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House Majority Leader D.J. Bettencourt of Salem on Lynch signing House Bill 229, which repealed the 10 percent gambling tax: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

House Bill 113, which passed the House 263-102 in February, has received closer scrutiny in the Senate. Sponsored by Steve Vaillancourt (R-Manchester), the measure would stop all state funding for NHPTV (Channel 11), including contracts with state agencies for educational and broadcasting services.

Vaillancourt and supporters of HB 113 have said that NHPTV does not fit into the state’s budget priorities. Vaillancourt has also staked out ideological ground, saying the state has no business using taxpayer money to fund public media.

The debate here in New Hampshire is not isolated, as a handful of states and Republicans in Congress have introduced proposals to either cut of defund public radio and television.

Impact

The fight is more than whether Big Bird will survive on free television in the state. At stake for NHPTV is a loss of an estimated $5.5 million over a two-year budget cycle, along with other funding that is jeopardized if NHPTV isn’t allowed to contract with state agencies. NHPTV is also involved in the state’s enhanced 911 system used by public safety agencies, in expanding broadband in the North Country, and in offering free educational programming to school systems throughout the state.

“HB 113 will have far-reaching and negative impacts on our other sources of support,” said Peter Frid, NHPTV president, in testimony to lawmakers. “Our work with state agencies is supported by general funds, and if we were to do a project with them we couldn’t receive revenues.”

Fate

The Senate Finance Committee has recommended against passing HB 113, in part because the station does not received funding directly from the state; NHPTV is funded and overseen by the University System of New Hampshire, which receives money from the state.

Senate Finance Committee member Robert Odell (R-Lempster), one of three Republicans to recommend killing the bill, told New Hampshire Public Radio that lawmakers shouldn’t tell the university system how to run its operations. “We didn’t want it in the budget that way. And it’s not going to be,” Odell said.

We ask readers for feedback on whether the state should the state defund New Hampshire Public Television, including barring it from service contracts with state agencies. Should lawmakers tell the university system how to budget its operations? How Senators answer those questions likely will determine the fate of HB 113.

(Comments below, policy here.)

>> Wednesday, May 6, full Senate session beginning at 10 a.m. at the State House.

This Daily Briefing was written by Michael McCord.

Nanny rates

On Wednesday, the House defeated a bill to re-allow a variation of so-called “payday loans” — short-term, high-interest loans — that lawmakers banned in 2009. The vote on Senate Bill 160 was narrow at 186-179, and the issue generated passion and contrasting views on the role of government.

“What have we come to? We were elected to get government off our backs and no more nanny states. I’m really disturbed,” said Rep. Steve Vaillancourt (R-Manchester).

“This will make loan sharking an acceptable business,” said Rep. Donna Schlachman (D-Exeter). “It’s state-regulated usury.”

Stuck in the middle

A Senate committee has voted to kill a House measure that would withdraw New Hampshire from the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative. Sen. Jeb Bradely (R-Wolfeboro) is trying to keep RGGI alive, but make it a whole lot different.

“There are people who want to keep the program exactly as is, and there are people who want to repeal outright. We’ve got a long way to go with this,” Sen. Jeb Bradley (R-Wolfeboro) told the Concord Monitor about the amendment to House Bill 519 he plans to introduce on the Senate floor next Wednesday.

The article says his plan would lower the cap for the price of carbon from $9 per ton to $1 per ton (it’s currently $1.86). It would also turn that money back over to utilities, rather than use it to fund a state-administered grant program for renewable and efficient energy projects.

Power pleas

The House voted 261-104 to pass its version of Senate Bill 148, which would return any federal grant money for health care reform and force the state Attorney General to join the multi-state lawsuit against the law. The debate on the House floor was pointed and sharp.

“We don’t want to do anything, anything that will allow this federal law to plant its poisonous seeds in our state,” said Rep. Andrew Manuse (R-Derry).

“I urge you to read article 37 (of the state Constitution), use your common sense, deny this lust for power and defeat this amendment,” said Rep. Gary Richardson (D-Hopkinton).

Accounting jujitsu

Sen. Lou D’Allesandro (D-Manchester) was puzzled by a Senate Finance Committee amendment to House Bill 635. It would cut the Department of Corrections budget by $10.5 million by sending 600 prisoners from the state prison in Concord to an as-yet unknown location run by private companies.

“I really didn’t see any materials that indicated we could save $10.5 million. I didn’t know where they were going, how they were going to get there, what the costs would be,” said D’Allesandro, who was the only Finance Committee member to vote against the bill.

