This week, we heard a lot of talk about Gov. John Lynch’s veto of so-called right-to-work legislation, pleasure over the first tax cut of the session signed into law, and a newspaper speaking out for consumers.

Veto speak

Jack Kimball, New Hampshire Republican Party chair, on Lynch’s veto of “Right to Work,” House Bill 474:

“It is clear by his veto on HB 474, John Lynch is against free market principles, job creation and individual liberty. It also confirms that he is out-of-touch with the plight of New Hampshire families and business owners. Right to Work would create a more appealing business climate that would attract new businesses, create sustainable jobs for our citizens and allow current businesses to grow while putting us back on track for a prosperous future.”

Gov. John Lynch’s HB 474 veto message:

“In the last seven years of recruiting businesses to move to New Hampshire, not one business leader has ever even asked me if New Hampshire had a right-to-work law, let alone suggested it was a factor in the company’s location decision. No New Hampshire business leaders have ever told me that the lack of a so-called right-to-work law prevented them from expanding or hiring new workers here in New Hampshire. And no New Hampshire workers have ever told me they couldn’t get a job because New Hampshire doesn’t have a so-called right-to-work law. The debate over the so-called right-to-work bill in New Hampshire appears to be largely driven by national outside interest groups, and is not a result of problems facing New Hampshire businesses or workers.”

House Speaker William O’Brien speaking to New Hampshire Public Radio before Lynch vetoed HB 474:

“My caucus members are concerned (about) not allowing the governor to believe that he can function as a third branch of the legislature. The senate and the house have spoken with very strong majorities that right to work is what the people of NH want.”

Ray Buckley, New Hampshire Democratic Party chair, critiquing Republican criticisms of Lynch’s HB 474 veto:

“Why do Republicans want to turn New Hampshire into Mississippi? New Hampshire is routinely recognized as having one of the most business-friendly business climates in the nation and ranks highest in public safety and our schools outperform most other states.”

Spread the good (tax cut) word

House Majority Leader D.J. Bettencourt of Salem on Lynch signing House Bill 229, which repealed the 10 percent gambling tax:

“This tax cut is merely a first installment in our plans for tax relief for New Hampshire citizens. Help is on the way and we are going to get back to being a low tax, business friendly state. We want people from across New England and the country to come here to visit, to shop and to bring their businesses… I encourage Governor Lynch to travel around the border communities and get the word out about this pro-business tax cut. I’d be happy to work with local merchants in my hometown to set up an event with the governor to let people know about this tax cut that the Republican legislature has delivered to the people.”

Flawed measurements

Concord Monitor editorial:

“In its anti-regulatory zeal, House Republicans also want to eliminate the Department of Agriculture’s Weights and Measures Division. Last week, in this paper, Hanover Rep. Bernie Benn shared some startling facts that every consumer should know about the need for the division’s inspectors. Last year, the agency inspected 139 service station gas meters and found that 113 were pumping less gas than displayed on the pump. The inspectors found scales that were cheating customers and home heating oil trucks that were overcharging by $36,000 by using meters that overestimated how much fuel had been delivered.”

This Daily Briefing was written by Michael McCord.

3 sides of the nickel

Gov. John Lynch dismissed the last-minute tax cut proposal that was trumpeted by House leadership (see “Speaking of Gas Prices“). Lynch said he wouldn’t have to veto Senate Bill 78 because the Senate won’t pass this “political gimmick” that could chop an estimated $6.5 million out of the state’s Highway Fund, which is used for road and bridge construction and maintenance.

House Majority Leader Rep. D. J. Bettencourt (R-Salem) countered with enthusiasm, suggesting an economic development chain reaction would unfold if the measure passes. While New Hampshire already has the lowest gas tax and prices in the region, Bettencourt said, “Expanding this margin by another 5 cents would result in more out-of-state residents coming to New Hampshire to fill their gas tanks. While they are here, visitors will also take advantage of our low tax environment and purchase other goods, including cigarettes, liquor and lottery tickets. This will help to drive up state revenues, as will the business profits taxes of the local gas stations benefiting from the additional business.”

