#

It’s official. New Hampshire is ranked the 2nd best state in the country. Well, according to U.S. News & World Report, which released Tuesday the findings of its “Best State” rankings.

To some, the rankings are looked at as a symbol of the progress the Granite State has made. For others, it’s seen as a waste of time and not reflective of what’s actually going on in the state.

That’s true, at least, for Louisiana, which came in last place, and whose governor told The Boston Globe that the list used statistics and indicators from before his term. A spokesman for Gov. John Bel Edwards, a Democrat who took office in 2016 after years with Republicans in charge, said the ranking system could be helpful in guiding public policy, but it “lacks critical information.”

New Hampshire’s southern neighbor, Massachusetts, took the title as “best state” and state officials, on both sides of the aisle applauded the news.

Regardless if states agree with the rankings or not, it’s true that they do shape the public policy discussion and highlight issue areas where the state could improve.

Even Gov. Chris Sununu told reporters that the number 2 ranking “helps immensely” as he works to court new businesses from out-of-state.

“Though we have much work to do to ensure that our state continues to grow and thrive, this announcement is something that Granite Staters can be particularly proud of today,” he said in a press release. “It will also serve as useful information to those considering moving their home or business to New Hampshire.”

The survey was conducted by evaluating states across 68 metrics and tens of thousands of data points provided by McKinsey & Company’s Leading States Index. The seven different categories — healthcare, education, infrastructure, crime and corrections, opportunity, economy, and government — were weighted based on a national “citizen experience” survey asking people to prioritize each area in their state and their levels of satisfaction with government services. The combined ranking in each category determined a state’s order.

For New Hampshire, the state ranked 4th in healthcare, 3rd in education, 12th in infrastructure, 13th in crime and corrections, 1st in opportunity, 13th in economy, and 30th in government.

Photo Credit: U.S. News & World Report

As with any good news in the state, the second place ranking quickly became a battle over who should get credit for it. Can Sununu, who has been in office for only two months, tout it on his resume? Should former Democratic Gov. Maggie Hassan receive the praise? Or how about the Republican-controlled Legislature which passes the bills and laws impacting these rankings?

New Hampshire Democratic Party Chairman Ray Buckley said the state’s high ranking reflects the accomplishments of Hassan, who is now the freshman senator from the Granite State.

“Thanks to Senator Maggie Hassan’s steady leadership in the Governor’s office over the last four years, New Hampshire has been recognized as the number one state in the nation for economic opportunity and the number two-ranked state overall,” Buckley said in a statement.

“As Governor, Senator Hassan worked across party lines to balance two fiscally responsible budgets that protected critical economic priorities for our people and to pass and reauthorize our Medicaid expansion program that has strengthened the health and financial security of more than 50,000 hard-working Granite Staters,” he added. “She also froze in-state tuition at our universities and reduced tuition at community colleges, and cut taxes for our small businesses that are the backbone of our economy.”

Democratic politicians also said Hassan’s leadership deserves the credit for the high ranking. Sen. David Watters, D-Dover, said “Maggie Hassan made this happen.”

@Maggie_Hassan made this happen. In Concord, we must first do no harm to a thriving NH economy. @NHDems #nhpolitics https://t.co/IUtDmI2qYn

— David Watters (@SenDavidWatters) February 28, 2017

However, others said it doesn’t matter who is responsible for the high ranking. It should be on what the state needs to do in order to improve, said Greg Moore, state director for the New Hampshire chapter of the Americans for Prosperity.

Overrated: worrying about who's responsible for NH being #2 in state rankings. Underrated: worrying about why NH isn't #1. #nhpolitics

— Greg Moore (@GregMooreNH) March 1, 2017

For example, even where the state received high rankings, there are still some troubling statistics within those numbers. New Hampshire ranked 3rd for education. It came in first place for “Pre-K to 12” education, for its strong test scores and college readiness. Yet, it came in 39th for higher education due to high college costs and amount of student debt at graduation.

Sununu admitted to the high cost of tuition for the public university system. In his budget that he revealed in February, he didn’t increase funding for it either, but he revealed a plan that he believes will help solve the problem.

“I’ve put forth a plan for a $5 million scholarship program in the state, not to help 10 or 20 or 100 students, but over 8,000 students, [who] can really grab on to these funds and not just use them for our university system, but they can use it for community colleges, career schools, private schools,” he told NH1 News. “Whatever pathway they think will best provide them the tools to enter the workforce. We’re making those changes today and again I think we’ll see a lot of growth in those rankings as we move forward.”

Moore also said the state should focus on the business tax rate as a way to stimulate economic growth and encourage businesses to expand to New Hampshire. In the rankings, New Hampshire ranked near the bottom for GDP growth (32nd place). He pointed to the fact that the Granite State has a higher business profits tax rate (8.2 percent) than Massachusetts (8 percent). He is supportive of further reducing that rate.

“It certainly is fair to point out that that legislative leaders pushed for the tax cuts strongly, and that then-Gov. Hassan vetoed the budget over them, but thankfully we were able to make them a reality,” he told NH Journal. “If we want to be more competitive than Massachusetts, we need to continue to expand on the successful business tax relief efforts we’ve had to this point.”

By looking at the low rankings in the different categories for New Hampshire, lawmakers can figure out what they need to discuss to take the title of “Best State” away from the Bay State.

Although, New Hampshire is already technically the “Best State” since Massachusetts is a Commonwealth…if you want to be technical.

