Expect a spirited debate when the House votes on Senate Bill 129 in its full session Wednesday.

The rules

If enacted, the measure would go into effect before the 2012 general election and would require voters to present an approved form of identification to ballot clerks before being given a ballot.

Those without a proper form of ID — such as a driver’s license, military ID, or a state-issued photo ID — would be allowed to cast a provisional ballot and would have three days to present proper ID to voting officials.

The controversy

The measure steps into a Constitutional minefield of issues, starting with the possibility that it infringes on the right to vote by creating onerous safeguards. According to a Nashua Telegraph story this morning, Assistant Attorney General Matthew Mavrogeorge told members of the House Republican Caucus that requiring voters to pay $10 for a state-issued ID may violate the N.H. Constitution and amount to a “poll tax,” which was outlawed by the 24^th amendment to the U.S. Constitution in 1964. One provision in the amended bill would allow potential voters who couldn’t afford the $10 to apply for a voucher.

House Speaker William O’Brien (R-Mont Vernon) has thrown his full leadership weight behind SB 129. Sponsored by Sen. Sharon Carson (R-Londonderry), the bill passed the Senate in March by a nearly party-line 18-6 vote. O’Brien is quoted in the Telegraph story as saying that the costs to vote are reasonable because “there are costs to vote today” such as time off from work or paying for gas to get to the polls.

Opponents of the bill say it’s unnecessary, targets a phantom issue and creates additional costs for local election officials.

While there have been a handful of investigations by the offices of the Secretary of State and Attorney General, there has been only one substantiated case of voter fraud in the past decade in New Hampshire. Secretary of State Bill Gardner has long contended that the state doesn’t have such a problem.

In a blistering minority report opposing the bill, Rep. David Pierce (D-Etna) said the bill should have been retained because the Election Law Committee failed to carefully consider the constitutional implications:

“The committee did not discuss whether the bill is constitutional under Part I, Article 11 of the New Hampshire constitution. The committee never even discussed the framework that should be used to analyze its constitutionality. The committee couldn’t answer the question about whether the bill would be subject to the constitution’s rational basis test or to a strict scrutiny analysis. The list of substantial and genuine questions about the bill goes on and on. … The right to vote is the most fundamental right we have to keep government in its place. We ought to know what we’re doing before we reform it in such a profound and fundamental way.”

The Daily Briefing expects SB 129 will pass handily — and, if it becomes law, that its constitutionality ultimately will be decided in the state Supreme Court.

>> Wednesday, May 4, full House session vote on SB 129. Session begins at 10:00 a.m. at Representatives Hall in the State House.

This Daily Briefing was written by Michael McCord.

Do you want to show your ID when you go to vote next time? Would you trust ballot results more if your neighbors had to?

(Comments below, policy here.)

House Speaker William O'Brien

A recent story in the Concord Monitor touched on the efforts of two Republicans — Rep. Susan Emerson of Rindge and Rep. Marshall “Lee” Quandt of Exeter — to lead a coup against O’Brien.

The effort comes after Emerson and Quandt were both removed from their assigned committees by O’Brien for opposing parts of the House budget. Quandt has been especially vocal on his blog, calling O’Brien “‘Bully’ the Kid.”

But, Daily Briefing rates the odds of O’Brien’s removal as about as likely as a state income tax or Newt Gingrich becoming a liberal and singing the praises of President Obama. Even Quandt concedes the votes aren’t. But, he points out, it’s notable for even a minority of members to be talking about it out loud.

This Daily Briefing was written by Michael McCord.

Should he stay or should he go? Let us know how you think O’Brien is doing.

(Haven’t commented yet? FDP’s Comments Policy can be found here.)

With the deadline to “Crossover Day” on March 31 fast approaching, both the House and Senate are in session this week to finish work on their remaining bills.

The two main budget bills are the top remaining bills in the House. The Senate will clear its docket of more than 49 bills and amendments. The Senate will be in session Wednesday and the House is scheduled for two days, Wednesday and Thursday.

Education Funding Amendment

“Responsibility” is the key difference between the House and Senate versions of a constitutional amendment related to education funding.

