You are on page 1of 15

Legislative Action Alert

Week of May 16, 2011


Jackie Cilley
jcilley@aol.com

On Mowing and Meditation

Bruce and I “took the weekend off” at our rustic little cottage in Maine. For
Bruce at least, there’s really no such thing as down time. For reasons I can’t
explain or understand (and, frankly, have stopped trying), raking in Maine is
somehow different from raking at home for him. He can mow, trim
shrubbery, weed-wack, move plants around, paint trim, and get generally
dirt streaked and nasty-smelling and appear for all the world to be having
the time of his life.

I, on the other hand, sit protected from black flies on the screened porch
contemplating the ways of the world. I suspect Bruce is more productive
than I am but I haven’t chipped a fingernail at my pursuits.

The world was a different place politically when we were here last summer.
Sure there were some heated debates among friends about the direction of
the country, fiscal policies, healthcare policies and so on. The mood seemed
restive and there was plenty of talk of change. Candidates for state and
federal offices here, in New Hampshire and in states across the country
talked endlessly about the economy, jobs and budgets needing to be
trimmed.

The Tea Party was on the rise and the media accommodatingly amplified its
voice, making it seem numerically much larger and stronger than it was or is.
Its candidates served as the butt of numerous jokes and who, many political
observers contended, would not garner the votes to win office. No doubt
some seats would change hands, but reasonable people would be elected
who would find reasonable solutions to the problems facing each state and
the country.

Voters would never elect extreme candidates such as Sharon Angle of


Nevada, Christine O’Donnell of Delaware, Allen West of Florida or even Rand
Paul of Kentucky. Except in many instances they did. Voters certainly didn’t
elect all of their approved candidates, but on the whole the Tea Party had
amazing success with 65% of their endorsed candidates for US congress

1
winning election and significantly shifting the balance of power and the
direction of the country.

The relevant question now is did voters get what they bargained for? If New
Hampshire, Wisconsin, Ohio, Illinois and even Maine are any indication there
seems to be considerable buyers’ remorse. Instead of focusing on the
economy and job creation, these legislatures have fast-tracked gun bills of all
manner, elimination of worker rights, dismantling women’s reproductive
healthcare and pushing draconian budgets that leave thousands of our
citizens behind.

The local dineah owner’s sentiments are telling. A Republican and initial
supporter of recently elected Gov. Paul LePage, Norm’s pretty uncomfortable
with his new Governor. Among LePage’s first acts was removal of murals of
workers from the Department of Labor (because they showed favoritism of
workers over big corporations!) and support of expanded child labor
(allowing kids to work more hours below minimum wages). Norm wishes for
an electoral do-over. I’ve met a lot of folks like Norm here in Maine and in
New Hampshire.

There’s a difference in Maine – one I hope we import to New Hampshire.


Here there is a critical mass of influential Republicans who are standing up
against the radical Tea Party agenda and most especially the assault on
workers. In an unprecedented opinion piece by eight Republican Senators,
LePage (a member of their own party) was taken to task for his abusive
attitude and tone toward those who disagree with him (can anybody out
there say Speaker O’Brien??) as well as his attitude toward labor (again,
does this sound familiar in NH?).

“We may find ourselves on opposite sides of an issue or vote, but we are all
working to achieve what we feel is best for our great state. We are not the
enemy of labor and labor is certainly not an enemy to us,” state these
Senators in the op ed and subsequent interviews with newspapers
throughout Maine and they go on to say “How we do things is as important
as what we do.”

Maine’s politics have long been moderate on most big issues, not so different
from the New Hampshire of a short time ago. These Senators are certainly
defending that tradition. It may also be they’re feeling the early winds of a
serious backlash that polls are just beginning to pick up on. It was

2
something to think about as I sipped my coffee and watched Bruce re-stack
his wood pile.