As a Mass ex-pat, I would point out that MA is not a state, it is a commonwealth, for what it's worth. Thus, NH best state. #nhpolitics https://t.co/uBKICQ4xVW

— Greg Moore (@GregMooreNH) February 28, 2017

Follow Kyle on Twitter.

When Sen. Dan Feltes, D-Concord, introduced a bill Wednesday, he sought a $25 million appropriation to the state’s affordable housing fund. Instead, he’s walking away with $5 million at best.

Senate Bill 94 would have put $25 million in the NH Housing Finance Authority’s Affordable Housing Fund to do what its name suggests — create more affordable housing for Granite Staters.

“This is a competitiveness issue,” Feltes testified before the Senate Capital Budget Committee. “We have to think about housing. I think, quite frankly, if there is one bill that’s a top priority, this is it. We have to do something right now and something significant.”

This funding mechanism isn’t anything new. It’s been around since its creation in 1988, under former Republican Gov. John H. Sununu, to be a revolving loan fund that provides low-interest loans and grants to build, rehabilitate, or acquire affordable housing. It’s first appropriation was $4.5 million. Since then, there have only been a few times when the Legislature has added cash to the fund. The fund didn’t see another dime until 2002, when $5 million was added to it.

In 2007, during Democratic Gov. John Lynch’s administration, approximately $750,000 was given to the fund. In 2015, $800,000 was added, and in 2016 $2 million was appropriated, but that money was earmarked for housing for people with substance use disorders.

The appropriation last year came to fruition on Tuesday where city and state officials broke ground for the Families in Transition’s Family Willows Substance Use Treatment Center and Recovery Housing in Manchester. The expanded treatment center and recovery housing focuses on women, and mothers with children dealing with the opioid crisis. It’s expected to provide treatment for about 400 women. Gov. Chris Sununu and U.S. Sen. Maggie Hassan attended the groundbreaking ceremony.

Feltes said the lack of funding for affordable housing is a “workforce, jobs, and competitiveness issue.” Testimony from leading experts on affordable housing in the state said all three areas are connected and important for New Hampshire’s future.

Without affordable housing in the state, people have trouble finding a place to live and workers end up living farther away from their jobs. Sometimes that’s too much for employees, so companies are left with an inadequate workforce, and without a strong workforce, or affordable housing, the state won’t be able to convince businesses to come and set up shop.

“You’ll hear about how we need a stronger workforce and affordable housing to keep the young working families that are demographically and economically needed as we move forward,” Feltes said.

Feltes is right. Lawmakers have heard testimony and had meetings from advocacy groups, government agencies, and political experts on how New Hampshire’s aging population will impact housing, transportation, and health care costs.

Already, workers are feeling the crunch of high housing costs, spending approximately 60 to 75 percent of their income on housing each month, according to Elissa Margolin, director of Housing Action NH, a coalition of organizations and businesses advocating for expanded workforce and affordable housing options.

Currently, the statewide median rent in New Hampshire is approximately $1,206 a month, she said, which is a 15 percent increase from five years ago. The vacancy rate, a factor in what’s driving the rising rents, is at 2 percent statewide and about 1 percent near the larger job centers.

The Granite State has already fallen behind the rest of New England and most of the country in terms of providing funding for affordable housing.

Rhode Island voters recently approved a $50 million bond for their state’s housing trust fund. They previously issued a $25 million bond in 2012 and a $50 million bond in 2006. Vermont uses a percentage of their real estate transfer tax for its housing trust fund, which is about $9 million a year.

In Maine, which has a similar population size to New Hampshire and similar workforce challenges, regularly funds its trust fund through their real estate transfer tax, with about $6 million invested annually. In 2009, a $50 million bond was approved, followed by another $15 million bond in 2015.

Connecticut and Massachusetts have also recently appropriated hundreds of millions of dollars a year to affordable housing.

Dean Christon, executive director of NH Housing Finance Authority, said the fund gives them “a lot of flexibility into how these dollars are being used.” They can be spent on housing from homeless shelters to senior housing to workforce rental housing.

David Juvet, senior vice president of public policy for the NH Business and Industry Association, said for the businesses he talks to, workforce and housing are the top issue for them.

When asked by Sen. David Watters, D-Dover, if the state should have “some skin in the game,” he responded that “there is some legitimate policy reason why the state should be involved with helping to assist economic development.”

The issue of affordable housing, workforce development, and business competitiveness of the state is usually a bipartisan issue. Everyone wants to see New Hampshire succeed. Affordable housing, especially when it comes to providing relief for the substance abuse crisis, also receives bipartisan support.

The bill only had Democratic support though, including Senate Democratic Leader Jeff Woodburn and House Democratic Leader Steve Shurtleff.

So why aren’t Republicans jumping on board? Well, it’s most likely the price tag of the legislation — $25 million can be a hard sell. During the hearing, Senate Majority Leader Jeb Bradley asked a witness if they would the measure if it were a different amount.

The committee also has to tackle a more pressing issue with the unanticipated charge costing the state millions of dollars to convert several state-owned buildings to natural gas after Concord Steam Corp. announced plans to close this year. The Senate Capital Budget Committee will her testimony on that bill in the coming weeks.

Ultimately, the committee unanimously voted on an amendment to changed the $25 million appropriation to the Affordable Housing Fund to only $5 million, and then they recommended that the bill “ought to pass” when it goes to the Senate soon.