An amended Senate proposal, sponsored by Sen. Nancy Stiles (R-Hampton) reads, “the general court shall have the authority, responsibility, and discretion to define reasonable standards for elementary and secondary public education, to establish reasonable standards of accountability therefor, and to mitigate local disparities in educational opportunity and fiscal capacity.” {emphasis added}

The word “responsibility” is absent from the House version of basically the same measure. This causes some to be concerned that merely “allowing” for targeted state aid, as the House version does, won’t get the job done. Gov. John Lynch is among those who wants to see the Legislature’s responsibility for education funding made explicit.

The Senate votes this week on their version of the measure, CACR 14 (the amended version can be read here). The House passed theirs, CACR 12, sponsored by Rep. David Hess (R-Hooksett), March 16.

Payday Loans

Is there a market a for high-interest installment loans? Some senators think so, and don’t believe the Legislature should get in its way.

The Senate votes this week on a measure to revive two types of high-interest, installment loans, including the so-called “payday loans” that lawmakers either banned or modified in 2008.

Sponsored by Sen. Sharon Carson (R-Londonderry), Senate Bill 160 passed the full Senate by a narrow 13-11 on March 16 and was given a second approval by the Senate Finance Committee.

Voter ID

A move to require photo identification from all voters is also making its second trip to a full Senate vote this week.

Republican supporters say the measure will prevent voter fraud, while opponents say it attacks a problem that doesn’t exist and discourages voting. The bill is sponsored by Sen. Sharon Carson (R-Londonderry).

Senate Bill 129 is sponsored by Sen. Sharon Carson (R-Londonderry). It passed the full Senate by an 18-6 vote on March 16 and was given an ‘ought to pass’ recommendation by the Finance committee in a 4-3 vote.

>> Full session of the New Hampshire Senate, the State House, Wednesday March 30, 10 a.m.

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

Today we start a new, semi-regular feature called “They Said It.”

Our goal is to capture a sampling of legislative and state government quotes that we hope illuminate, educate, entertain and reflect the tone of the current legislative session.

Here are our Top Six of recent vintage.

Drop Out

Gov. John Lynch was none too pleased on Tuesday that the House approved House Bill 429 by a 210-134 vote. The proposal would return the high school dropout age to 16, repealing one of Lynch’s top priorities in office.

“Today’s action by the House of Representatives sends absolutely the wrong message to our young people and threatens our ability to maintain a skilled and educated workforce, which would limit future economic development,” Lynch said in a statement after the vote. “The people of New Hampshire would be justified if they asked themselves, ‘Just what is our House of Representatives thinking?’”

They were thinking about mom and dad, according to the bill’s sponsor, Rep. James Parison (R-New Ipswich). “This bill is not about the dropout age. This bill is about parents,” Parison said during the floor debate.

Boardwalk for Sale

House Majority Leader D.J. Bettencourt (R-Salem) took offense to Lynch’s criticism that the House Finance Committee’s budget cutting strategy was taking too much from essential government services.

“This isn’t a game of Monopoly — this is taxpayer’s money,” Bettencourt said. “Governor Lynch has lost all credibility to lecture Republicans on the difficult choices that must be made in our economy.”

Picture This

Senate Democrats (and one Republican) opposed Senate Bill 129, the voter photo ID measure, which passed the Senate 18-6. Sen. Amanda Merrill (D-Durham) said the bill was unnecessary because as far as anyone knows, there has been only one case of proven voter fraud in the state in the past ten years.

“We don’t have voting fraud,” Merrill said. “We do have citizens for whom this bill creates obstacles to the most basic civic right.”

Remain Calm

House leadership gave a strong thumbs-down to a so-called “birther” bill amendment that would have required presidential primary candidates to submit their birth certificates proving American citizenship. Amendment supporter Rep. David Bates (R-Windham) was not pleased when opponents said such a measure would undermine the state’s hallowed first-in-the-nation primary status.

“The hysterical claims that we are going to jeopardize the first in the nation primary, it’s just utter nonsense,” Bates said in an interview with Talking Points Memo.

The measure the amendment was attached to, House Bill 421, was set aide, or “laid on the table.” Sponsored by Rep. Robert Kingsbury (R-Laconia), it would have required not voters but lawmakers to nominate U.S. Senate candidates to the New Hampshire primary. Voters, though, would still be able to write in candidates.

Staying Put

After the House Legislative Administration Committee ended the two-month-long process to remove him from office on alleged ethics violations, Rep. Michael Brunelle (D-Manchester) had this to say:

“I am grateful to attorneys Paul Twomey and Bob Backus, House Democratic Leader Terie Norelli, my Democratic colleagues in the House, and to the hundreds of people of both political parties across the state who were supportive of me during this outrageous attempt to have my election by the voters of Manchester’s Ward Three overturned,” Brunelle said in a statement. “I consider this unfortunate waste of taxpayer resources completely concluded and I am happy to be able to continue working for the people of Manchester.”