Contents

Page
Thought for the Week: On Mowing and Meditation 1
Breaking News – Daler Wins Special Election 2
On the Senate Floor
NH’s Minimum Wage Tradition Out the Window 5
How Many Avenues to Union Busting? 6
Pesky Federal Grants Safe for Now 7
Sending Messages to Congress 7
Senate Hearings on Select Bills
Death Penalty Expansion
7
Banning Utility Companies from Using Eminent Domain 8
On the House Floor
Winnepesaukee Speed Limits Upheld
8
Thorny Issue of Reasonable Compensation
9
Pressure to Override Gov’s Veto on Right to Work
9
Ethics by Any Other Name Just Ain’t 10
Update on the Folks Behind the Curtain 11
How Committees of Conference Work 12

♦♦♦♦♦

Breaking News

As I was wrapping up this week’s Alert, the results of the special election in
Hillsborough, District 4 were released – and they were stunning. In the 16th
(of 103) most Republican district in New Hampshire, Democrat Jennifer Daler
swept her opponent by 59% to 41%. Daler, a former legislator, replaces
former Rep. Bob Mead who took the position as Chief of Staff to Speaker Bill
O’Brien.

3
As the first of four scheduled special elections all eyes were on Hillsborough,
District 4 as a bellwether of voter sentiment in response to the agenda of the
current majority in Concord. In April Andrew Hemingway, Chairman of the
Republican Liberty Caucus NH, exhorted activists to work for Republican
Peter Kucmas and keep the seat in Republican hands. “If the progressives
pull off a victory, they will claim that this is a repudiation of the Republican
agenda,” stated Hemingway, “and, it will be seen as a direct hit to Speaker
O’Brien…”

In a similar vein James Pindell on WMUR Politics noted that “…even Speaker
O’Brien says the election will serve as a referendum on him and a
reaffirmation that voters meant what they meant in November.” Pindell
went on to say, “Republicans can and should win by any margin possible,
and if they don’t, it will be a huge story.”

Equally stunning was the 22% of voters who turned out – a precedent over
any special election in modern memory, suggesting that voters are
energized and motivated to change the direction of our state.

This election was not without a strange occurrence. The door to the New
Boston polling location sported a sign that read “Per pending legislation you
will be required to produce a photo ID in order to receive a ballot.” Some
voters saw the sign and turned away without voting. Anybody arriving
without their purse or wallet would likely have believed that they wouldn’t be
allowed to vote. It is a mystery that any moderator worthy of the title could
have believed it appropriate to implement a piece of legislation that had not
yet become law (if, indeed, it does). It took complaints and an inquiry from
the Attorney General’s office to demand the sign be taken down and for
voters to be allowed to cast their vote. The matter is now under
investigation.

There are three additional special elections scheduled in the southern tier:
Strafford, District 3 on August 9, Rockingham, District 14 on September 6,
and Hillsborough, District 3 on September 20. It is interesting to note that
the Union Leader has already called these races in favor of Democrats. In an
article covering the Hillsborough 4 special election, the piece ended with the
following line: “Democrats also won state representative races in
Hillsborough County District 3, Rockingham County District 14 and Strafford
County District 3.” Nice to see that the Union Leader also appreciates public
reaction to the New Hampshire traditions-killing legislation coming out of
Concord these days!

♯♯♯♯♯

Well, folks, as difficult as it is to believe, we’re nearing the end of this year’s
legislative saga. The House has wrapped up hearings on Senate bills and is
finalizing its work on the last of them. The Senate will hear 7 bills in the
4
upcoming week and it, too, will have completed its regular legislative
calendar. Once all bills have cleared each chamber, the process of voting on
concurrence will begin in full (there is already a committee of conference
underway on changes to the pension system in SB 3). The real circus will get
fully under way with the committees of conference. It is a messy process
under the best of circumstances and the dynamics of this year promise to
make it more so. Rumors are flying that the House is really angry about the
way that their bills have been treated by their colleagues in the Senate.
Watching the battle over whether kids will be allowed to carry guns in school,
whether all federal employees can be tossed out of the state in order to
protect its sovereignty or whether the New Hampshire Army will resurface in
the process could be more entertaining than the whole session we’ve already
been subjected to! In case you missed it, I’ve included an overview of the
committee of conference process contained in last week’s Alert at the end of
this document.

For the full details of House and Senate calendars, please visit the General
Court website at http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/. You may also want to
download the Journals from that same site for each chamber. In those you
can read the remarks made by legislators during debates on legislation –
always good nighttime reading entertainment! Additionally, the Journals
contain the roll call votes of each legislator. You will be able to see how your
legislator voted on any bill of importance to you.