On Wednesday, the full Senate did not take up the amendment and the bill was returned to the Finance Committee.

This Daily Briefing was written by Michael McCord.

This Rollinsford cow from Brookford Farm is headed for milking, not slaughter. (photo by Hilary Niles)

The issue has emerged in the past few years as a number of smaller meat and poultry farms have sprouted up throughout the state. Later today, the Senate will likely pass House Bill 339, which would establish a meat inspection services administrator.

The hunt for local food

According to the U. S. Department of Agriculture, 23 states have given up their meat and poultry protection program in the past four decades — as New Hampshire did in 1978. A Nashua Telegraph story by David Brooks from last August focused on the challenges of a state having only one federally certified slaughterhouse with inspection capability.

State veterinarian Stephen Crawford, whose office would oversee the state inspection service, said in the story that “the increase in interest for locally raised meat and poultry has created an enormous opportunity for New Hampshire farmers. The most significant limitation to filling the demand for meat other than poultry is a distinct lack of access to local slaughter facilities.”

Making it pay (for itself)

Establishing the program is one thing, but providing enough funding to get a viable service up and running may be an issue. House Bill 339, sponsored by Rep. Laurie Harding (D-Lebanon) establishes a meat inspection fund. But, it only appropriates $1 through June 30, 2012. Supporters believe the program will become more than self-sustaining through fees, fines and other grants and donations. The cost for inspection services will start at $50 for a cow, $10 for a turkey or rabbit and $5 for a chicken.

House Bill 339 had bipartisan sponsorship and passed the House by a voice vote in March. The bill already made it through one round of Senate vetting before being resubmitted (as all spending bills do) to the Senate Finance Committee, which gave it a unanimous recommendation for passage.

>> Wednesday, May 4, full Senate session vote on HB 339 and more than 60 other bills and amendments. Senate Chambers at the State House, beginning at 10:00 a.m.

This Daily Briefing was written by Michael McCord.

What quotables have you read or heard that you think reveal the verbal tenor of the 2011 legislative session? Email suggestions for the Daily Briefing to NH@FrontDoorPolitics.com.

Gas (tax cut) fumes

There’s been no shortage of talk about Senate Bill 78, which would cut the state gasoline tax by five cents a gallon through June 30. The measure passed the House this week, 208-98.

“This bill is good for our economy and will give welcome relief to the drivers of the state who are facing soaring gas prices.” — House Speaker William O’Brien.

When asked by the Concord Monitor if he would veto the bill if it reached his desk, Gov. John Lynch said it’s unlikely the Senate would follow the House’s lead. “I don’t believe it’s going to get to me. I don’t worry about political gimmicks,” he said.

House Majority Leader D. J. Bettencourt touted the economic benefits of SB 78. “While a five cent decrease may not seem like much at face value, it will add up when motorists fill their tanks each week. And as a resident of the border town of Salem, I am also confident that lower prices in New Hampshire will encourage those living along the border in Massachusetts to come here and purchase gas along with lottery tickets, liquor and other consumables,” he said.

Portsmouth blogger William Tucker of miscellany: blue had this take on the economic benefits of SB 78 that Bettencourt cited. “Majority Leader Bettencourt suggests Massachusetts’ drivers are going to head to New Hampshire to fill their gas tanks if the state cuts the gas tax by five cents per gallon. Let’s check the numbers. If we assume the entire savings is passed along to consumers (which is not guaranteed), a driver buying 20 gallons of gas would save $1.00. At $4.00 a gallon, if our Massachusetts driver has a car that gets 32 miles to the gallon, he would have to live within four miles of a New Hampshire gas station just to break even. Not likely.”

RGGI reactions

The House voted to prohibit New Hampshire’s participation in the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI), but some Senators aren’t enthused. Sen. Nancy Stiles (R-Hampton) told the Portsmouth Herald that RGGI could be saved through Senate amendments to the bill. “The broad stroke is to save this bill in any way we can save it. There are always opportunities for amendments to come until the last gun is fired. But the most important thing is to make sure we have the components in there that will allow a majority of the senators to support it,” she said.

Andrew Hemingway, chair of Republican Liberty Caucus of New Hampshire, says RGGI isn’t worth saving. “While there are many fallacies about the merits of the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative, the erroneous idea that the program stimulates job growth is keeping a few of the enamored hanging on…When government uses tax dollars to stimulate job growth, it is taking money by force from people who are producing wealth honestly and giving it to people who cannot create wealth on their own because there isn’t enough demand for their products. It’s never good when government picks the winners and the losers. In the case of RGGI, everyone is a loser,” he said in an opinion piece.