Some activists say any little bit can help “move the needle” some more.

“We need the state’s oar int he water to help steer the ship,” said Evelyn Whelton of the Mount Washington Valley Housing Coalition. “A small push at the state level would influence housing growth and send a signal to businesses and those who want to move here, that we are engaged in economic development and are serious about it.”

Follow Kyle on Twitter.

Yet again, the House voted Thursday to kill a right-to-work bill. Since the early 1980s, the New Hampshire House has rejected right to work 35 times and despite Republican control of the State House, they still couldn’t get it done this year.

The bill, which would have prevented unions from requiring nonmembers to pay the cost of representing them, failed by a 200-177 vote, with 32 Republicans joining every Democrat to oppose the bill. Fifteen Republicans and four Democrats did not vote. After the bill was voted down, the House brought up a measure, which passed, stating the right-to-work issue could not be brought up again until the next legislative session in 2019.

So why did it fail again? The Democrats argue that right-to-work is union busting, creates a “free rider” problem, and is wrong for the Granite State. If it had passed, New Hampshire would have been the first state in the northeast to have a right-to-work law on the books. However, the politics of the vote reveals confrontational rhetoric, deep wounds within the Republican Party, and the blame game of who’s at fault for letting it fail.

“STRONG-ARMING” VOTES

Gov. Chris Sununu made it clear throughout his campaign that he wanted to see right-to-work pass in New Hampshire. He even mentioned it in his inauguration speech in January, saying how the law would be an important economic benefit for the state and would encourage businesses to come here.

Before the vote, the governor said he was not “banging the walls” trying to get House Republicans to vote a certain way. However, behind closed doors, he reportedly told the House Republican caucus on Thursday that “you’re either with us or against us.”

“You’re either a Republican or a Democrat,” and he invited opponents of right-to-work to “go leave and vote with the Democrats.”

High-ranking supporters of the bill also told lawmakers that if they won’t vote in favor of the bill, then figure out a way not to vote against, meaning stay home or abstain.

Rep. Matthew Scruton, R-Rochester, said he was encouraged by his colleagues to stay home because “the roads were slick.”

“I did not listen to that advice,” he told the Fosters Daily Democrat. “This bill was being pushed by several out-of-state special interest groups and was not going to help New Hampshire workers.”

State Republican Party Chairman Jeanie Forrester also displayed some of her strength in her newly elected position at a Wednesday press conference, where she said “for those folks who support the governor,” they will be rewarded in the next election cycle with campaign funds.

Even for outside groups, like the state chapter of Americans for Prosperity, said they wouldn’t support lawmakers who broke their pledge. During each election, the group asks all legislators to sign a five-part pledge, which includes support for right-to-work.

Reps. David Miltz, of Derry, and Rio Tilton, of Seabrook, signed the pledge, but voted against the bill Thursday.

“Have I mentioned that we don’t treat pledge breakers well,” AFP state director Greg Moore told the Union Leader. “If we don’t do something when you break a pledge, the pledge doesn’t mean a whole lot, right?”

This pressure from House leadership, the governor’s office, state party, and outside groups might not have convinced “on-the fence” Republicans who are current or former union members, or know people who are in a union. Rep. Tim Josephson, D-Canaan, said strong-arming the House Republican caucus into voting in favor of something they don’t agree with alienates them.

When you tell your caucus "you're w/us or against us" you alienate those who actually rep THE PEOPLE. #nhpolitics https://t.co/BgpOoaWfpc

— Tim Josephson (@TimJosephsonNH) February 16, 2017

For some lawmakers, they are concerned about how their vote might play in their home district come election time next year or if they choose to run for local office.

That happened to House Speaker Shawn Jasper in 2012. He lost an election to serve as Hudson selectman, even though he served on the board for years and was the incumbent chair. He blamed his loss on his support for right to work, which failed by one vote in the House in 2011.

THE JASPER BLAME GAME

Jasper’s role in the vote is also being questioned by the more zealous right-to-work lawmakers. Some say he didn’t try hard enough to convince people to vote for it and are blaming him for the bill’s failure. Jasper is pushing back saying that’s not true, he supports right-to-work, but it was always going to be a tough sell in the House. Jasper was also endorsed this past election by the SEIU Local 1984, State Employees Association. That endorsement probably didn’t help his cause either.

The speaker barely won his gavel for a second term after defeating a fervent right-to-work supporter in Rep. Laurie Sanborn, R-Bedford. After the December vote, Jasper said he recognized that his party was fractured, but he hoped to move forward and work with all Republicans.

“I think we’d all like to move beyond the issues of the past,” he told reporters at the time. “I’m certainly going to be working with the people who were not in favor of me being re-elected.”

To prove he stood with the governor, Jasper stepped down from the speaker’s podium, went to his seat, and cast a vote in favor of right-to-work. After the vote, he echoed a similar message as he did in December.

“What I’m trying to do, and not everyone appreciates this, is to avoid tearing my caucus apart,” he said.

Despite his sentiments, some Republicans still think his support his disingenuous. Some say he “stacked” the House Labor, Industrial and Rehabilitative Services Committee with anti-right-to-work Republicans.

“There has been an ongoing attempt by a number of Right-to-Work supporters, who facing the possibility that SB 11 will be defeated in the House on Thursday, are attempting to portray me as the reason for such a defeat, alleging that I had ‘stacked’ the Labor Committee,” Jasper said in an email to House Republicans on Wednesday before the vote. “Nothing could be further from the truth.”