♦♦♦♦♦

On The Senate Floor This Week

Over the upcoming two weeks Senate committees will take up the final 7
House bills, completing their legislative calendar of hearings. In another sign
of winding down, the full chamber will make final decisions on only 23 bills
reported out of its various committees. The recommendations of
committees on House bills continues to show the Senate to be the more
moderate of the two bodies, though there is a shared ideology between the
two as can be seen from the bills discussed below.

The indisputably most important piece of legislation that continues to be


worked on in the Senate is the budget. The Senate will unveil its rendition of
the biennial budget within the next two weeks.

Detailed below is a selection of noteworthy bills to be voted on by the full


Senate as well as those being heard in committee. For a comprehensive list
of floor action and committee hearings please go to
http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/scaljourns/

Minimum Wage Tradition Out the Window

5
Championed by two Republican governors over 75 years ago, the minimum
wage has a long tradition in New Hampshire. In days when Republicans
cared about workers, the unemployed and the poor Governors John Winant
and Styles Bridges fought to ensure a social safety net in our state that is
now being unraveled by their modern day successors. At Bridge’s insistence
New Hampshire became one of the first state’s in the country to have an
Unemployment Compensation Division with units devoted to promoting jobs
and to increasing the minimum wage. (Sadly illustrative of how far our
conservative colleagues have strayed from their roots, are the many social
programs Bridges supported including elderly assistance when he “…
revamped the state’s old-age assistance program so that New Hampshire
became the first state in the nation to qualify for participation in the new
federal Social Security program.” Styles Bridges, Yankee Senator, Kiepper,
2001)

Not letting the door to history hit them in the arse as they slam it shut
behind them, these legislators are about to ban our state’s ability to
determine its own minimum wage standards. HB 133 mandates that New
Hampshire’s rate be no higher than the federal minimum wage.

Along party lines and by a supermajority, the House passed this bill by a
margin of 239 – 106. Similarly, the Senate Commerce Committee
recommended passage of this bill with no changes by 4 -1 along the same
party lines. It will now go immediately to the Governor’s desk for signature
or veto. There is no word yet from the Governor’s office of his intentions
toward this bill. However, each legislative chamber has a comfortable
supermajority to override a possible veto and is expected to do so. Perhaps
the most interesting aspect of HB 133 is its contrast to the numerous bills
passed by this legislature to assert the state’s rights against any intrusion of
the federal government.

How Many Avenues to Union Busting?

The anti-worker ideology of the current legislature has been well


documented in earlier editions of the Alert and elsewhere. Pushed by such
groups as the American Legislative Exchange Council (see an overview of
this group on p. of this week’s Alert), Americans for [billionaire’s] Prosperity,
Cornerstone Policy and Research among other extreme right-wing financiers
are numerous bills whose goal is to strip workers of long-standing rights.
One example, the elimination of collective bargaining, has transitioned to a
study committee on the topic for the time being (this could come back up
during the committee of conference process on several bills such as HB 2,
HB 580 and SB 3). Additionally, the Right to Work [for less], HB 474, was
successfully passed by a veto-proof majority in the Senate and is coming
back to the House on May 25 for an attempted override of the Governor’s
veto. The bill passed the House without the votes to override the veto. [See

6
list of legislators needed to sustain the Governor’s veto under discussion of
House floor action below.]

In yet another example of what critics call the continuing effort to weaken
labor unions in New Hampshire, HB 589 comes at the issue from a slightly
different angle. This bill, recommended for passage by the Senate
Commerce Committee on a 4-1 vote, will eliminate the ability of one
union to be recognized as the exclusive representative for an
individual unit of public employees. Critics of this bill claim that it may
lead to multiple unions representing any given bargaining unit.
Consequently, they argue, the bargaining process will be more cumbersome
for all parties involved and will ensure smaller sized bargaining units with
less ability to have an impact. This bill has already passed the House.