This Daily Dispatch was written by Michael McCord.

Rep. James Parison (R-New Ipswich) has sponsored a bill to lower the permissible school drop-out age to 16.

In this last of three parts, we look at three bills that are part of the so-called Regular Calendar that are subject to floor debate and roll call votes. They’re measures regarding death penalty, the school drop out age, and voting.

To help you follow along, the committee names in red are linked to previous Front Door Politics dispatches on these bills.

Death Penalty

Criminal Justice and Public Safety

House Bill 147, sponsored by House Speaker William O’Brien (R-Mont Vernon), would expand the state’s death penalty statute to “include murder committed during home invasions where the killing is premeditated.” The vote comes during the trial in Nashua of a 21-year-old charged with the home invasion murder of a Mont Vernon woman in October 2009. The measure received a majority Ought to Pass recommendation by a 14-2 vote in committee.

Drop-Out Age

Education Committee *

It’s uncommon for a bill that doesn’t get any committee recommendation to still have a House roll call vote, but that’s just the case with House Bill 429, sponsored by Rep. James Parison (R-New Ipswich). The bill would allow students 16 or older to drop out of school with only parental permission and would reverse a 2007 law that raised the drop-out age to 18. The committee split 8-8 on a recommendation vote. Last week, Gov. John Lynch announced that the statewide drop-out rate had dropped below one percent in 2009-2010 — a 61 percent reduction since 2007-2008.

*Our original dispatch mistakenly reported that House Bill 429 would also require superintendent permission and an alternative learning plan. It would not, and that dispatch has been corrected.

Who Can Vote

Election Law

It’s also not often that a House roll call vote is scheduled for a bill that gets a majority Inexpedient to Legislate recommendation, but House Bill 176 is an exception to that rule. If passed, it would prohibit voting in New Hampshire for those who serve in the military or go to college and have so-called temporary “domicile” status in the state. It’s sponsored by Rep. Gregory Sorg (R-Easton). The committee rejected the bill 13-5. Look for an interesting floor debate.

>> The full House will be in session on Tuesday, March 15; Wednesday, March 16; and Thursday, March 17; all beginning at 9:00 a.m.

>> The Senate will meet in session on Wednesday, March 16, at 10:00 a.m.

>> Check the status of ALL the bills Front Door Politics has covered this session with our new 2011 Bill Tracker.

This Daily Dispatch was written by Michael McCord.

To prepare for the flurry of activity, today we begin a series of dispatches looking at some of the bills we’ve followed from early stages through public hearings and committee votes. We start with bills that are on the “consent,” or voice vote calendar.

This process bundles up scores of new pieces of legislation and lets lawmakers agree to the committee recommendations on each bill, all by voicing just one vote. The official name for killing a bill is voting it “Inexpedient to Legislate,” commonly shortened to ITL. Short for “Ought to Pass,” an OTP recommendation means the committee supports the bill in question.

To help you follow along, the committee names in bold are linked to previous Front Door Politics dispatches covering these bills.

Education

The committee gave a unanimous Inexpedient to Legislate (ITL) recommendation for House Bill 39, which targeted the state’s curriculum requirements for an adequate education.

Election Law

House Bill 223, which would eliminate election-day voter registration, received an ITL recommendation.

Executive Departments and Administration

Back in November, we highlighted the progress of a study committee looking into establishing a state meat inspection service. House Bill 339 would establish just such a service, and received a unanimous Ought to Pass (OTP) committee recommendation.

Health, Human Services and Elderly Affairs

Two pharmaceutical take-back bills are headed for passage after receiving unanimous OTP committee recommendations. House Bill 71 would allow communities and private entities to establish drug take-back programs, and House Bill 426 would allow for institutions such as nursing homes and correctional facilities to re-allocate unused drugs.

Municipal and County Government

House Bill 144, a proposal to repeal the PACE, or clean energy district legislation from last year, has been amended to changes some funding mechanisms in a way that satisfied committee concerns about the new program. The PACE changes are headed for passage after a unanimous OTP recommendation by the committee.

This Daily Dispatch was written by Michael McCord.