This Daily Briefing was written by Michael McCord.

Make your own quotes, below! (Comments policy here.)

It was slipped into the House budget proposal, but the N.H. Senate has stripped the controversy from its version of the budget. And now, a Senate committee has reshaped House Bill 580, which also included a collective bargaining provision that organized labor strongly opposed.

House Bill 580

When it passed the House last month, HB 580 was one of a handful of comprehensive proposals this session to reform New Hampshire’s public pension system. Daily Briefing took notice of one particular provision in the original text of HB 580. Bear with us here — the legalese is followed by regular English. It said when a collective bargaining agreement has lapsed, or during negotiations:

“the status quo shall be maintained as to the wages, hours, and conditions of employment of employees in good standing. Except where required by statute, the continuation, after the expiration of the agreement, of the provision of any medical, dental, and life insurance benefits, retirement or pension benefits, and any other fringe benefits, shall be subject to the exclusive authority of the public employer.”

In other words, while employees and their wages would not revert to “at will” status when a contract ends, their benefits would.

Another clause would have allowed public employees to opt out of all “medical, dental and retirement benefits in order to instead receive an increase in his or her base salary or wage.”

With that kind of change in law, collective bargaining negotiations and group insurance calculations would become a whole new ball game.

They’ll look into it

So, the Senate Executive Departments and Administration Committee acted in the time-honored legislative tradition of dealing with radioactive issues by creating a study committee.

Actually, they replaced everything in the bill with a provision to create this collective bargaining study committee. As amended, HB 580 would have three Senate members and four members of the House study the issue of public sector collective bargaining agreements.Their report would be due by December 1.

The measure passed the committee by a unanimous 5-0 vote. The bill now heads to a full Senate vote Wednesday.

It ain’t over till it’s over

But this may not be the end of the story. House Bill 580 — the one that got turned into a study committee — was sponsored by Rep. Neal Kurk (R-Weare). He’s the same representative who inserted the “at will” measure into the House budget bill, which the House passed by a sizable 228-139 vote.

Any changes the Senate makes to both the budget and HB 580 will have to be approved by the House. Stay tuned.

This Daily Briefing was written by Michael McCord.

Should they study collective bargaining, leave it alone, or change it now?

(If you haven’t commented before, check out our Comments Policy first, please.)

If it seems like politicians want to cut the gasoline tax every time fuel prices begin to skyrocket, as we’ve seen during the past month, well you’re right.

You may recall, for example, how the massive gas price hikes during the summer of 2008 (during a presidential election season, by the way) brought out urgent political calls for a gas tax cut. Last week, the N.H. Republican House leadership said one solution to today’s high gas prices is a temporary 5 cent per gallon cut in the tax through June 30.

Naturally, Gov. John Lynch disagrees.

The proposal

To compensate for reduced revenue stemming from the tax cut, money would be collected from the $30 car registration surcharge, which is also set to lapse after June 30. The registration surcharge money goes into the Department of Transportation’s Highway Fund budget, so the tax cut would essentially take away money that would otherwise go for road and bridge construction and maintenance. It’s estimated the temporary tax cut would cost at least $6 million.

New Hampshire’s gas tax is 18 cents per gallon, ranking in the bottom third of the country’s gas tax rates, and hasn’t been raised in two decades.

The proposal will be attached as an amendment to Senate Bill 78, which would eliminate the registration surcharge immediately upon passage — and which Lynch has threatened to veto.

Back-and-forth

House Speaker William O’Brien (R-Mont Vernon), according to the Concord Monitor, seemed to dare Lynch when he said, “Does he see the same pain that we see in the economic life of New Hampshire?”

“This proposal is simply a political gimmick and would offer no relief at the pumps for the people of New Hampshire,” Lynch’s spokesman Colin Manning also told the Monitor. “What it would do is provide less money for the people of New Hampshire to maintain our roads and bridges.”

Gas tax talk usually drives economists to the extremes. Supporters cite economic benefits to consumers and convenience store owners. Opponents believe the quickest way to bring down gas prices is to cut demand by driving and buying less, which they say is what happened in 2008 when gas prices spiked at around $4 a gallon and demand dropped.

The big picture

In his budget proposal, Lynch kept the surcharge in place through 2013 to help pay for tens of millions of dollars in road and bridge construction projects.

But since last fall’s election campaign season, Republicans have focused on the $30 vehicle registration surcharge as a political issue. Last week, they issued a report showing the surcharge’s impact on towns and cities across the state.

