacted, which is likely, then someone who is arrested on a Friday evening of a long holiday weekend might wait five or six days before seeing a judge about bail.

HB 115-FN

If you’ve been following me at all, you know that I am squarely against school vouchers or, as they’re so euphemistically called, Education Freedom Accounts (EFAs). When they were snuck into HB 2 in 2021, the argument for them was that they help low-income families afford private and religious schools. Since then, the Republicans have steadily increased the income cap to for a family to qualify for EFAs. This bill raises the income cap to 400% of the poverty level for fiscal year 2026 and eliminates the income cap entirely after then. Not only did this bill pass, but a floor amendment that would have at least required annual recertification of each family failed. So once you’re in, you’re in.

The budget will have this bill baked in, and there is, and will be, no limit on the total amount of taxpayer money that can go toward EFAs. This reason alone will suffice for me to vote Nay on the budget.

HB 646-FN-LOCAL

In keeping with House Republicans’ desire to not feed kids, they voted down this bill that would require school districts to provide an online application to enroll in the federal school meals program. And, yes, they voted for this after we had gotten a free lunch, courtesy of AARP. You can’t make this stuff up.

HB 675-FN-A-LOCAL

By capping school budgets to a five-year average of previously approved amounts, with some adjustments, this bill will lock in disparities among school districts, to the disadvantage of property-poor districts. It violates local control as well.

HB 703-FN-A-LOCAL

This bill would have prohibited “meal shaming” of school children who have unpaid meal balances. You know the rest.

HB 521-FN

Make registering to vote easier by putting it online? No thanks, say the Republicans.

HB 570-FN

This bill repeals the Drug Affordability Board, which helps to lower drug costs in the state.

HB 572-FN

The “Partners in Housing” bill, with Lebanon’s own Rep. Laurel Stavis as prime sponsor. It creates an inventory of municipal and county owned land that could be developed, and it expedites the review process for these properties. The bill also lays the foundation for a low-interest loan and grant program to support creating workforce housing on these lands. I’ve heard it said that there is no silver bullet to solve the housing problem, but there’s silver buckshot. This bill is an important pellet.

HB 219-FN

Another thing that Republicans don’t like: renewable energy. They would much rather use dirty fuels from out of state (so that our money leaves the state) than promote clean, renewable energy that keeps our money in New Hampshire. I shant speculate on why (cough Koch Brothers cough).

Like the other New England states, we have a Renewable Portfolio Standard. It requires certain percentages of renewable content in the energy that the utilities deliver, and it sets the prices for Renewable Energy Certificates (RECs), which are generated into a marketplace when renewable energy is generated. For example, I generate one REC for each megawatt-hour that my solar panels produce. I sell that REC into the marketplace and get $27 for it.

This bill reduces the renewable requirements and the value of RECs in the state. Supposedly, doing so will save ratepayers money. If it does, it will be a negligible amount.

HB 452-FN

We’ve seen a bill like this before. It makes it so that aliens temporarily residing in New Hampshire cannot obtain a driver’s license. These people are here legally, with permission to work and pay taxes. If they cannot obtain a driver’s license, it’s going to be rather difficult to get to work. Or they might drive illegally without a license. This bill is on-brand for Republican cruelty.

HB 123

This bill arose out of a bill in my committee last year. If you own a large woodlot and do not harvest the wood, then you are eligible for carbon credits. There’s a marketplace for them. You might even have heard that trees are good for the enviroment.

So what’s the problem? There are very large parcels, especially in Coos County, owned by out-of-state interests that are using the forests only to generate carbon credits. The towns in the North Country rely on the timber tax generated when trees are harvested. No harvesting, no timber tax, and the North Country suffers.

This bill allows municipalities to tax standing forests that are just generating carbon credits. In other words, it’s a substitute for the timber tax that the towns would have gotten if normal harvesting were occurring.

The Democratic caucus recommendation was to vote for the bill in order to help the North Country. The opposition included groups that rarely agree on anything: Americans for Properity (because they don’t want any new taxes—or old ones for that matter) and major environmental groups (because they don’t want to discourage carbon sequestration).

I was torn on how to vote. During the 30-second voting period, I decided to go against the caucus recommendation and vote against the bill. The bill that my committee had last year ended up creating an inventory of the affected lands, and that inventory is ongoing but should be completed soon. Let’s see how much land is affected before we decide to tax it.

The bill passed anyway.