Pesky Federal Grants Safe for Now

A bill that may have jeopardized federal grants-in-aid, HB 590, has been
amended to the creation of a study committee by the Senate. This
legislation set out to express the position of the General Court grants not
specifically tied to constitutional authorization as interpreted by this
legislature would be deemed unconstitutional. Amending the bill to a study
committee has temporarily suspended any direct action relative to federal
grants New Hampshire departments and agencies receive. However, the
reporting date for the study committee, November 1, 2011, allows ample
time for legislation to be introduced next year. The Senate Internal Affairs
Committee has recommended HB 590 ought to pass as amended to the
study committee by a 4-1 vote.

Sending Messages to Congress

The Senate did not agree with the House on a bill that would have
encouraged Congress to withdraw from United Nations. However, it did
request through HCR 11 that Congress “limit appropriations to the
United Nations system to amounts no greater than those of the
second largest financial contributor to the organization.” The Senate
Internal Affairs Committee recommended this amended version of HCR 6 to
the full body on a 4-1 vote.

In a similar show of dissension from their House colleagues, the Senate


Internal Affairs Committee voted to kill HCR 12, a bill urging Congress
to withdraw the United States from the North American Free Trade
Agreement (NAFTA). The Senate Internal Affairs Committee voted to
recommend an ITL (inexpedient to legislate/kill the bill) by a unanimous 5-0
vote.

Being Heard in the Senate


7
The Senate Finance Committee will meet on Monday, May 16 (beginning at 9
a.m.), Thursday, May 19 (beginning at 1 p.m.) and Friday, May 20 (beginning
at 9 a.m.) in Rm. 103 of the Statehouse to continue finalization of details on
the Senate version of the biennial budget. Once the Senate has rendered all
of its decisions on the budget and held a vote of the full chamber, the bill will
go back to the House for concurrence, nonconcurrence, or nonconcurrence
requesting a committee of conference.

A hearing on HB 147-FN, expanding the death penalty to include the


crime of willfully causing the death of another during a home
invasion, will be held by the Senate Judiciary Committee on
Wednesday, May 18 at 1:30 p.m. in Rm. 305-307 of the LOB (Legislative
Office Building). This bill was brought forward in response to the horrific
murder of Mount Vernon resident Kimberly Cates, whose 11 year old
daughter was also seriously wounded during the rampage.

Responding to the anger of North Country residents, HB 648 Seeks to


prohibit public utilities from petitioning for permission to take
private land or property rights for the construction or operation of
certain transmission facilities. The angst as well as the legislation arose
in response to plans by HydroQuebec, in a cooperative arrangement with
Northeast Utilities, to construct high voltage power lines from the north
country to Massachusetts. The companies are seeking the use of eminent
domain of properties needed to complete the project. This is a hotly
contested issue with dozens of north country residents who testified at the
House hearing on this bill expected to make the trek once again to testify at
the Senate hearing on the matter. The Senate Judiciary Committee will hear
HB 648 on Thursday, May 19 at 1:15 p.m. in Representatives Hall.

On The Floor of the House

With most of the high profile and controversial bills being readied for
committees of conference, the House will vote on principally mundane
legislation this week. In fact, almost half the calendar is under “consent”
that will require only one vote for the entire listing. Some select bills of
interest are discussed below. For a comprehensive overview of bills on the
House calendar, please go to
http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/house/caljourns/calendars/2011/houcal2011_39.html

Winnepesaukee Speed Limits Upheld

In a surprise move the House Transportation Committee recommended by a


11-6 margin an ITL (inexpedient to legislate/kill the bill) on SB 27, a
bill that would have increased the boat speed in the Broads on Lake
Winnepesaukee. While certainly not a concern to the majority of New
8
Hampshire citizens, the issue of boat speeds on Winnepesaukee has been a
more than decades-long contentious issue for the legislature. Having finally
succeeded in pushing for speed limits on our largest lake, supporters
comprised of dozens of businesses and citizens turned out to defend the
recent law against changes suggested in the bill. It remains to be seen as to
whether the full House will take the overwhelming testimony of those who
own residents and businesses all along the lake into consideration and
support the committee’s recommendation.

Thorny Issue of Reasonable Compensation

Both the House and Senate have passed bills that allow business owners to
shelter more (if not all) profits from the business profits tax. Currently there
are federal and state standards defining “reasonable compensation,” the
amount of money that one can claim is compensation rather than profits
earned by the company. In New Hampshire, business profits are subject to
the BPT (business profits tax) while personal income is not taxed.
Supporters of these bills argue that the standards used by the Department of
Revenue Administration are unfair, artificially lowering otherwise
“reasonable” compensation. Opponents cite the DRA’s statements that
should this bill become law it will prevent them from enforcing any standards
for compensation resulting in general fund losses amounting to $45 million
or more.