On the other hand, Senate Finance Chair Chuck Morse (R-Salem) told the Concord Monitor he wondered whether oil producers would benefit most from the gas tax reduction. The Senate also wasn’t ready to embrace the math attached to the House cigarette tax reduction bill (lower taxes = greater revenues) when it tabled House Bill 156 yesterday (see “The Price of Taxing Tobacco“).

Steps of the dance

While it may appear that the Senate is playing bad cop to the House’s good cop when it comes to tax cuts, this is a traditional legislative dance of differing assumptions and priorities. It can and does work both ways, as Sen. Lou D’Allensandro (D-Manchester) found out in 2010 when he managed to get an expanded gambling bill through the Senate — only to run into a wall of opposition and skepticism in the House.

The reality is that this stage of the game is nearly all political posturing. The tax cuts that have been passed by the House or tabled in both the House and Senate remain very much in play. It’s the final House-Senate conference committees, where the two chambers’ differences are worked out, that will reveal the Legislature’s final revenue priorities come June.

This Daily Briefing was written by Michael McCord.

If you’re in retail, we want to know: Do you see more business with lower taxes?

(Comments below, policy here.)

As always, to help you follow along, we have highlighted committee names with a link to previous dispatches on these bills.

Retirement System Reform

Executive Departments and Administration

The push by Sen. Jeb Bradley (R-Wolfeboro) for comprehensive retirement system reform takes its next step before the full Senate. Senate Bill 3 passed its committee by a 4-1 vote, with Democratic minority leader Sylvia Larson being the sole vote against the measure. The bill includes a massive amendment, with changes including an increase in contribution rates for teachers, police and fire, while phasing in a system of extended length-of-service requirements for newly hired police and fire personnel and those having less than 10 years of service. The original bill had set the earliest retirement age at 50 following 25 years of service for anyone currently working who had less than 10 years of service.

Expanded Gambling Stalled

Ways and Means

Senate Bill 182, the 13^th attempt by Sen. Lou D’Allesandro (D-Manchester) to expand gambling in New Hampshire, likely will be returning to committee. The full Senate will vote on the committee’s unanimous recommendation to re-refer the bill back to committee until 2012. The measure called for up to 10,000 video slots and table games, such as poker and roulette, at four locations in the state. D’Allensandro told the Eagle-Tribune that, in his estimation, no one wanted a fight over gambling this session. “There’s got to be an appetite. I think the perception is the House doesn’t want to raise money,” he said.

(In proving the Daily Dispatch can be a questionable prophet at times, we noted in our March 4 dispatch on SB 182 that it was unlikely the bill would face the same fate — retained in committee until 2012 – of a similar proposal in the House. We stand humbled and corrected.)

Electronic Car Registration

Commerce

Senate Bill 156, which would establish New Hampshire’s first Electronic Vehicle Registration program, passed its committee with unanimous 4-0 recommendation shortly after its one and only public hearing on March 11. Sponsored by Sen. Andy Sanborn (R-Henniker), the measure would set up a one-year pilot program of allowing consumers to register their newly purchased new or used cars with participating dealers — rather than a town or city hall office.

>> Wednesday, March 16 – Senate in Session beginning at 10 a.m. in the Senate chambers at the State House.

This Daily Dispatch was written by Michael McCord.

Last month, we tracked a different gambling proposal in the House that would create casinos with video poker, slots and table games. In the process, House Bill 593 would divert as much as $363 million of the state’s gambling take to reduce education property taxes and contribute to the Highway Fund. After a public hearing Feb. 22, the House Ways and Means Committee voted to retain the bill in committee.

