Update: School Funding, Minimum Wage, Medicaid Expansion, Clean Water
This was a busy week in the legislature with two session days coming smack in the middle of a week-long celebration of the 200th anniversary of the New Hampshire State House which also included a reunion of current and former legislators. It was also one of the “newsier” weeks of 2019–especially when it came to events taking place outside the House of Representatives.
Public School Funding and Moving Closer to a Final State Budget
On Wednesday, in a ruling that rocked the state, a state superior court judge ruled that New Hampshire’s per pupil public school funding formula is unconstitutional.
Late Thursday, the state Senate passed its version of a new budget with literally not a minute to spare before the midnight deadline.
The Senate weakened HB494 by tacking on an amendment that effectively neuters the bill. The original House version—which I cosponsored—declared Coakley Landfill to be an “imminent hazard” and ordered remediation of PFAS chemicals contaminating surface water flowing into Berry’s Brook. The Senate amendment removes the imminent hazard declaration and requires the Department of Environmental Services to work with the EPA and the Coakley Landfill Group to deliver an action plan, including a cost estimate, by November 1. Unfortunately, a cost estimate is not the same as a clean-up and people living near the site continue to live in fear of what the contamination is doing to their health and their property values. For these reasons, a spirited discussion is expected in the committee of conference to iron out differences between the House and Senate versions.
As for the Senate version of the budget, it now goes to a committee of conference between the House and the Senate for additional work and negotiation. While there are significant differences between the budgets passed by the House and Senate (especially when it comes to a far less generous Senate budget for public school funding), these differences are minor in comparison to the differences between Democrats and Republicans. There is also a large gap between what may acceptable to a legislature with a large, recently elected Democratic majority and a Republican governor with veto power.
While the budget process is likely to devolve into a predictable political passion play before getting settled at some point over the summer (we’ve all seen this movie before), the next steps are far murkier for public school funding, an issue which has dogged the state for more than three decades under both Republican and Democratic administrations. Barring a successful appeal to the state Supreme Court—or a constitutional amendment favored by the governor which would strip the courts of the power to rule on public school funding issues—the legislature (and a governor who hasn’t viewed fixing public school funding inequities as a priority) will be under the gun to address the issue to the satisfaction of the court.
The direction in Cheshire Superior Court Judge David Ruoff’s opinion is clear: The legislature is now officially on point to come up with an acceptable solution to the state’s public school funding crisis. “As every court decision on the matter has recognized, school funding is no small task, and the burden on the Legislature is great”, Ruoff wrote. “Yet, as every court decision has similarly recognized, the Legislature is the proper governmental body to complete it. As has been the result in the past, the Court expects the Legislature to respond thoughtfully and enthusiastically to funding public education according to its constitutional obligation.”
With New Hampshire property taxes already among the highest in the nation—and nearly all public school funding coming from local property taxes—“property poor” towns like Berlin have maxed out on the tax rate residents can afford to pay and are already closing schools and eliminating art and foreign language programs. The bottom line is that fixing this problem and living up to the state’s constitutional obligation to provide each child with an adequate education will require the legislature to look at new sources for revenue rather than simply increasing property taxes.
The original House budget, passed earlier this year, attempted to do that by adding a 5% state capital gains tax for upper income earners benefiting from the sale of securities and other property. Unfortunately, the failure of the capital gains tax to make it into the Senate budget combined with its uncertain future in the committee of conference and the court’s ruling even if that idea fails to make it into the final budget, the legislature may be forced to look into other ways to raise revenue that the state, for very good reason, has so far managed to avoid.
Update: This Week in the House
With warmer-than-usual June days here to remind us that summer is approaching (finally)—and a Thursday deadline to act on remaining Senate bills—Wednesday and Thursday were busy and productive days. Here are some of the highlights. (A quick caveat: Senate bills passed with amendments by the House require the Senate to “concur” with the House amendment. If the Senate does not concur, a conference committee will be called to work out the differences. If the House and Senate agree on the amendment or on required changes, the bill then heads to the governor for signature.)
In the Consent Calendar, a series of non-controversial but important bills were approved by voice vote:
SB-285 establishes a coastal resilience and economic development program that allows Seacoast cities and towns like Portsmouth to better prepare for sea-level rise, storm surge, and future flooding due to climate change. It allows municipalities to create municipal development and revitalization districts, coastal resilience and cultural and historic reserve districts; a coastal resilience and cultural and historic reserve district fund; and creates a coastal resilience and cultural and historic reserve commission.
SB85 reestablishes the commission to study environmentally-triggered chronic illness. With New Hampshire experiencing some of the highest cancer rates in the country and with two confirmed cancer clusters on the Seacoast alone, understanding the scope of the health impacts of air and water contamination are critical.
SB292 adds rigor and accountability to the state’s new 10 year mental health plan by requiring the commissioner of the Department of Health and Human Services to submit a progress report by September 1.
On the regular calendar, we acted on dozens of bills, including:
SB10. This bill passed 209-136. It establishes a state minimum wage of $10 per hour in the first year and $12 per hour in the second year. While it falls short of providing a living wage in a state with a high cost of living, it would end New Hampshire’s status as the only New England state without a minimum wage and would benefit low wage workers who often have to work multiple jobs simply to make ends meet.
SB290. This bill makes minor changes to the work/community engagement requirement of the Granite Advantage Health Care Plan—the state’s Medicare expansion plan covering tens of thousand of lower income New Hampshire residents. Passed after an intense debate along party lines 207-143, the bill establishes a trigger for the elimination of the work/community engagement requirement if 1) there are negative economic consequences due to increased costs for uncompensated care arising from people being suspended from the program or 2) if more than 500 people lose coverage by failing to meet the requirement. These rule changes ensure that the program fulfills its original intent by ensuring that people who can’t afford coverage have a way to obtain it so that unaddressed medical issues don’t pile up to a point where costs are shifted to people paying for coverage through employers, via the federal exchange, or the individual market.
SB263. This bill creates a cause of action for people injured by discrimination in our public schools. Despite support from the Governor’s Council on Diversity and Inclusion, it passed largely along party lines 222-141.
SB242 passed by an overwhelming 308-25 margin despite constitutional concerns. It provides protection and guidance for New Hampshire businesses selling products out of state who prior to last year’s South Dakota vs. Wayfair decision were exempt from collecting sales tax from customers in other states. The bill authorizes the New Hampshire Department of Justice to take legal action against out-of-state taxing authorities imposing sales tax collection obligations on New Hampshire businesses.
SB241 funds the project development phase of the Capitol Corridor Rail project that would link Concord, Manchester and Nashua to Boston. This is not another study. It funds an engineering plan, environmental studies, and other information required by the Federal Transit Administration to win competitively awarded construction funds. It passed 213-141.
SB58 passed by voice vote. It requires insurers to reimburse providers at rates that reflect the increased costs of less-invasive and more conclusive 3D mammography. In the state with the highest breast cancer rates in the country, making this change is long overdue.
SB279 provides good news for young people having trouble starting a family. Passed 210-147, it requires coverage for infertility treatment and in vitro fertilization. This brings New Hampshire with Rhode Island, Connecticut and Massachusetts—who all have this requirement.
SB41 was the only Senate bill on either day that was killed. This bill would have allowed so-called “historical horse racing terminals” to be installed in charitable gaming facilities across the state. These machines are similar in many ways to slot machines and there was considerable concern that gamblers might get in over their heads because no limit to wagers was specified in the bill. After an amendment failed that would have allowed local communities to opt in or opt out (which I supported), the bill failed by a 158-183 vote and then was ruled Inexpedient to Legislate (ITL) in a second vote 184-157.