The Senate version on this subject, SB 125, is recommended OTPA (ought to


pass with amendment) by a 16-5 margin of the House Ways and Means
committee. Interestingly, Rep. Susan Almy, writing the synopsis of this bill
for the minority, notes that a “…few other states tried to shift the burden of
proof years ago and shifted back immediately due to severe revenue losses.”

Plenty of Pressure to Override Veto on Right to Work

Hitting a new low, the unemployment rate in New Hampshire now stands at
4.9%, one of the lowest in the country. The unemployment rate has been
trending downward for two and a half years. That’s difficult to understand in
light of those who insist the Right to Work Act will create more jobs and
lower unemployment (most especially when every current Right to Work
state has a higher unemployment rate than NH).

9
It is not only the improvements to employment that demonstrate the
misinformation surrounding this proposed legislation. New Hampshire has
also once again been voted the No. 1 most livable state by CQ Press.
Rankings consider economic, educational, health, public safety and
environmental statistics. All without right to work laws! Amazing! (Anyone
out there want to take a wager on whether we hold on to No. 1 status once
some of the other proposed bills become law????)

Despite the glowing stats and recognition of New Hampshire’s standard of


living, leadership at the Statehouse continues to press to implement this
harmful legislation. Why would they want to turn NH into the Mississippi of
the Northeast? Because their out-of-state puppet masters hold this as their
No. 1 priority.
Due to some confusion in the way this material was presented last week we
are reprinting the list of legislators who voted against the misleadingly
titled Right to Work Act. These legislators have been targeted and are being
severely pressured to change their vote. Help them to stay strong by
contacting them and asking that they sustain the Governor’s veto. Please
see Governor’s veto message here:
http://www.governor.nh.gov/media/news/2011/051111-veto-hb474.htm . You may want to use
the Governor’s points when contacting your legislators. Only Republican
Representatives are listed here as all Democratic Representatives voted
against RTW.

NH Republican Representatives Needed to Sustain RTW


Veto

Peter Bolster Julie Brown Randy Brownrigg


Mike Buxton Frank Case Tim Copeland
Russ Day Debra DeSimone Jim Devine
Pat Dowling Richard Dwinell Susan Emerson
Laura Gandia Carol Gargasz Carlos Gonzalez
Ken Gould Gary Hopper Karen Hutchinson
Phyllis Katsakiores Dave Kidder Dave Knox
Priscilla Lockwood Mike McCarthy Betsy McKinney
Irene Messier Alida Milham Phil Munck
Chris Nevins Barry Palmer Amy Perkins
Larry Perkins Jim Pilliod Mark Proulx
Lee Quandt Matt Quandt Bill Remick
Herb Richardson Dave Russell Frank Sapareto
Jeff Shackett Todd Smith Tony Soltani
Kathleen Stroud Kevin Sullivan Ross Terrio
John Tholl Marc Tremblay James Waddell
James Webb David Welch

Ethics By Any Other Name Just Ain’t


10
In homage to an antiquated legislative concept, the NH House resurrected
the Redress of Grievances Committee for the first time in more than a
century and a half. Driven by their deep distrust of courts and judges these
poor misguided souls reached back to Art. 32 of our NH constitution* to
justify taking over the court’s functions.

Long ago our legislature recognized the wisdom of a bright red dividing line
between those who pass laws and those who rule on them. Unfortunately,
these throw-backs to the Dark Ages lawmakers have no interest in under-

*[Art.] 32. [Rights of Assembly, Instruction, and Petition.] The people have a right, in an orderly and peaceable manner, to assemble
and consult upon the common good, give instructions to their representatives, and to request of the legislative body, by way of petition or
remonstrance, redress of the wrongs done them, and of the grievances they suffer.

standing the context of historical decision-making. They have no more


interest in historical evolution than they do in scientific evolution.