The same fate is unlikely for a much more expansive effort currently underway in the Senate. On Monday, the Senate Ways and Means Committee will hold its first public hearing on Senate Bill 182, sponsored by Sen. Lou D’Allesandro (D-Manchester). The latest proposal from this longtime advocate for expanded gaming in New Hampshire — who co-sponsored HB 593 — is also co-sponsored by Sen. Jim Raucsch (R-Derry) and Sen. John Gallus (R-Berlin).

D’Allesandro’s bill would allow for 10,000 video lottery machines at four locations in the state, and would create a permit process for table gaming. The four locations would be determined, according the language of the bill, “based on demographics, population, access to appropriate transportation, suitability for tourism, local resources, and development opportunities.” The four casino operators would have to pay a combined $145 million in initial license fees.

Senate Bill 182 would also give the state 40 percent of all net video machine income, spreading that money among seven state and municipal government accounts:

• 31 percent for oversight and to the general fund
• 3 percent for property tax relief (divided equally among all ten counties)
• 3 percent for the city or town where a casino is located
• 1 percent for the casino’s neighboring cities or towns that are in the same county
• 1 percent for programs to treat problem gambling
• ½ percent for the department of travel and tourism to promote tourism in the state
• ½ percent for police, fire and emergency medical training

The bill’s preamble leaves little doubt about the economic development goals for expanded gambling: “New Hampshire has an interest in promoting economic recovery, revenue, property tax relief and job creation as soon as possible through the development of regulated gaming in order to preserve the quality of life for New Hampshire residents.”

As we noted in a recent dispatch, however, opponents of expanded gambling maintain that gambling’s economic benefits are overstated and the state’s “quality of life” would be threatened — not preserved.

For his part, D’Allesandro is nothing if not persistent. In 2010, he led the fight and won Senate approval for a similar bipartisan measure, but the House defeated it 212-158. In 2009, D’Allesandro also got Senate approval for expanded gambling as part of final House-Senate budget negotiations, but House conferees shot the measure down and it was removed before the final budget vote.

>> Monday, March 7, Senate Ways and Means Committee, public hearing for SB 182, Room 100 at the State House, beginning at 11 a.m.

This Daily Dispatch was written by Michael McCord.

House Bill 593, sponsored by Rep. Edmond Gionet (R-Lincoln) would establish two casinos — “at least 100 miles apart” — offering video poker, slots and table games. The House Ways and Means Committee will consider how the bill proposes permitting the casinos, plus how it would distribute the state’s proceeds to offset the state education property tax and contribute to the highway fund.

According to language in the bill, cities and towns would have to approve a gaming location. A $10 million one-time fee would be assessed to any table game licensee, and as much as $363 million annually would be used to offset the education property tax. That money would come from the state receiving 49 percent of the net machine income. The highway fund would also receive eight percent of all table game revenues. As of Feb. 21, no fiscal analysis of the bill had been provided by the Legislative Budget Assistant.

Sen. Lou D’Allesandro (D-Manchester) is an HB 593 co-sponsor and a long-time advocate for expanded gaming in New Hampshire. In 2010, D’Allensandro led the successful bid to gain Senate approval for the bipartisan bill he sponsored, Senate Bill 489, which supporters said could have raised as much as $150 million in licensing fees alone from six casinos. But gaming foes said the estimated revenues and potential numbers of high-paying jobs were overstated and that out-of-state casino operators would benefit the most. The House defeated the measure by a 212-158 vote.

Last May, Governor Lynch’s Gaming Study Commission released a detailed, long-awaited report on the benefits, costs and consequences of expanding gaming in the state.

“Expanded gaming would generate additional revenues and economic activity, but it would also generate additional societal and economic costs,” the report’s executive summary said. “A fully informed decision about expansion requires a business model analysis that accounts for both benefits and costs. Such an analysis should center on the state’s long-term interests, not just short-term financial or other needs.”

>> Tuesday, Feb. 22, public hearing on HB 593, House Ways and Means Committee, Legislative Office Building, Room 202, 3 p.m.