At the press conference with Forrester, Jasper pushed back against making right-to-work a “litmus test.”

“I’ve said all along that this is a difficult issue,” he said. “I don’t think this is an issue that should define a good Republican versus a bad Republican. I would not characterize anyone who votes against this as a bad Republican.”

Jasper was then criticized by former NHGOP Chairman Jennifer Horn on Facebook, saying he sent “a clear and consistent message against this legislation.”

“Speaker Jasper has failed the governor and he has failed our party,” she said. “Worst of all, he has failed New Hampshire.

Jasper quickly shot back, saying “her comments shows a lack of understanding of the legislative process and a lack of understanding of the individuality of House members. Republicans are not just mind-numbed robots who do what they are told.”

LACK OF UNIFIED CAUCUS OR MESSAGE

Jasper is right in that the New Hampshire Republican Party is fractured and this right-to-work bill further exposed the wounds that have yet to be bandaged. Among the 32 Republicans who voted against the legislation, several of them were from Jasper’s leadership team.

Twenty of the 32 Republicans were from Rockingham County and out of 10 representatives from Derry’s delegation, seven of them opposed it.

The vote also split former allies, including President Donald Trump supporters. Rep. Fred Doucette, R-Salem, a former co-chair of Trump’s campaign and a member of the labor committee, voted against right-to-work. Doucette is also a former union member and said many of his constituents are also union members.

Rep. Al Baldasaro, R-Londonderry, chair of Trump’s state campaign veterans’ coalition, supported the bill, saying “union members in the Republican Party failed us.”

House Democratic Leader Steve Shurtleff told WMUR that the GOP leadership “is trying to paint it as being Democrat versus Republican, but it is bipartisan. I don’t think it plays well to tell Republicans who disagree with this that they will be ostracized by the party going forward. I’ve always told my caucus they are free to vote their consciences.”

It remains to be seen how Jasper and the House leadership plan to unify the Republican caucus, but if another controversial vote comes up, expect to see some divide in the party again.

Rep. Sean Morrison, R-Epping, also voted against the bill and said the right-to-work fight was more of “a matter of message than substance.”

“I too believe this is about freedom … freedom of businesses to conduct themselves as they see fit, and freedom from overreach by government in private business matters,” he told the Union Leader. So let’s lower energy costs, lower business taxes, less red tape and less government interference in employee/employer relationships, as we should in the Live Free or Die state.”

Sununu said he was “deeply disappointed” in the result of the vote, but isn’t going to let this failure define his term.

“It is clear that some House members did not understand this opportunity to unleash the untapped potential of our economy,” he said in a statement. “I know that we can continue to work collaboratively on initiatives that will drive new business into the state. Right-to-work, though important, is just one piece of a broader effort to promote economic development, signaling to our nation’s business community that New Hampshire is open for business.”

WHAT COMES NEXT?

Expect to see a push on further cutting business taxes in the state. Former state Rep. Joe Sweeney also hopes that becomes a focus of the administration.

#NHHouse should accelerate business tax cuts to appeal for new businesses to move here. Need to make up for #RTW failure. #nhpolitics

— Joe Sweeney (@JoeSweeneyNH) February 16, 2017

There’s also a national right-to-work bill that has been introduced in Congress. If that passes and Trump signs it, New Hampshire will have to comply with it. It has a possibility of making it through, since Republicans hold majorities in the House and Senate, but it’s almost certain that Democrats would filibuster the bill if it reaches the Senate floor.

It’ll also be important to keep an eye on the 32 House Republicans that voted against right-to-work next year if they seek reelection. Will the NHGOP find someone to challenge those representatives in a primary fight? Will they see any funds from the party for reelection?

However, don’t expect right-to-work to be gone for good. If the GOP can hold on to the State House in 2018, it can push the legislation again.

“It’s always been a heavy lift,” Moore told the Union Leader. “This cause can succeed but only if you make it a prolonged message which galvanizes the support for free enterprise that is out there across this state. We’re bowed but not beaten.”

Follow Kyle on Twitter.

Time and time again, New Hampshire lawmakers are told that they should be concerned about the state’s aging population. What kind of workforce is going to replace baby boomers as they retire and how does this older population impact housing, health care, child care, and transportation costs?

A governor’s commitment of encouraging young people to stay or come back to the state is usually revealed in their budget proposal, and Gov. Chris Sununu’s recent speech provides some clues on how he plans to do that.

In his Tuesday presentation to members of the House and Senate Finance Committees, Sununu was asked to cite his priorities in his budget.

“With me, everything is about not what we do in two years, it’s what we do for five, 10, and 20 years down the road,” the governor said. “So, I’m really trying my best to bring a philosophy of true long-term planning and long-term thinking. It’s about kids. It’s about what’s happening with our students, what’s happening with our younger population, making sure we can create a foundation there that can be lasting.”

Granted, it’s nearly impossible for Sununu or the Legislature to impact natural population change. As baby boomers retire, the state’s working population, aged 20 to 64, will begin a steady decline, dropping 50,000 persons from 2010 to 2030, which would strain already tight labor supplies and restrain economic growth and vitality, according to research from the New Hampshire Center for Public Policy Studies (NHCPPS).

New Hampshire’s two-year policymaking process also doesn’t help lawmakers’ ability to anticipate and plan for long-term demographic change, but it’s something they should focus on, the Center argues in a 2016 demographic report.

