inside sources print logo
Get up to date New Hampshire news in your inbox

Full-Day Kindergarten Makes It Out of Conference Committee. Drinking Water Bill Dies.

On the last day of conference committee work in the New Hampshire State House, a deal was reached to fund full-day kindergarten, but a bill aimed to improve water quality standards stalled in committee.

A last-minute deal was reached Thursday between GOP members of the House and Senate on using revenue from the lottery game Keno to fund the legislature’s plan for full-day kindergarten, but Democrats no longer support the bill. They say it doesn’t fully fund the program for all cities and towns and local communities are going to be left to pick up the bill. Exactly how much the state would spend per-pupil will depend on how much revenue is raised from taxing Keno.

The amendment presented by Sen. Jeb Bradley, R-Wolfeboro, guarantees school districts that want full-day kindergarten an extra $1,100 per kindergarten pupil. The state currently offers school districts an “adequacy grant” for half-day kindergarten of $1,800 per student, which is half of the $3,600 for students in grades 1-12. About 75 percent of the school districts in the state have already adopted full-day kindergarten using local property taxes to pay for it.

Democrats wanted the second half day of kindergarten to be fully funded at $1,800 per student in exchange for support on legalizing and regulating Keno. However, Republicans were cautious to do that out of concern that Keno would not generate enough revenue to support the full amount.

The amendment guarantees that at least $1,100 will go to funding full-day kindergarten since they are confident enough Keno revenue will be raised to do that. The state will fully fund the program at $1,800 if Keno revenues are enough. If not, the grants will be pro-rated per community at an amount between $1,100 and $1,800 depending on the exact amount that is raised from Keno.

Gov. Chris Sununu has made full-day kindergarten a priority for his first term in the Corner Office. While funding negotiations have constantly changed over the past few months in the State House, he applauded the deal lawmakers made and said it was a “first step” in getting the program fully funded.

“This is not a time for partisan politics, we need to get this done,” he said in a statement. “This is one of the most transformative pieces of legislation, and more progress for kindergarten than this state has ever seen.  As revenues increase, the amount of funding can increase for kids. It is not only a first step, it is a real plan that funds full-day kindergarten across every community in this state.”

But Democrats say this isn’t the deal they agreed on. Senate Democrats called it a “shell game.”

“Senate Democrats have been leading on Kindergarten for years, and we are glad Governor Sununu has at least attempted to follow our example. But, today’s failure to support full-day kindergarten like any other grade while giving even more tax cuts for the wealthy elite is a major disappointment and once again demonstrates Governor Sununu’s failure to lead,” said Senate Minority Leader Jeff Woodburn.

Democratic gubernatorial candidate Steve Marchand called the “kenogarten” policy “disingenuous.”

Former 2016 Democratic gubernatorial nominee Colin Van Ostern was active on Twitter to express his disappointment that the deal reached in the conference committee didn’t guarantee full funding of kindergarten at the $1,800 level.

The full-day kindergarten bill is expected to pass in the House and Senate next week.

A separate bill that would lead to stronger standards for a toxic chemical in more than 200 communities’ drinking water ultimately died in committee.

The bill would have required the Department of Environmental Services to set a standard for a group of chemicals known as perfluorochemicals or PFCs. The state currently uses the federal government recommendation of 70 parts per trillion, but other states have set tougher standards.

The conference committee couldn’t agree on the bill due to concerns that it could require towns to make expensive upgrades to their water systems. The defeat of the bill in the legislative session saw both Republicans and Democrats disappointed that it failed.

“I am very disappointed House Republicans rejected drinking water standards that protect the public health, particularly prenatal and early childhood health,” said Sen. Dan Feltes, D-Concord. “Just like on the budget, Republicans have caved to the know-it-all wealthy elite and big corporations at the expense of everyday Granite Staters – folks who just want clean drinking water for them and their children.”