This Daily Dispatch was written by Michael McCord.

Fresh off his budget address to the Legislature yesterday, Lynch will face questions from members of the joint House and Senate Finance committees. Among many details still to be deciphered, Lynch’s budget proposal would:

• Cut state general fund spending to $160 million less than it was in 2008-2009.
• Eliminate about 1,100 state job positions (including current vacancies) and fire around 255 state workers.
• Eliminate the state’s subsidy for municipal retirement costs — yet recommend reforms that will save municipalities, school districts and the state $1.5 billion over the next 20 years.
• Cut $20 million in uncompensated care payments to hospitals to fund federally optional Medicaid services, such as prescription drugs, nursing services and wheelchairs.
• Close visitor welcome centers and four Motor Vehicle substations.

Lynch said the budget was a result of “re-thinking every aspect of state government” and making hard choices given the drop-off in federal stimulus funding and the slow pace of economic recovery.

“We have pored over every line in every budget,” Lynch said Tuesday. “We’ve asked not only whether a program was worthy, but also whether it was the most important thing for us to continue to do as a state. For programs that we believe should continue, we asked ask how they could be done more efficiently.”

One question Lynch is guaranteed to hear — and likely more than once — is how he justifies his 2012-2013 revenue projections. They are $300 million above the $4.4 billion figure the House has already approved as its benchmark. House Majority Leader Rep. D. J. Bettencourt (R-Salem) said the budget proposal was “an important first step” but he criticized Lynch for missing “a tremendous opportunity to bring transformative change” to state government.

“Instead, he took a step back by overinflating revenue figures by nearly $300 million, which would set us up for budget deficits for the next two years,” Bettencourt said.

While Lynch and House Republicans agreed on a proposal to repeal the 10 percent gambling winnings tax, Lynch parted ways with other House proposals to reduce the rooms and meals tax and tobacco taxes — which could account potentially for as much as one-quarter of the $300 million difference in the biennium revenue estimates. In particular, Bettencourt said that the budget keeps in place a $30 car registration fee surcharge, “which is a huge burden to working families of New Hampshire.”

>> Thursday, Feb. 17, public hearing of the joint House and Senate Finance Committees on Gov. John Lynch’s budget proposal, Legislative Office Building, Rooms 210-211, 10:00 a.m.

>> You can see the complete budget proposal (all 1,540 pages) here. You can also read the easier-to-digest 39-page budget summary here.

This Daily Dispatch was written by Michael McCord.

Democratic majorities in both the N.H. House and Senate have been replaced by Republican super-majorities, and the state’s budget crisis has deepened. The next two-year budget hasn’t even been crafted yet, and deficit estimates range from $400 million to the $1 billion figure claimed by Republican leaders.

Lynch told business leaders in Manchester last week that he will present a balanced budget, a “tough budget” without any new taxes or tax increases, according to the Union Leader. His budget proposal would also benefit the business community and keep education funding level.

When the current biennial budget (2010-2011) was written, Lynch and Democratic budget writers projected the state would bring in a little more than $4.5 billion in revenue. Republicans have already lowered that figure, projecting $4.4 billion in revenue over the next two years. It’s lower, in large part, because Republicans want to be asking for less.

In addition to bringing down the tobacco tax and rooms and meals tax, for example, the evolving Republican budget plan also targets recent tax and fee increases passed under Democratic control. They propose repealing the $30 car registration fee hike, eliminating the gambling winnings tax, and reducing fees for auto inspections, marriage licenses, vital records, builder applications, pet store licenses, and license renewals for restaurants and lodging facilities.

Republicans also challenge the very integrity of the process used by Democratic leaders when they crafted the current budget. “Revenue estimates contained within the Governor’s previous budget were artificially inflated,” said House Majority Leader D. J. Bettencourt (R-Salem).

It’s a charge the Lynch administration has disputed. In 2009, Lynch said projected revenues would remain flat — nearly the same as the previous biennium (2008-2009).