Of course, how to attract young people also differs based on party beliefs. The Republican solution is usually to cut business taxes to make New Hampshire more competitive, with the understanding that more business growth will bring more jobs, which will bring more young people to the state. Democrats believe that New Hampshire needs a massive infrastructure investment, such as a commuter rail connecting Manchester and Nashua to Boston.

Steve Norton, executive director of NHCPPS, said it’s a constant battle of perspectives and there is always going to be some state investment to encourage young people to stay.

Besides making decisions on which projects to fund, Norton said it can be difficult for lawmakers to decide which age group to focus on. Should they look at keeping early 20-somethings in the state or the late-20s-early-30s group who might want to come back?

“We have always lost 20-somethings for reasons that are obvious,” he told NH Journal. “It’s not always the most exciting place or they want to move to an urban center like Boston or [Washington] D.C. When I think about this question of workforce development, it’s really that 30-something population that is coming here.”

Norton pointed to policies in Sununu’s budget that help “create a connection to New Hampshire,” which would encourage a young person to stay after graduating from college or to come back to settle down. He focused on Sununu’s creation of a scholarship program and full-day kindergarten proposal.

Sununu proposed a new $5 million-a-year scholarship fund to assist high school students to attend colleges, universities, or workforce training programs in the Granite State. He said the Governor’s Scholarship Fund would be administered by a proposed commission and would be based partially on need to serve “at least 1,000 students each year.”

He is also seeking $9 million a year to fund full-day kindergarten. He said the funds, which would be awarded in addition to education adequacy grants, would target communities that need it most. It’s expected that he will receive some pushback from Republicans on this policy proposal, so expect the amount of funding to change in subsequent versions of the budget.

“Both of those policies have an impact on young people and there’s an increasing likelihood that they would come back or stay,” Norton said. “Sununu’s expansion of kindergarten could be an important distinction for people who want to start a family, since we know decisions that many people make are based on the strength of the local school systems.”

It can be argued that Sununu isn’t investing enough in higher education, since he didn’t propose increasing the state’s community college or university system’s budget. Without an increase in funding, it’s highly likely they will increase tuition for the next academic school year. The University System of New Hampshire is one of the most expensive public universities in the country and graduating students have some of the highest student loan debt in the nation. With high debt, young people might take more lucrative jobs in urban centers or in other states.

Norton said organizations and businesses that support workforce development and incentivize young people with benefits, such as loan forgiveness programs, could pave the way for a younger and stronger New Hampshire economy.

Kate Luczko, president and CEO of Stay Work Play New Hampshire — a nonprofit group focused on retaining young people in the state — echoed Norton’s sentiments, saying her organization partners with businesses to make their opportunities better known to high school and college students.

“I’m trying to get this message across that being a townie is cool,” she told NH Journal. “Somehow, kids feel like if they want to be seen as successful that means leaving New Hampshire, and there is this stigma of not being cool if you stick around.”

Norton said even the symbolism of having a young governor could benefit New Hampshire’s demographic trajectory. Sununu, at the age of 42, is currently the youngest governor in the United States.

“Symbolically, we also have a young governor who is focusing on economic development,” he said.

In his inauguration speech, Sununu said he was committed to reaching out to “100 companies in 100 days out-of-state to invite them in. You will not get all 100, but we will try. You can’t catch any fish if you don’t go fishing.”

“Even if none of that comes to fruition, you’re creating the symbolism that New Hampshire is a business-friendly and family-friendly place,” Norton said. “But as always, the devil is in the details. For many of the proposals he put forward, we’re going to have to wait and see how the legislative process defines them. There are a lot of potential impacts but we’ll have to wait and see what happens.”

The governor’s budget proposal is expected to go through many rewrites and changes in the next few months as it moves through the House and Senate. While he helps set policy, it’s up to the Legislature to decide what proposals will be funded.

There are a number of education, health care, and child care bills in front of the Legislature, but Norton said he’s not seeing legislation focusing on how to tackle the state’s demographic struggles. He is optimistic, though, since Rep. Neal Kurk, R-Weare, introduced a bill creating a demographic study committee, who would make recommendations to lawmakers about how to tackle the aging problem in the state. It recently passed in the House and now it goes to the Senate.

Luczko said is also hopeful that communication between businesses, lawmakers, advocacy groups, and policy experts will improve as they work together on their mission of attracting young people.

“I cringe when we see duplication of efforts and someone starts a new effort that’s already being done,” she said. “There is a fine line between ‘the more the merrier,’ but then there’s something to say about being more effective if we combine resources and are more strategic about it.”

Follow Kyle on Twitter.

As expected, it didn’t take long for Democrats in New Hampshire to point out what proposals they didn’t like in Gov. Chris Sununu’s budget speech last week.

“I am encouraged by statements of Governor Sununu in support of full-day kindergarten and funding for the developmentally disabled, but as we all know, the devil is in the details,” said House Democratic Leader Steve Shurtleff in a statement. “The Governor’s budget address made no mention of the successful NH Health Protection Program, leaving serious unanswered questions for the 50,000 Granite Staters who rely on the program for their health care coverage.”

But the more divisive statements came from the Senate Democratic Caucus and New Hampshire Democratic Party (NHDP). While they applauded Sununu for keeping several initiatives put in place by former Gov. Maggie Hassan, they criticized him for not fully funding the Alcohol Fund to combat the opioid crisis.