According to recent research from the Environmental Working Group and Northeastern University, New Hampshire is tied with Alabama as having the second worst PFC contamination of drinking water in the country.

Sen. Dan Innis, R-New Castle — a sponsor of the bill — said it was a “common sense piece of legislation.”

“I am deeply disappointed that the House was unwilling to come to an agreement to better protect the citizens of my district and around the state from the growing concern about the quality of our drinking water,” he said. “This critical legislation will be the first bill that I file in the fall. It is imperative that we quickly come to an agreement to address this pressing issue for the Granite State.”

Follow Kyle on Twitter.

Sign up for NH Journal’s must-read morning political newsletter.

N.H. Gubernatorial Race is Starting to Take Shape…For 2018

Three months into Republican Gov. Chris Sununu’s term it already looks like he’s got a couple challengers in 2018. The first to announce in March was Jilletta Jarvis for the Libertarian ticket. Now, Steve Marchand, former Democratic mayor of Portsmouth is throwing his hat into the ring too.

Do these names sound familiar? Well, they both ran for governor in 2016. Jarvis was an Independent and Marchand came in second in the Democratic gubernatorial primary, finishing behind eventual nominee Colin Van Ostern.

“We can make New Hampshire the best place in America to start and raise a family, and the best place to start and grow a business,” Marchand wrote in a Monday email to supporters. “We will aspire to be the example of what America, at our best, can be. That’s why I’m running for governor.”

Last year, Marchand trailed behind his Democratic challengers in campaign fundraising and the polls, often coming in behind businessman Mark Connolly and Van Ostern, the former executive councilor. However, he managed a surprising second place finish, garnering 25 percent of the vote. Van Ostern received about 52 percent and Connolly took 20 percent.

On a Tuesday press call, Marchand chalked up his difficulty in fundraising to his timing and to entering the race late, but told reporters he enjoyed the experience.

“Keep in mind, last year, I got to second place in our primary despite very little time and consequently very little money,” he said.

Now, he’s not going to make the mistake of entering late again, and while it is definitely early to announce a run for the Corner Office in 2018 (more than a year-and-a-half out), Marchand said he couldn’t sit idly by under the leadership of President Donald Trump and Sununu.

“I realized there was an unprecedented passion unprecedented due to a lot of circumstances at the state and national level,” he said. “These are unusual times.”

Marchand has been quietly campaigning for the past few months, attending various Democratic meetings and doing meet-and-greets with his base. Already, he’s criticizing Trump’s and Sununu’s agendas. He pointed to Sununu’s first bill signing, which repealed required permits for concealed weapons.

“That’s not the direction we need to go in as a state,” he said. He also accused Sunnunu of wanting to weaken unions, suppress voter turnout, and privatize public education.

So what makes this campaign different than his last one?

He’s taking his job of fundraising more seriously, by hiring Nick Daggers of the CFO Consulting Group. Daggers specializes in fundraising for political campaigns.

Marchand only raised about $30,000 during his campaign last year, according to campaign filings with the secretary of state’s office. Van Ostern raised $1.1 million in just the primary election.

Daggers even wrote a blog post on his company’s website discussing the importance of early campaign fundraising.

“An early fundraising start will give the opportunity to build a solid infrastructure, allow the candidate more time to campaign, and most importantly give you the greatest chance at victory,” he wrote in 2013.

If Marchand can drum up a solid war chest before other candidates jump into the race, he could be a serious contender before he actually starts spending any of it.

Don’t expect too many changes in his platform, though. Marchand still supports legalizing and taxing marijuana and increasing the state’s business profits tax, which would supply millions of dollars to support state aid for full-day kindergarten and improve the state’s infrastructure, among other policies.

Yet, his record is already being criticized by the Republican Governors Association.

“From property taxes, to the gas tax, to the business profits tax cut, Marchand has consistently supported increasing the tax burden on New Hampshire families,” the group said in a statement. “While Steve Marchand may claim to be the most fiscally responsible candidate for governor, his campaign won’t be able to rewrite his record of supporting higher taxation on Granite State voters.”