Lynch’s budget address from 2009 (which you can see here) also presented budget-cutting proposals that led to an estimated 300 state employees being laid off, and proposed closing one-quarter of the state’s district courts. That budget also suspended revenue sharing to cities and towns and cut the state’s contribution to public employee retirement plans to provide an additional $123 million in education adequacy aid for communities — and called for a one percent decrease in spending from the previous budget.

>> Tuesday, Feb. 15, Gov. John Lynch’s budget address to the Legislature, Representatives Hall at the State House, 10:00 a.m.

This Daily Dispatch was written by Michael McCord, with contributions from Hilary Niles.

They include three measures we are watching that could lead to tens of millions in tax cuts on tobacco sales, rooms and meals and gambling winnings — but possibly make budget balancing even more difficult.

Tobacco tax cut – Sponsored by Finance Committee Chairman Rep. Kenneth Weyler (R-Kensington), House Bill 156 would cut tobacco tax rates by 10 cents a pack and 17.03 percent from “other tobacco products” such as smokeless tobacco, loose tobacco and cigars. If enacted, Weyler’s proposal could cut tobacco revenues, according to state estimates, from between $7.7 million to $14.8 million depending on sales volume. The state has enacted a half-dozen tobacco rate increases since 1990, the most recent a 45-cent per pack hike in 2009. For FY 2011, tobacco taxes are estimated to be the state’s third largest revenue generator after business taxes and rooms and meals (see below). Current projections split about $220 million in tobacco tax revenue between the general and education funds.

Rooms and Meals – Rep. Christopher Ahlgren (R-Wolfeboro) has proposed a one percent cut in the nine percent rooms and meals tax. House Bill 166 would return the rate to its previous level of eight percent, where it was before the latest increase in 2009. If enacted, the bill is estimated cut state revenues between $16.3 million and $27.2 depending on the strength of economic recovery. After business taxes, collections for rooms and meals (which also include car rentals) are the second highest revenue source with an estimated $245 million projected for FY 2011.

Gambling Winnings – A ten percent tax on a wide range of gambling winnings was enacted in 2009, but Rep. D.L. Christensen (R-Merrimack) has sponsored House Bill 229 to repeal the tax outright. For FY 2011, the state projected that the tax on gambling winnings will raise $3.4 million.

>> Tuesday, Feb. 8 — Public hearings for the House Ways and Means Committee, Legislative Office Building, Room 202.

10:00 a.m. HB 156-FN-A, reducing the rates of the tobacco tax. Executive session may follow.

11:15 a.m.        Executive session on HB 37-FN-A, reestablishing the initial monthly gross charge exemption to the communications services tax, HB 68, establishing a committee to study reducing the rate of the interest and dividends tax for New Hampshire residents over 65 years of age, HB 154-FN-A, increasing the threshold amounts for taxation under the business enterprise tax, HB 166-FN-A-L, reducing the rate of the meals and rooms tax.

1:00 p.m. HB 229-FN-A, repealing the tax on gambling winnings.

2:00 p.m. HB 201-FN-A, establishing deductions from the tax on gambling winnings, the business profits tax, and the business enterprise tax for gambling losses.

2:30 p.m. HB 215-FN-A, establishing a credit for gambling losses against the tax on gambling winnings.

3:00 p.m. CACR 13, relating to prohibiting any new tax on personal income.  Providing that no new tax on personal income shall be levied by the state of New Hampshire. Executive session may follow.

This Daily Dispatch was written by Michael McCord.

House and Senate leaders Terie Norelli (D-Portsmouth) and Sylvia Larsen (D-Concord) think they have most of those bases covered. They’re scheduled to release a bill the afternoon of June 7 that will get a public hearing June 8 and go to the House and Senate for debate on June 9.

They didn’t start from scratch in writing this bill. It includes $270 million in budget cuts and adjustments that were already agreed to by a joint House-Senate conference committee in recent weeks.