The House report offers no plan for making up the lost revenue to pay for scores of projects the Department of Transportation says will be put on hold if the House budget plan — without the surcharge — is passed.

In other tax cut news, the Senate Ways and Means and Committee has come out against a House proposal to cut the tobacco tax, House Bill 156. The bill is scheduled for a full Senate vote on April 27. It could be an early preview of how the Senate and House approaches to revenue reductions compare. (You can see an earlier report on HB 156 here.)

Q&A

Would you rather have a 5-cent reprieve in the gas tax for two months, or see that money go to roads and bridges? Let us know in the comments box, below. (See the comments policy here.)

>> A public hearing on eliminating the registration surcharge and temporarily cutting the gas tax by 5 cents (SB 78) will be held in the House Finance Committee, Room 210 of the Legislative Office Building, on Tuesday, April 26, at 10:00 a.m.

This Daily Briefing was written by Michael McCord.

Did we miss something? Submit your nominations for the next They Said It to NH@FrontDoorPolitics.com.

1992 revisited

“So, what am I asking of you, honorable members of the Senate Finance Committee and our state Senate? I am asking that you give us time. Originally, our strategic plan sought to achieve its goals by 2020. We now know that we don’t have 10 years to make that happen. But we need more than 10 months.

“The House’s proposed cuts are so disproportionate and so drastic that they would threaten the ongoing transformation at UNH just as it is taking hold. I am asking that you provide UNH with the support we need to complete our metamorphosis. I ask this not for myself or my colleagues or even for the students who are now enrolled at UNH.  I ask it instead for the next generation of students and families and New Hampshire citizens who need a strong, vibrant, affordable, reinvented, flagship public university.”

— University of New Hampshire President Mark Huddleston in testimony before the Senate Finance Committee earlier this week. The House budget proposal would cut New Hampshire’s allocation to the state’s public higher education system to $55 million per year — the same level from 1992.

New Hampshire ranks 50^th in the country for state support of higher education.

Don’t blame us

“To blame it on the Legislature, that’s not the way we should be going in this phase. We need to work hard to figure out how we’re going to restore some of this funding, which is going to be difficult at best.”

— Senate Finance Chair Chuck Morse (R-Salem) responding at the same hearing to concerns that state budget cuts will lead to higher tuition costs for students and their families.

Reverse logic

“Talk about affecting our strategy negatively. Instead of moving New Hampshire forward, it sets us back.”

— Gov. John Lynch during a State of the State address in Portsmouth. He was speaking about proposed House budget cuts to programs in education, health and human services, public safety, and the environment.

Keeping their word

“Unlike past campaigns when politicians said one thing to voters then went another direction in office, the Republicans currently serving in the Legislature have historically done exactly what they said they were going to do. These House Republicans have given voters a balanced $10.3 billion budget for the next two years and they have balanced the current budget without raising taxes or fees, without any new borrowing and without passing any new burden down to the cities and towns of the state. I have no doubt that the silent majority of New Hampshire voters are quite pleased.”

— Andrew Hemingway, chair of the Republican Liberty Caucus of New Hampshire.

Whose right to work

“A right-to-work-for-less bill may allow the extremists now in control of the Republican Party to check off an item on their reckless agenda and pay homage to their out of state billionaire contributors, but it will cost New Hampshire workers millions of dollars a year in lower wages and destroy thousands of jobs.”

— Ray Buckley, chair of the New Hampshire Democratic Party, following Wednesday’s Senate passage of House Bill 474, which would prohibit public sector employees who don’t belong to a union from having to pay fees to a union for negotiating a contract on their behalf.

Our right to work

“Right to work means more economic growth and more jobs here in New Hampshire, plain and simple. I commend the Senate for passing this important legislation to help ensure that our workers never have to be forced to join or pay a union. The Granite State is now one step closer to becoming the first right-to-work state in the Northeast, joining 22 other states nationally who have given their workers this important protection.”

— House Speaker William O’Brien (R-Mont Vernon) following Senate passage of HB 474.

Party politics

“Politics is the only place (in our lives) where your party is the most important part about you.”

— John Avlon speaking about a hyperpartisan culture of politics at “The Politics of Problem Solving,” a panel discussion presented by No Labels at the New Hampshire Institute of Politics on Tuesday. Avlon is a CNN contributor, political columnist for The Daily Beast, and founder of the national No Labels group.

Your quote here

Got your own choice words to share? Let us have ‘em in the comments box below. (Read the comments policy first if you haven’t already, please!)

This Daily Dispatch was written by Michael McCord.