House Speaker William O'Brien

House Speaker William O’Brien (R-Mont Vernon) has decided to have no full House sessions this week, allowing more time for committees to make their annual mad rush to beat the legislative calendar. In particular, there’s the March 10 (tomorrow) deadline to report all bills (except those in their second committee, like Finance). Meanwhile, the Crossover deadline of March 31 — when all House bills cross over to the Senate and vice versa — is creeping closer by the day.

This week’s meetings aside, beginning next Tuesday morning (March 15), O’Brien will crack the proverbial whip and keep lawmakers busy with three straight full House sessions, all beginning at 9:00 a.m. In that spirit, today we turn the spotlight on three of today’s executive session committee votes on bills we have followed this season.

Election Law Committee

Last month we highlighted the debate over two controversial bills: House Bill 176, which would not allow college students to vote in local or statewide elections if they weren’t originally residents of the town they live in for college; and House Bill 223, which if passed would disallow election day voter registration. We recommend listening to the audio files from the public hearings of both bills (HB 176 and HB 223).

>> Executive Session, House Election Law Committee, Legislative Office Building, Room 308, March 9, 10:30 a.m.

Health, Human Services and Elderly Affairs

We highlighted House Bill 228 last month and today the full committee will vote on the measure to eliminate all state funding to Planned Parenthood of Northern New England. The organization provides family planning services and other health care programs and if the measure passes, it will save the state an estimated $365,000.

>> Executive Session, House Health, Human Services, and Elderly Affairs Committee, Legislative Office Building, Room 205, 10:00 a.m.

Criminal Justice and Public Safety

Back in December we initially reported that Speaker O’Brien had sponsored a measure to expand the state’s death penalty statute. House Bill 147 proposes to include a capital murder provision that reads “a person is guilty of capital murder if he or she knowingly causes the death of another, while in another’s residence, while attempting to enter another’s residence, or as a consequence of having been in another’s residence, without invitation or right.” O’Brien’s home town of Mont Vernon was the location of an October 2009 home invasion murder of a 42-year-old mother, whose 11-year-old daughter survived the same attack.

>> Executive Session, House Criminal Justice and Public Safety Committee, Legislative Office Building, Room 204, 10:00 a.m.

This Daily Dispatch was written by Michael McCord.

House Bill 223 would repeal the election-day voter registration law that’s been in place since 1994, while House Bill 176 would prevent most college students from voting in the town they reside. Sorg is the sole sponsor for both bills.

HB 176 would replace a 1979 provision that defines who can vote in the state. Included in the changes would be prohibiting students attending “institutions of higher learning” from acquiring domicile for voting purposes in their college community unless they lived there prior to matriculating. It would also disallow military personnel and their families, as well as federal employees, temporarily posted to New Hampshire from voting in the state.

The bill has been sharply criticized by students at colleges and universities throughout the state as discriminatory and unconstitutional. A coalition of student Republicans and Democrats at Dartmouth College have come out against the proposal.

In a January story about HB 176 in the student newspaper The Dartmouth, Rep. Joe Osgood (R-Claremont) said he supports the bill because of his concerns that college students who live in small towns for a limited amount of time could use elections to make “drastic” and “detrimental” changes to the town. He also supports the measure because it would prevent voter fraud, though he could not cite any particular cases of fraudulent voting in the state. Osgood was also quoted in the story saying that college “tends to breed liberalism” among young people, which undermines the nation’s political system and is “destroying the country.”

According to the non-partisan Fair Elections Legal Network, even if the law were to pass, it would likely be ruled unconstitutional in the courts. Citing federal court decisions in 1972 and 1979, FELN President Robert Brandon said the law is clear and “it is unconstitutional to deny someone the right to vote based solely on his or her status as a student.”

Closer to home, one court decision stemmed from a 1972 case involving a Dartmouth College student who challenged New Hampshire’s former restrictive statute on student voting eligibility. The federal court ruled for the student and struck down that state law as unconstitutional.

>> Thursday, Feb. 24, public hearings on House Bill 176 and House Bill 223, House Election Law Committee, Representative’s Hall, beginning at 1 p.m.

This Daily Dispatch was written by Michael McCord.

The following post was originally published Tuesday, Jan. 11:

Conflicting Interests: Republicans Investigate State Dem Leader

The most bitter political fight of the new legislative session could end up to be not over taxes or budget cuts, but a constitutional provision enacted in 1792. How that provision is defined at hearings this week could determine the fate of a Democratic House member from Manchester who could be expelled from the Legislature by the Republican majority.