Worse, everything about the rules that govern the House Redress of
Grievances Committee begs for corruption and injustice – the very failings
presumably underpinning the existence of this committee. First, the chair of
the committee has sole authority over which petitions for redress will be
heard and which won’t. He decides who should be heard from and who
shouldn’t. He can notify others impacted by decisions or he may not.

This all came to a head last week. A case involving a father, David Johnson,
involved in a decades-long custody battle before the courts came before the
committee. During the open committee hearing Johnson gave extensive
testimony on the behavior and conduct of his ex-wife. Unfortunately, she
had not been notified of the hearing and was not there to hear these charges
or to defend against them.

Some 2.5 hours later, after a complaint was lodged with the Speaker’s office,
Chairperson Ingrebetson divulged that he had neglected to inform the
committee of the fact he had been supervising the visitation between
Johnson and his daughter. Ingrebetson didn’t think it noteworthy that he
had driven from his home in Pike to Londonderry every other weekend for a
year, for a total of 200 hours, to fulfill the mandatory supervision provisions
of Johnson’s visitation with his daughter. When the complaint was brought
forward, the Chair asked for an opinion on this issue from Speaker O’Brien
who quickly absolved him of any ethical concerns. As it turns out, O’Brien
may have a bit of a thorny problem in this regard as well.

After considerable public pressure, Ingrebetson has removed himself from


Chairing this particular hearing, though it is unclear whether or not he will
participate in deliberations. There is considerably more intrigue on this issue
so stay tuned.
11
Update on the Folks Behind the Curtain

Past issues of the Alert have reported on extremist organizations responsible


for writing New Hampshire’s new laws and who are heavily influencing this
legislature. The Americans for [billionaire’s] Prosperity is among the
foremost and Grover Norquist has his reach into this legislature as he does
throughout the country. For sheer breadth and depth of reach across the
country, however, few groups can match the reach of the American
Legislative Exchange Council.

You may recall that the American Legislative Exchange Council’s name has
been raised previously – in context of model legislation to repeal the
Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative. ALEC has been around since 1973, is
backed by some 300+ major corporations (including, yes, the notorious Koch
boys), and until recently was a relatively sleepy lobbying group that
schmoozed with legislators from around the country schooling them in
corporate interests and hoping that they would look favorably on the issues
of concern to these corporations.

Well, ALEC isn’t sleepy anymore. Over the past few years it has been
aggressively building its ranks and being much more assertive about pushing
its extreme legislative agenda. It is rabidly anti-worker and anti-
environment. The very bills on these topics making their way through the
New Hampshire legislature are very much based on model legislation ALEC
promotes.

ALEC reaches out quickly to new legislators to get them into the fold and
ensure that they understand the wishes of its members. Before most new
legislators know where the Statehouse restrooms are located, some attend
an ALEC conference to be educated. As can be seen from a post to his
facebook page, Sen. Fenton Groen of District 6 (full disclosure, this was the
seat that I held prior to last November) felt he “learned a lot” from the event.
The problem, of course, is that what he learned was what big business wants
not what New Hampshire citizens want.

“I am In DC right now. Warren and I attended an ALEC (American


Legislative Exchange Council) conference. ALEC is a conservative
association dedicated to conservative fiscal policy and Jeffersonian
principles of government. I learned a lot about budgeting
processes, best practices that other states are already using and
plans and strategies to restore limited government & 10th
ammendment rights… Whie in DC I also made a lot of good contacts
that I believe will assist me in my work to put the New Hampshire
retirement account on a solid footing.” Newly-elected Senator
Fenton Groen, a mere three days after taking office.
12
For the full story on the founding and evolution of ALEC, its corporate
backers and its legislative agenda, please see the just released report by
People for the American Way at http://www.pfaw.org/rww-in-focus/alec-the-voice-of-
corporate-special-interests-state-legislatures You will learn a great deal about how and
why the NH Statehouse is doing what it is doing.

One way to send a message to companies who use your consumer dollars to
fight against causes you believe in is to withdraw your support for those
companies.

Committee of Conference Process


More than You Ever Cared to Know!
Written in Cooperation with Maureen Mann

For the uninitiated, the path from proposed legislation to New Hampshire
RSA can be short and sweet or long, drawn-out and tortuous. Earlier in the
session, by way of example of the former, was a House initiated bill that fast-
tracked the repeal of “evergreen clauses” in public employee contracts.
Passed within two weeks of introduction, the bill went to the Senate for a
quick hearing, equally fast floor action and was promptly signed by the
Governor. All of this took place within the matter of a month from the time
the bill received a formal bill number.