Expect a long list of speakers to line up in Representatives Hall to support or oppose the myriad proposals for revenue and spending in 2012-2013. Senate budget writers have until June 2 to complete their version of the budget, at which point the House and Senate will have to hammer out any differences.

The committee is scheduled for two (2) two-hour sessions this afternoon and this evening on the main budget bills, House Bill 1 and House Bill 2.

Senate Finance Committee Chair Sen. Chuck Morse (R-Salem) has said that some of the spending cuts proposed in the House budget — especially programs for the developmentally disabled and mentally ill — would be either partially restored or given close examination. But, as he said last week, some $200 million in restored funding to those programs would have to be matched by cuts in other areas.

Senate Finance has already made recommendations to change a few notable proposals:

Last week, the committee decided to eliminate a controversial measure that would turn public employees into at-will employees when their contracts have ended. Morse said such a collective bargaining measure, which was added in the House at the last minute without public hearings by House budget writers, did not belong in the budget bill and should be vetted and debated separately.

The committee also recommended removing a House proposal to abolish the state Department of Cultural Resources moving its divisions into other state agencies and cutting the correlating budget — from the $427,000 proposed in February by Gov. John Lynch to $4,700 recommended by the House.

The House measure would also defund the New Hampshire Arts Council. If passed, that would make New Hampshire the only state in the country without an arts council or commission.

Q&A

What state programs are worth keeping, which should be gutted, and why?

Let us know your thoughts in the comments box below (Comments Policy here).

>>Thursday, April 21, 2-4 p.m. and 6-8 p.m., Senate Finance Committee public hearings and public testimony on HB 1 and HB 2 (State House, Representatives Hall). The hearings also will be streamed live online. Go to http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us.

This Daily Dispatch was written by Michael McCord.

The Senate votes tomorrow on a bill to bring the probate and district courts and the judicial family branch under one umbrella. The reorganization would bring lots of staffing and management changes and reductions, with an overall projected savings of almost $1.5 million in staffing costs in the next four years.

The idea behind House Bill 609, sponsored by Rep. Gary Richardson (D-Hopkinton), can be found in a major report by the Judicial Branch Innovation Commission. The report also called for New Hampshire courts to enter the digital age, and asks for $5 million to help them do it.

reorganizing

The Innovation Commission was established by the N.H. Supreme Court in March 2010 to figure out how the courts could meet increased demand at the same time the system was facing budget cuts. Headed by Eric Herr of Bristol, the commission is a group of judges, lawmakers, business leaders and experts from the National Center for State Courts.

The reorganization and attendant staffing changes comprise the report’s primary call to action. And it’s got traction. With some changes, HB 609 passed the House last week without objection. According to the Judicial Branch’s fiscal note in the bill, here’s a short list of what it would do:

• The reorganization would not close any court locations.
• Marital master positions would gradually be bumped up to full-time judgeships, with benefits.
• The positions of 42 clerks of court and 10 elected registers of probate would be converted to 18 regional clerks, 3 deputy clerks and 23 court assistants.
• The salary for registers of probate, who would be required to live in the county where their probate records are kept, would be reduced to $100 per year.

Allowing for some increases in budget line items, but more in savings, the branch estimates HB 609 would save nearly $1.5 million in personnel costs in the next four years.

But, sometimes it costs money to save money, according to Laura Kiernan, Communications Director for the Judicial Branch. The House’s recently proposed operating budget offered about $2.9 million more to the courts than Gov. John Lynch suggested at the beginning of the year.

That extra money is “intended to help accelerate some of the circuit court changes,” says Kiernan. She points to creating a centralized call center and expanding the court’s use of video conferencing as initiatives that save money in the long run, but cost to set up.

e-Courts

The Innovation Commission also proposed bringing New Hampshire courts into the digital age with an “e-Court” system, pegged at about $5 million to start up. This isn’t part of HB 609, but is handled through the budgeting process, instead.

Money for the e-Court system would mostly come from the state’s Capital Budget, where the House has written in $1.9 million specifically for its launch.

If funded, the project would take about five years to implement, ultimately introducing e-filing, electronic payments of fines and fees, and digitized court records to the Granite State’s court system. Lawyers, people involved in cases, and the public would have online access to the files.

Q&A

Can the courts can deliver better service with fewer resources? Do they have a choice?

Share your thoughts in the comments box below (policy here).

>> The House is not in session this week; it meets next for full session votes on April 27 at 10:00 a.m.

>> Wednesday, April 20, 10 a.m., full session of the Senate (State House, Senate Chambers).

This Daily Dispatch was written by Hilary Niles.