That committee walked away from budget talks, however, over the remaining $30 million and the issue of expanded gambling.

Gambling

The majority of senators favor bringing video slots, and potentially casinos, into New Hampshire. Most representatives are in opposition to the idea. Gov. Lynch also is also resistant, for now.

“I’ve made clear to members of the House and Senate that I would not consider or support any bill that would issue gaming licenses before New Hampshire had developed an appropriate regulatory structure,” Lynch said in a press release. “My position is unchanged.”

Lynch’s position echoes that of the special Gaming Study Commission that he convened last year. In fact, his commission, whose report came out May 18, recommends not only changing regulations if gambling is expanded but also studying the current regulatory structure even if it’s not.

“Given the dollars and extent of gaming activity that already occurs across the state, mainly through Lottery and charitable gaming, such a review is needed to assure that the interests of the state and its citizens are being protected now,” commissioners wrote in their final report. “Structures must also be examined to determine their capacity to properly monitor and control expanded gaming.”

Will Internet gambling be legalized at the federal level? Will bordering states expand their own gambling sites? How much will new gaming facilities displace existing economic activities?

These are among the questions the commission came across in their study. They did not, however, find clear answers. They recommend, therefore, a business model analysis that accounts for both the benefits and costs of more gambling in the Granite State. One consideration to that end is New Hampshire’s “brand.”

Tourism experts confirmed to the commission that the state’s brand would be affected by gambling. But whether that impact would be good or bad, they couldn’t say—another reason for a comprehensive study, commissioners agreed.

They also want to investigate the potential burden of problem gambling, noting that communities nearest gaming sites are most likely to bear those social costs.

“Once established, legalized gaming is highly unlikely to be repealed,” according to the report. “If anything, the dependence on revenues from gaming tends to make states (less able to) prevent proliferation once casino gaming is legalized.”

Common Ground

One item budget negotiators have agreed to is repealing the so-called “LLC tax,” according to a statement released by the House information office.

Not a new tax but rather an extension of the interest and dividends tax to Limited Liability Companies, the LLC tax caused quite a stir in the business community when it was passed late in last year’s budget compromise.

Several bills this year were written specifically to repeal it, but none passed. Now most Republicans and Democrats alike favor repeal. This budget omnibus is the last chance this session to move the repeal forward in this session—a task that many legislators seeking reelection are keen to complete. 

The committee of conference also agreed to close the Anna Philbrook center for mentally ill children.

The Dept. of Health and Human Services and mental health advocates agree that the facilities there are outdated. Moving the kids to the state’s psychiatric hospital as originally proposed, however, would have displaced up to 14 adults at a time. “That is more like 400 bed nights,” according to Mike Cohen, executive director of the New Hampshire chapter of National Alliance on Mental Illness.

The committee reportedly compromised with a plan to relocate those adults to a separate hospital unit and ultimately to community-based treatment programs.

A caviat to the original proposal to close Anna Philbrook also included the option of renovating the center for use as office space for the state. It is not clear as of press time whether this option has been kept in the latest version of the budget bill.

© 2008-2010 Niles Media “Front Door Politics” all rights reserved.

The House and Senate teams working on the budget agreed on how to fix $270 million of a nearly $300 million shortfall, but neither is budging on the final $30 million. Gov. John Lynch has said he’ll keep lawmakers working until the job is done.

Lynch has also said he’ll refuse to sign any legislation that calls for expanded gambling before regulations are in place to manage it. The Senate has taken a very strong stance in support of new gaming ventures this session, while the House has voted it down three times.

Budget aside, there’s still more at stake on Wednesday, with final votes due on more than 60 bills that went to Committees of Conference two weeks ago to find a compromise between House and Senate positions.