Besides entering the race early, Marchand said he’s more committed to expanding his “knowledge base” and getting out to interact with voters on a grassroots level statewide.

“The more you go out and speak to groups and to people, the more you learn,” he said.

With this early momentum, Marchand also seeks to improve upon some mistakes his Democratic challenger made in the general election.

Van Ostern’s biggest struggle in his race was name recognition. A poll before the election found that only 10 percent of respondents did not recognize Sununu’s name, but about 28 percent never heard of Van Ostern. While Van Ostern benefited from a strong ground game from the New Hampshire Democratic Party and a bigger war chest than Sununu, the voters didn’t turn out for the Democratic nominee like they did at the top of the ticket.

By getting out of the gate early and meeting with voters now, Marchand is increasing his chances that come Election Day next year, the voters will remember who he is.

Yet, Democratic voters might also recognize Connolly’s name on the ballot. The former gubernatorial candidate is also mulling another run. He stirred some intrigue when he had a paid “sponsored post” on Facebook last week.

Connolly said Marchand’s announcement was too soon and that now is the “time to governor” and the “focus should be on the budget.”

“We should be working with our leadership in the Senate and House to get our best possible budget for the state,” he told NH1 News. “After the budget plays out… I’ll consider running again if the ideas I offered in 2016 aren’t being fully addressed. But certainly at this stage you don’t say if you’re in or you’re out.”

Marchand’s focus is on Trump and Sununu. He believes Sununu’s “full-throated” support for Trump during the campaign and still in his term, will ultimately be his downfall.

“It’s never too early to begin what’s going to be a long and difficult process,” he said. “It is difficult to defeat a first-term incumbent governor. I’m under no illusions. I will be a happy warrior. I will not be outworked. I know the magnitude it will take.”

Follow Kyle on Twitter.

Sign up for NH Journal’s must-read morning political newsletter.

Andru Volinsky Becomes Strong Critic of Gov. Sununu’s Agenda

A Democratic member of the state’s highest council is quickly becoming one of the fiercest critics of Gov. Chris Sununu’s agenda. Andru Volinsky, one of the two Democrats sitting on the five-member Executive Council, has been the most vocal about the differences in ideology between him and the governor, especially when it comes to education.

Volinsky, D-Concord, did not support Frank Edelblut’s nomination to be the next state education commissioner. During Edelblut’s nomination hearing in January, Volinsky pushed back on his background in public education and religious views.

The most tense exchange between the two men was over the fact that Edelblut sat on the board of Patrick Henry College, a private Christian liberal arts school in Virginia, and the the school had an “oath of faith” that all of its “agents” needed to sign, which included a belief in creationism over evolution.

“You will be the chief educator to whom all of the science teachers in our state will report. Do you subscribe to this such that the science teachers need to worry about whether you will require creationism to be taught alongside evolution?” Volinsky asked.

He treated his questioning of Edelblut like a court-room cross-examination, using poster board and an easel to showcase his points.

His long questioning at one point drew a rebuke from two of his Republican colleagues on the council, David Wheeler and Russell Prescott, who chastised him for taking too long and accused him of grandstanding. Edelblut, who previously made an unsuccessful bid to be the Republican gubernatorial nominee in 2016, was ultimately confirmed on a 3-2 vote that fell on party lines.

Volinsky also recently criticized Edelblut for not disclosing a $1,000 donation he made to the Croydon School Board’s legal defense fund in a school choice lawsuit brought on by the N.H. Department of Education, which he now has influence over as state education commissioner.

The state education department sued to block the town of Croydon’s practice of using public funds to pay private school tuition for some of its children. The dispute helped spur legislation, known as the “Croydon bill,” that would make the tuition practice explicitly legal.

Edelblut’s disclosure came after the Valley News reported that Croydon rejected a request to reveal the names of the donors to the $23,000 fund and Edelblut, for two weeks, declined to answer questions about his role.