“And in the midst of a substance abuse crisis, we need to find out why Governor Sununu chose not to fully fund the Alcohol Fund, which supports our effort to combat this crisis,” said Senate Minority Leader Jeff Woodburn in a statement.

NHDP Chairman Ray Buckley echoed Woodburn’s sentiments saying he was “disheartened to see that the governor did not fully fund the state’s alcohol fund, which would provide key resources to combat this epidemic.”

The Alcohol Abuse Prevention and Treatment Fund was created in 2000 by the Legislature, and it’s a mechanism that takes 5 percent of the gross profits from the sale of alcohol to support education, prevention, treatment, and recovery programs for alcohol and drugs. The fund has only been fully financed one time since its inception, which was in the 2003-2004 biennium — the first year it began. In his budget speech, Sununu proposed increasing the funds to 3.4 percent, double the 1.7 percent rate the previous budget had set.

In each budget after that, the governor or Legislature transferred the revenue to the general fund and only appropriated a small amount to the Alcohol Fund, which means Republican Gov. Craig Benson and Democratic Govs. John Lynch and Maggie Hassan suspended funding during their terms.

In the most recent budget, for the 2016-2017 budget biennium, Hassan and the House proposed suspending the funding formula. Hassan proposed giving the fund $9.6 million over the two-year period, but the Republican-controlled House dropped that figure to $3.6 million. Senators proposed bringing the formula back and lowering the cap to 1.7 percent, which would give the fund $6.7 million.

If the fund was fully financed for the whole biennium, it would have received approximately $19 million, still nearly $10 million less than what Hassan suggested. After the Senate put forward its recommendation for the budget, the NHDP called their budget “unbalanced and partisan” with “irresponsible gimmicks.”

It’s interesting that the NHDP would criticize Sununu for not fully funding the Alcohol Fund, when previous Democratic governors did not fully fund it either.

“We haven’t had a Democratic governor who has fought as hard as Sununu is fighting for it [the Alcohol Fund] right now,” said former state Rep. Joe Hannon, R-Lee, who made his mark in the Legislature by focusing on the opioid crisis.

“No one has taken the leadership on this, and the battle will be in the House and Senate Finance Committees,” he told NH Journal. “I’m always happy when the governor speaks about how he is addressing substance abuse treatment. He gets it, and that’s something I haven’t seen in awhile from leadership in the state.”

New Futures, a nonprofit group looking to curb substance abuse in the state, is a fervent supporter of fully funding the Alcohol Fund at 5 percent. They believe the money from the non-lapsing, flexible fund could be used for creative and innovative solutions to stop the opioid epidemic.

“We are encouraged by the fact that Gov. Sununu has increased the funding for the Alcohol Fund by doubling the current amount,” said Linda Paquette, president and CEO of New Futures. “However, we anxiously await the release of House Bill 2 in order to clarify the support in the budget for addressing New Hampshire’s substance abuse epidemic.”

Paquette said she was “very curious” what Sununu meant when he talked about “incentives” with the Alcohol Fund.

“First, I propose we double the Alcohol Fund, increasing these important resources by more than $3 million and creating incentives to ensure that those funds are truly spent,” he said in his Thursday speech.

Pacquette said she is hopeful that the Alcohol Fund will be a priority for the Republican-controlled State House because the funds are “not restricted.” New Hampshire is expected to receive federal money from grants and the 21st Century Cures Act, legislation approved by Congress and former President Barack Obama in December 2016, which gives $6.3 billion in funding to circumvent the opioid crisis and enhance medical research and development.

“The Alcohol Fund can be used to fill gaps where grant money and federal funds are restricted for certain uses,” Paquette told NH Journal. “It can be used for supporting recovery housing and investing in early childcare as a substance abuse prevention strategy. He [Sununu] clearly has made the opioid crisis a priority of his administration.”

Sununu presented his budget to the House and Senate Finance Committee in a Tuesday joint committee meeting. The House Finance Committee will take a look at his budget first and put forward recommendations to the full House later in the spring. After passage in the House, the Senate Finance Committee will review that budget and put it up for a vote to the full Senate, before returning to the governor’s desk for his signature or veto.

“We’re going to double that fund and get the money where we can have a lot of impact,” he said in the meeting. “Not just in the high-density areas, but really all across the state. None of our communities have been immune to that.”

The Senate Finance Committee recommended passage of Senate Bill 196 on Tuesday, which was amended to increase the Alcohol Fund to the 3.4 percent rate proposed by Sununu. If the House changes the formula or suspends it in its budget recommendations, this bill could override it and fund it at the rate Sununu proposed.

“This is a sound proposal that I and a majority of the Senate Finance Committee supported today by recommending a bill to do just that,” said Senate Finance Chair Gary Daniels, R-Milford, in a statement. “We have established a number of initiatives that serve to stem substance abuse, including the heroin crisis, and I know we can do more with the funding Governor Sununu has proposed as part of his budget.”

Follow Kyle on Twitter.

Gov. Chris Sununu is quickly making education reform a priority during his two-year term. Just take a look at his Thursday budget speech.

“This budget and this administration recognizes local control in public education as the touchstone of policymaking, and that state government’s role in shaping education policy should be focused strictly on benefitting students and their families,” he said. “A major goal of this budget is to expand educational opportunity and choice for kids and their families.”