In the meantime, several bills relating to health insurance, family law and the criminal justice system have already made it through the Committee of Conference process and await Lynch’s signature.

health insurance
Health insurance providers will have to include both hearing aids and certain autism treatments in their coverage plans, thanks to House Bills 561 and 569. They were sponsored by Rep. Susan Emerson (R-Rindge) and Rep. Suzanne Butcher (D-Keene), respectively.

Mandated coverage requirements like these apply to Health Maintenance Organizations and Health Service Corporations, but not to any self-funded health insurance policies, such as those the state operates for its own employees. Therefore, the state would not necessarily take on any increased costs if these bills become law.

But some skeptics still have concerns.

Rep. Neal Kurk (R-Weare) spoke during a brief floor debate on the hearing aid bill.

“In the past, even though by law (mandates like these) don’t need to apply, they get adopted,” he said.
Kurk and Rep. Sherman Packard (R-Londonderry) both questioned how much these requirements would cost the state in that case, and Packard also asked how much they will cost policyholders whose plans will be subject to the mandates.

The answer: up to $17 per year per policy for the hearing aids, according to Rep. Edward Butler (D-Harts Location). He delivered both bills’ Committee of Conference reports to the House. The potential increase to premiums under the bill mandating autism treatments would be a bit lower, at $9 to $10 per member per year, according to Rep. Susi Nord (D-Candia), who assisted Butler with the reporting.

Dollar limits to the autism benefits were added by the Senate and ultimately agreed to in the Committee of Conference. These helped keep the projected premium increases down to about .2 percent, Nord said, as opposed to a potential .4 percent increase.

“It’s minimal to the amount of benefit for families who are paying the premiums but not getting the benefits for their children,” she argued. Butler also maintained that the benefits could ultimately save schools and communities millions of dollars because children with autism would get more health care from insurance.

Nord said an independent study suggested 300 to 350 families would benefit from the mandate, which includes a treatment approach called “applied behavioral analysis.” The practice is said to produce significant improvements in functionality with life skills, communication and socialization. Prescriptions and counseling, as well as speech, occupational or physical therapy, would also be required under HB 569.

family law
Divorced parents will no longer have to go to court to recalculate child support when one child in the family turns 18, provided Gov. Lynch signs House Bill 1420. Sponsored by Rep. David Bickford (R-New Durham), the new law will allow child support to be automatically recalculated for remaining children when an older child becomes an adult.

“(It) keeps people from having to go to court as much and takes some of the burden off the courts,” Bickford said.

The House and Senate also have voted in a new task force on work and family. Proposed in House Bill 1271 and sponsored by Rep. Mary Gile (D-Concord), this will replace a similar task force that was created in 2007. The new 29-member body will try to identify ways the state can help citizens attend to both work and family in a productive way.

The task force will hold a series of public hearings throughout the state to get feedback on the issue from workers and employers, as well as state agencies and interested organizations.

The task force will also collect data on employers’ family-related policies and practices, develop an incentive-based program to reward employers for offering family-friendly benefits, and offer public education on how such policies can help the state’s economy prosper.

criminal justice
The Justice Reinvestment Initiative that passed the Legislature this spring has potential to bring comprehensive changes to criminal justice codes. It aims to simultaneously lower recidivism rates and save the state money by reducing jail time and increasing community supervision for nonviolent criminals. Senate Bill 500, sponsored by Senate President Sylvia Larsen (D-Concord), benefited from wide support in both the House and Senate.

The Parole Board, however, expressed grave concerns about public safety if current practices change. According to John Eckert, executive assistant to the Parole Board, who spoke out against SB 500, it would be a mistake to grant parole according to a formula. He says the Parole Board should instead be allowed to exercise judgment regarding whether or not an offender is safe to release.

The Parole Board itself will be the subject of a special study created by House Bill 1167. Sponsored by Rep. Laura Pantelakos (D-Portsmouth), the committee will compare New Hampshire’s Parole Board to those of other states to gauge its effectiveness. They’ll look particularly at the board’s make-up and procedures for hearings, with a report due in November.