Volinsky emailed Edelblut earlier this month to ask that he make public whether he had contributed to Croydon and to explain why he had not disclosed the donation previously.

“I contributed $1,000 to the Croydon legal defense fund,” Edelblut said in a reply email. “The contribution was made anonymously. I prefer the focus to stay on the cause and not draw attention to myself.”

Volinsky said he doesn’t think Edelblut’s contribution was a crime, but he should be more transparent about any potential conflict of interests.

“I was troubled by the fact that Mr. Edelblut did not respond to this request for disclosure and then reading his response, I’m equally concerned because he said the reason for anonymity was that he did not want to interfere with the cause,” Volinsky told NH1 News. “Think about it. He was running for governor. And the private schools [were] part of his platform. So he was already in the middle of this, number one. And number two, he’s describing the diversion of public funds to private schools as a cause for him. That is contrary to his testimony that he was merely an implementer, and it doesn’t speak well for him being candid during his confirmation process.”

He also said that he was concerned the new commissioner was seeking to further his own “agenda” rather than implement policy created by others. He tweeted, “Ed [Commissioner] secretly helped fund Croydon to support his ’cause’ — diverting public funds to pay for private schools. #edelblutagenda #nhpolitics”

It’s not surprising to see Volinsky come strongly out against Sununu’s education agenda. Volinsky is a lawyer who litigated landmark state education cases before the New Hampshire Supreme Court, and he ran for his seat on the Executive Council with the campaign promise to protect public school funding. Sununu has long been an advocate for school choice.

Volinsky’s comments about the “Edelblut agenda” have made waves in the conservative Twitter community, that sought to take his own words and discuss how the “Volinsky agenda” is bad for New Hampshire.

Volinsky then responded, reclaiming the term as his own and saying what he supports in his own education agenda.

Liberals and Democrats online rallied behind Volinsky’s agenda, posting why they agree and support him.

Volinsky even gave a speech about his agenda at to the New Hampshire State Teachers Association on March 17.

“Every morning with coffee I read my emails and my twitter feeds come through. This morning, some troll tweeted that Edelblut did nothing wrong and my complaints were only part of the #VolinskyAgenda,” he said. “I don’t respond to these things, but thought, the #VolinskyAgenda, huh? So, yea, I have an agenda. The #VolinskyAgenda is good schools, climate change, universal access to healthcare and reducing income inequality. That’s my damned agenda.”

Although it’s only been nearly four months since Sununu’s inauguration, many people are behind Volinsky’s agenda, which could possibly set him up for support for a gubernatorial bid in 2018 if he wanted to run.

It’s not often that Executive Councilors run for the corner office. The five-member regulatory board is charged with overseeing the administrative functions of the state government. The Executive Council advises the governor and provides the check for state contracts. The council also has veto power over pardons and state agency nominations by the governor.

For the first time in recent memory, the 2016 gubernatorial nominees were both Executive Councilors. Sununu was from Newfields in District 3 and Democratic gubernatorial nominee Colin Van Ostern of Concord sat in the District 2 seat.

With the council getting more public attention, it’s possible that Granite Staters could see more Executive Councilors running for higher office, and Volinsky could potentially be the next candidate.

Follow Kyle on Twitter.

UNH Pollster Makes Adjustment to Surveys in Age of Trump

Pollsters were heavily criticized after the presidential election for completely missing the mark on their predictions. Across the country, they were scratching their heads, trying to figure out how they didn’t see Republican Donald Trump defeating Democratic challenger Hillary Clinton.

Even the University of New Hampshire Survey Center had to take a step back and figure out what went wrong for them. In their last Granite State Poll before the November election, they predicted an 11-point victory for Clinton. She actually won New Hampshire by four-tenths of a percentage point, 47.6 to 47.2 percent.