Rep. Mike Brunelle has been accused of violating the state Constitution because he is state Democratic Party executive director and he has proposed legislation that would benefit his employer, such as raising in the state’s minimum wage.

A motion on the House floor by Rep. Phil Greazzo (R-Manchester) during the Jan. 5 opening session accused Brunelle of violating Part II, Article 7 of New Hampshire’s Constitution, which says that “no member of the General Court shall take fees, be of counsel, or act as an advocate in any cause before any branch of the legislature.”

Rep. Paul Mirski (R-Enfield), the House Majority Policy Advisor, said in a statement that was issued as the motion was being heard on the floor — and when Brunelle was hearing it for the first time since being sworn in last month — that “Rep. Brunelle took an oath just a month ago to serve the people of (his district). He cannot equally serve the interests of the State Democratic Party and his constituents on the floor of the NH House at the same time.”

The matter has been turned over to the elections subcommittee, which will hold a hearing today to decide on procedures. A full hearing to investigate the charge is scheduled for Thursday.

In a letter to House Speaker William O’Brien (R-Mont Vernon), House Minority Leader Rep. Terie Norelli (D-Portsmouth) accused Republicans of foul play, saying “a rush to judgment without any pretext of due process is a disservice to the people of our State.”

She also said the attempt to remove Brunelle should not fall to the elections subcommittee, which looks at qualifications for legislators such as place of residence. She questioned the logical outcome of the constitutional argument by saying the entire premise of “citizen legislature” could be undermined.

“If it is your intent to judge the qualifications of legislators by their place of employment or sources of income (despite the lack of any constitutional basis to do so), please provide a list of all other representatives whom you intend to investigate,” Norelli said in the letter. “I note, for example, that Representative Greazzo receives compensation as an alderman in the City of Manchester, (which) is a paying position. There are bills pending that arguably benefit the City of Manchester. He himself is sponsoring a bill relative to local spending caps, and another bill relative to municipal liability for dog bites.”

In a Jan. 8 Concord Monitor story, former Republican House Speaker Donna Sytek said the issue should have been sent to the bipartisan Legislative Ethics Committee to determine if Brunelle’s employment is an ethics violation.

“There’s no question (Brunelle) was elected. He was sworn in,” Sytek said in the story. “The question is one of ethics. If someone has a question, he should refer it to the ethics committee and let the committee decide.” Sytek served as chair of the Republican State Committee from 1981 to 1984 while she was an elected House member from Salem.

Hearings of the Election Subcommittee (of the Legislative Administration Committee) on Rep. Michael Brunelle:

>> Tuesday, Legislative Office Building, Room 104, 11 a.m.

>> Thursday, Legislative Office Building, Rooms 205-207, 10 a.m.

This Daily Dispatch was written by Michael McCord.

John Lynch will be inaugurated today for his historic fourth consecutive term as New Hampshire's governor. (courtesy photo)

You may recall that in November, Lynch hosted a two-day series of budget briefings from state agencies. As a preview to the budget negotiations ahead, a joint House and Senate committee — comprised of members of the Finance and Ways and Means committees — will hear perspectives on the health of the global, national, regional and state economy.

The first briefing will be on the global economy from Jeff Applegate, the chief investment officer with Morgan Stanley Smith Barney. While there is still much economic uncertainty and there will be plenty of budget belt-tightening in Concord, there also have been more optimistic forecasts from Wall Street. Lawmakers could hear some of it from Applegate. During a November press briefing with financial reporters in New York, Applegate said he expected 2011 to be a “year of recovery and expansion.”

In a related matter, the Department of Administrative Services reported that state revenues for December came in $900,000 short, leaving the state $9.3 million below projections for the first five months of the 2011 fiscal year.

That said, one sign reflecting potential economic health is that business tax revenue is up $6.3 million over projections for fiscal 2011 — and collections are up almost $10 compared to the same point a year ago.

On Deck

We’ll take a closer look at the economic briefings scheduled for Jan. 7 and Jan. 10 starting tomorrow.

>> Joint House-Senate Economic Briefing for Ways and Means and Finance Committees, Rooms 210-211 of the Legislative Office Building, today (Jan. 6) at 1:30 p.m.

This Daily Dispatch was written by Michael McCord.