In his 2018-2019 biennium budget, Sununu focused on four areas of education reform that he wants to accomplish: full-day kindergarten, charter schools, higher education, and school building aid.

FULL-DAY KINDERGARTEN

Sununu’s proposal includes $9 million a year for full-day kindergarten. He said the funds, which would be awarded in addition to education adequacy grants, would target communities that need it most.

After his speech, Democrats sought clarity on how it would be determined which communities received funding.

“We also do not know from his presentation which communities will get full-day kindergarten and which ones won’t…” said New Hampshire Democratic Party Chairman Ray Buckley in a statement.

Sununu said the formula would be based on a community’s property wealth, the number of students on subsidized lunch programs, and the number of English as a second language students.

“So I am proud today to be the first governor to deliver a real full-day kindergarten program for communities across the state,” he said.

Some Democrats, including gubernatorial nominee Colin van Ostern, were in favor of requiring all school districts to offer full-day kindergarten. Sununu’s budget leaves the decision up to individual cities and towns, but if they opt for full-day kindergarten, they’ll receive more funds.

Regardless if a school district offers half-day or full-day kindergarten, they only receive 50 percent of the state’s per-pupil grant compared to students in other grades. Sununu’s proposal would give the neediest communities an opportunity for additional funds to make full-day kindergarten a possibility.

CHARTER SCHOOLS

In his speech, Sununu called for increasing charter school funding by $15 million.

“And in addition to fully funding the adequacy formula, funding for charter school is stabilized and enhanced in this budget by linking funding to the state’s average per-pupil expenditure,” he said. “This will increase funding for our charter schools by $15 million, helping eliminate uncertainty and volatility for administrators, teachers and parents.”

This is probably one of the more contentious proposals in his budget, and it will be interesting to see if that amount changes as it moves through the budget process in the Legislature.

All of New Hampshire’s 25 charter schools, except for one, rely mostly on state and federal funding, and all but one are not supported by local property taxes. In the Granite State, per-pupil expenditures for charter schools are about $6,500, which is lower than traditional public schools, which averages about $14,900 for the 2015-2016 academic year.

Sununu is a fervent school choice advocate and he’s hoping the Legislature passes charter school-friendly bills during the legislative session. Democrats claim charter schools take away state money that could go to improve traditional public schools, and they lack equal proportions of disabled or special needs students, who are then forced into the traditional public school system.

Senate Majority Leader Jeff Woodburn told NH1 News that diverting public school funding to charter schools “is the wrong direction. It doesn’t make our state stronger or our kids better.”

HIGHER EDUCATION

It’s often a criticism of the Granite State that the population is aging and young people are leaving . The million dollar question is how does the state plan on encouraging them to stay?

Higher education advocates see increased funding to the state’s community college and university system as a key investment into the future workforce of New Hampshire.

Sununu said he agrees, but university officials and higher education activists remain skeptical.

“Our higher ed system is a critical part of ensuring New Hampshire students have an opportunity to learn beyond their high school years and enter the New Hampshire workforce with real-world skills,” Sununu said in his speech. “My budget approaches post-secondary education strictly in terms of students and outcomes. The university and community college system of New Hampshire are key to these efforts, and we’ll continue to make investments in our partnership.”

He proposes a “significant increase” to the operating budget of the community college system, to the tune of $10 million for capital infrastructure investments.

However, it’s not immediately clear where those funds are coming from. A few months ago, New Hampshire’s Community College system asked lawmakers for about $49 million for 2018 and $52.5 million for 2019, an increase from about $44 million in the current budget.

In Sununu’s budget, it appears that the community college system’s proposed budget is the same amount of funding as in the current budget. He could pull the funds from infrastructure funds, but it wasn’t exactly clear where he would do that.

University System of New Hampshire (USNH) officials were not thrilled that they didn’t see an increase in their budget either. Sununu’s proposal would provide $81 million a year to the university system — the same level as the current budget. USNH asked for $88.5 million in 2018 and $93.5 million in 2019.

Without an increase in funding, it’s likely tuition will once again increase for the next academic school year at USNH colleges by no more than 2.5 percent for in-state students. The actual figure will be known later this spring after trustees set the rate.

In a statement, USNH “expressed deep disappointment” that the governor’s budget did not provide additional funding, which would have allowed the system to freeze or lower tuition for in-state students.

“Keeping our public, four-year colleges and universities affordable is not only critical for hard-working New Hampshire families, but also for the many businesses that depend on highly skilled talent to grow, thrive and succeed,” USNH Chancellor Todd Leach said in a statement.

Full time in-state tuition at UNH is $14,410 for the 2016-17 academic year. Room and board varies depending on the type of housing and meal plan, but costs range between $10,000 to $14,000 a year.

USNH receives the lowest state funding per capita of any university system in the county and tuition costs for New Hampshire students are some of the highest in the nation, which leads to students also having some of the highest student loan debt in the country after graduation.

Rep. Wayne Burton, D-Durham, and a former college administrator, criticized Sununu’s “cold shouldering of USNH.

“I’m deeply disappointed that Gov. Sununu, though professing the need for an educated workforce, shortchanged the principle player in that effort, our state university system,” Burton told the Fosters Daily Democrat.

Instead of increasing funds to the university system, Sununu proposed a new $5 million-a-year scholarship fund to assist high school students to attend colleges, universities or workforce training programs in the Granite State.