Their last survey also had Democrat Colin Van Ostern beating Republican Chris Sununu by 11 percent, 55 to 44 percent, for the governor’s office. Sununu beat Van Ostern by 2 percent.

For many political strategists in the state, these way-off predictions confirmed their suspicions that the UNH survey is a “bad poll.” Even WikiLeaks exposed that the Clinton campaign didn’t think much of them.

“As always, this poll doesn’t have a good history of accuracy so we need to take it with a grain of salt,” Clinton campaign manager Robby Mook wrote to Clinton about a recent UNH pre-primary poll May 5, 2015.

“The state of survey research is not static and there are a lot of technological changes and problems,” said UNH Survey Center director Andrew Smith. “We do an analysis after each election to look for biases that come into the surveys.”

Smith said he believes he found the reason why his numbers were so off during the election and he tweaked his methodology to reflect that in his most recent UNH poll released this week.

In his past polls, he would weight the sample based on age, sex, and region of the state, in addition to the number of adults and telephone lines within households.  Often pollsters will weight their samples to adjust for oversampling and undersampling of key demographics. For example, more women than men, and more older people than younger people, answer polls in the Granite State, Smith said.

Now, Smith added level of education into the mix.

“It’s a difficult variable to use and in the past it didn’t have that much political correlation when we used it, so it didn’t make a difference statistically,” he told NH Journal. “However, we saw that in this election, the percentage of people with a college education make a significant difference, and had we weighted it going into the election, we would have been dead accurate on all of the results.”

This election showed that Trump won the support of white, blue collar workers with some college education or less. He also over-performed in rural areas, while Clinton did better in more wealthy suburban areas.

Smith said he found that men with some college education, known as the Trump coalition, were not participating in the UNH surveys as much as they did when it came time to vote.

“It’s a new phenomena in New Hampshire politics,” he said. “Is it due to Trump? Probably, but it certainly made a difference in our polls. Hopefully, our methods are improved.”

The UNH Survey Center released four polls since February 10. The first one, released last Friday, was on Trump’s approval ratings in the Granite State, which found that residents are pretty divided on the president.

Forty-three percent of adults said they approve of the job Trump is doing as president, while 48 percent are disapproving of his performance, and 8 percent are neutral, the poll found.

These numbers are close to the national trend. The Pew Research Center released Thursday the findings of its survey, which found 39 percent approve of his job performance, while 56 percent disapprove.

Looking at the different regions of the state, his approval rating also varies. This is where it will be interesting to keep an eye on the UNH Survey Center to see if their new weighting of education level has an impact on the data.

In the Central/Lakes, Connecticut Valley, and Manchester area, his approval ranges from 32 to 39 percent. Along the Massachusetts border, on the Seacoast, and in the North Country, his approval rating is more positive.

Credit: UNH Survey Center

Credit: UNH Survey Center

“It’s not surprising anymore,” Smith said. “Democratic political strength in the central part of the state and Connecticut River Valley is still there and Republicans have been strong in Massachusetts border towns and somewhat strong in the Greater Manchester area, like in Bedford.”

Smith said he found the political dynamics of the North Country interesting because that area is becoming more Republican. For years, it used to be an area of Democratic strength due to blue collar support for Democrats with union support.

“The character and self-identification of the people in the North Country is different than the rest of the state,” he said. “They have not been doing well economically and the Democratic Party has been having difficulty holding onto these blue collar people.”

As exhibited by Trump’s win, many of these blue collar workers in New Hampshire, and in other states across the country, lent their support to the president.

“All we are seeing right now is a group of people who are quasi-Republicans, who might not have participated in politics before, or turned out greater in number, but we’ll have to see how that plays out in the next several years,” Smith said.

The other polls released this week showed that the drug crisis is still the number one issue for residents in the state, Gov. Sununu has similar approval ratings at the start of his term as his predecessors, and all of New Hampshire’s congressional delegation have positive approval ratings.

 

Follow Kyle on Twitter.