Update: ERPO and Other Key Votes by the Criminal Justice Committee
The full legislature will meet 4 times within the next week to deal with a logjam of bills, including Thursday when we’ll have a rare afternoon session. Here’s a link to the full calendar if you’d like to see the bills we’ll be voting on.
In preparation for these votes, many committees, including the Criminal Justice and Public Safety Committee (which I serve on), were busy voting in executive session on recommendations to make to the full legislature.
A recommendation of “Ought to Pass” is exactly what it sounds like. It’s the committee’s seal of approval for a bill.
“Inexpedient to Legislate” is a recommendation to kill a bill.
A vote to “retain” a bill is a decision to do additional work. Retained bills are worked on over the summer and amended versions may be introduced in the second year of the legislative session.
This Week’s Votes in the Criminal Justice Committee
In a disappointment for gun violence prevention advocates, the committee voted 19-1 to retain HB-687–a bill that would have established Extreme Risk Protection Orders (ERPO). These court orders can be requested by a family member, intimate partner, or a police officer. When granted, they temporarily limit a person’s access to firearms if they pose a serious risk of using them to harm themselves or others. The vote to retain the bill occurred after a 10-10 tie vote to approve an “ought to pass” motion on an amendment to the bill featuring a series of changes requested after the public hearing by the ACLU and other legal experts. Because a majority of committee members is required to pass a motion, the 10-10 vote meant the amendment failed. With the amendment defeated, the “ought to pass” motion for the original, unamended bill also failed 6-14. With the “ought to pass” motion for the bill defeated, a motion was made to retain the bill, which passed 19-1. During the initial vote on the amendment, several committee members expressed concerns with specific language that they felt didn’t adequately protect the due process rights of people who may be relieved of their firearms under the bill. Others objected to the process used to amend the bill—saying they hadn’t had enough time to study the final changes before the vote. I voted “yes” on the amended bill, “yes” to passing the original unamended bill, and finally “yes” to retaining the bill for additional work. The good news is members of both parties expressed a genuine interest in coming back with an improved bill next year. In a recent survey of 1,100 New Hampshire adults, 81% expressed support for this type of legislation. We owe it to them to get it done.
The news was better on HB-514–a bill to establish a 7 day waiting period between the purchase and delivery of firearms. The “ought to pass” recommendation was approved 12-8 and the bill now moves on to the full house. (I voted with the majority).
By a 13-7 vote, HB-605 was also recommended as “ought to pass”. This bill criminalizes the possession, transfer, or manufacture of animal fighting paraphernalia used during dog fights and cock fights. During the public hearing, law enforcement officials testified that currently the only way to successfully prosecute people arranging these fights is to catch them while the animals are still fighting. The Animal Rescue League and the New Hampshire Chiefs of Police Association strongly supported the bill. (I voted “yes”).
New Hampshire farmers will be pleased by the 17-3 “ought to pass” recommendation for a bill that raises the minimum penalty for stealing, damaging, consuming, or vandalizing crops to $500. Crop theft is an ongoing and discouraging problem for many farmers and HB-394 ensures serious consequences for those who steal Christmas trees and harvest food that doesn’t belong to them.
HB-134 was retained in committee 20-0. This bill would have reduced the penalty for certain first offense drug possession charges as a way of reducing the prison population by easing the penalties. The committee agreed unanimously we should do more work to look at sentencing reform more broadly.