By contrast, the biennial budget bills, HB 1 and HB 2, are shaping up to be an


excellent example of the longer path. The steps ahead may include:

Passage by the Senate of an amended version of HB 1 and HB 2. This is all


but certain as the Senate has already signaled the policy amendments that it
intends to pull from HB 2 as well as the reinstatement of some of the funds
for mental health and developmental disabilities services.

Sending the amended bills back to the House for ‘concurrence’,


‘nonconcurrence’, or ‘nonconcurrence with a request for a committee of
conference’. The chances of the House concurring with all changes—since it
has already signaled significant displeasure with the anticipated Senate
alterations—is practically zero. On the other hand, if the House were to
nonconcur without asking for a committee of conference, the bill would die
immediately. At that point, the state would operate under a continuing
resolution that would maintain services at their current level and the
Governor would call a special session and the budget process would begin
13
again, though most likely as a more expedited process. Although
nonconcurrence is not unusual for other pieces of legislation, it would be
highly unusual for the budget bill.

So a far more likely scenario for whatever passes out of the Senate in HB 1
and HB 2 is for the House to 'nonconcur and ask for a committee of
conference' (CoC). A CoC, even for those folks steeped in the traditions of
the House and Senate, is a messy process from which all parties often
emerge less than satisfied with the final result of negotiations. The CoC is
comprised of both Senate and House members, usually selected from the
committees that heard the bill in their chamber; although in the House the
Speaker, not the committee chair, makes the final decision on who will
become members. While this composition of the CoC’s ensures that
members are knowledgeable about the legislation, it may also result in
entrenched attitudes about the bill. In the House, in fact, any House member
of a CoC who cannot support the “House position” must notify the Speaker
so he or she can be replaced by someone who will support that position. It is
not unusual for members to be switched out and replaced by others.

During the CoC, members work to find agreement on each point of the
budget, meeting jointly but voting separately while in conference. Members
may not change the title of the bill, nor may they add amendments that are
not germane—amendments in which the subject matter is not contained in
either the House or Senate version of the bill—although this has been
interpreted very loosely. Nor may members include subject matter from
another bill that has been indefinitely postponed. Subject matter from tabled
bills may be included. The sponsor of a bill that is in CoC shall, upon request
to the CoC, be provided an opportunity to be heard. No public testimony is
taken although the public has an opportunity to weigh in by contacting their
senators and representatives.

It is not at all atypical for CoCs on the biennial budget to go late into the
night, even through the entire night some years. To avoid the special
session, the CoC will finally hammer out all of the details to members’
satisfaction, or at least sufficiently to obtain a recommendation The bill in
the form unanimously agreed to by all members, with senators and
representatives voting separately, then heads back to the House and Senate
chambers for concurrence or nonconcurrence with the CoC’s
recommendation.

At this stage of the process no further changes can be made. The bill is
submitted to the full House and Senate as is and requires an up or down vote
on its entirety. In order for the budget to pass, it must receive a majority
“yea” vote on concurrence. Failing that, the bill dies and, as noted above,
the process will need to begin again via a special session.

14
Typically, the hammered out compromise of HB 1 and HB 2 receives
agreement from each chamber as that is often preferable to resorting to a
continuing resolution and special session. The bill then heads to the
Governor’s desk for signature, veto, or passage without the signature of the
Governor. The distinction between passing with or without a signature has no
impact on whether a bill becomes law. The difference is wholly political. The
Governor makes a statement of support by placing his signature on a piece
of legislation. He may decide that a bill is not something he supports but that
a veto may make matters more problematic, so he is willing to allow it to go
into law but not with his public support.

If the bill, in this instance the budget bill, is vetoed, both the House and
Senate must “take up the veto” to determine whether it is possible to
override it. In this legislative year in which supermajorities exist in each
chamber, it should be relatively easy for each body to muster the two-third
majority needed to override a Governor’s veto and pass the bill. That said,
surprises have and do happen.

15

You might also like