“We have to understand that not every student travels the same workforce path, and we need to build a system that provides flexibility to work within their lifestyle,” he said. “This scholarship program is designed, not to help 10, or 20, or even a 100 students, but at least 1,000 students each year, and we’ll open workforce gateways like never before.”

He said the Governor’s Scholarship Fund would be administered by a proposed commission and would be based, partially, on need.

SCHOOL BUILDING AID

The state is expected to end the current two-year budget with an $80 million surplus, and most of that money will be going to one-time expenses to fix roads and bridges, and provide school building aid through the “Infrastructure Revitalization Fund.”

“For the first time in a long time we’re going to give a boost to school building aid by granting dollars directly to communities to rebuild our classroom infrastructure,” Sununu said. “Specifically, schools with health and safety issues in towns that might not be able to otherwise address things like asbestos, lead paint, or other critical safety issues and these are where our school building aid will be targeted and funded.”

It’s unclear exactly how much of the $80 million surplus would be available at the end of the current fiscal year, and how it would it be allocated to cities and towns, but Republicans applauded the proposal during the governor’s speech.

Follow Kyle on Twitter.

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

After Gov. Chris Sununu released his $12.1 billion biennium budget on Thursday, the overall sentiment among Democrats and Republicans was “the devil is in the details.”

Those details will be hammered out in the next few months as the House and Senate make their recommendations to Sununu’s 2018-2019 budget. Overall it appears both parties believe it’s a solid budget with room for improvement. Republicans praised it for being “a realistic, conservative budget which is transparent, forward thinking and strengthens education, supports our cities and towns and focuses on solving real problems that have plagued taxpayers for years,” according to Senate leadership.

Democrats were glad that Sununu kept some of his campaign promises, but were also critical that he didn’t provide too many details on proposals they deemed important, including Medicaid expansion and full-day kindergarten.

“I am very concerned about the $500 million cut from state agency budget requests and what that could mean to the citizens of New Hampshire,” House Minority Leader Steve Shurtleff said in a statement. “The governor’s budget address made no mention of the successful NH Health Protection Program, leaving serious unanswered questions for the 50,000 Granite Staters who rely on the program for their health care coverage.”

In his budget proposal, Sununu includes more than $50 million in spending to address an existing shortfall in the Department of Health and Human Services’ (DHHS) fiscal 2017 budget.

In January, DHHS projected a $65.9 million dollar budget shortfall. Commissioner Jeffrey Meyers pushed back against the accusation his department overspent, claiming instead Medicaid costs did not decline as the legislature expected during the last budget debate. That put Sununu in the awkward position of writing a budget with an unexpected hole in it, while also figuring out how to handle Medicaid for the state.

As for the deficit, Sununu is requiring the commissioner to make quarterly reports to him and members of the legislature leadership “about where we actually stand on our true costs, so we can become a more nimble government that’s responsive, not just reactive.”

“As governor, I won’t make people wait until after an election to discover we may have a shortfall,” he said in remarks during a Thursday joint legislative session. “We have to be transparent. We have to be honest with the people and honest with ourselves.”

Democrats’ claim he didn’t mention Medicaid expansion is true. He only mentioned the program when talking about the DHHS deficit, since that’s where the department says its money went.

“And where we have failed in the past, I am pushing for true accounting of our Medicaid program so we can reconcile estimated Medicaid payments to actual costs,” Sununu said. “And as we go forward, be sure that we won’t wait two years to check in on them again.”

He doesn’t say if he plans to expand, repeal, or replace NH Health Protection Program. The Medicaid program in New Hampshire received bipartisan support in the legislature last year when lawmakers extended the program until Dec. 31, 2018.

That legislation gives Sununu wiggle room as he attempts to balance politics and health coverage for the state. As Washington debates repealing the Affordable Care Act, several states including New Hampshire are waiting to see how Congress and President Donald Trump’s administration handles the issue.

Sununu was reluctant to say anything about Medicaid on the campaign trail, commenting he was worried about financing the program in the long-term, but didn’t mention repeal. Not wanting to permanently fund the program, he told voters it was better to let the federal government make the first move.

Before the budget speech, Democrats waited to see if Sununu would fulfill his campaign promise of funding full-day kindergarten. His proposal includes $9 million a year for full-day kindergarten, but after the speech Democrats sought clarity on determining which communities get funding.

.@ChrisSununu needs to explain targeted full day k. $9 million a year while giving $15 million to charter schools? #nhpolitics

— NH Young Democrats (@NHYoungDems) February 9, 2017

Sununu said funds, which will be awarded in addition to education adequacy grants, would target the communities that need it most based on a community’s property wealth, the number of students on subsidized lunch programs, and communities with a high number of English as a second language students.

“So I am proud today to be the first governor to deliver a real full-day kindergarten program for communities across the state,” he added.

There’s a big distinction to be made with the state “mandating” full-day kindergarten and simply funding full-day kindergarten. Several Democrats sought to require school districts to offer full-day kindergarten, but Sununu’s budget doesn’t make that a requirement. He’s leaving it up to the individual cities and towns, but they’ll receive more funds if they opt-in.

In towns that vote to implement full-day kindergarten, school districts presently only receive 50 percent of the state’s per-pupil grant for kindergarten students. Under Sununu’s plan, the neediest communities can apply for additional grants to make the program possible.

Rep. Victoria Sullivan, R-Manchester, who sits on the House Education Committee, said she wasn’t thrilled about Sununu’s full-day kindergarten funding proposal. Sullivan said it should be a local community’s decision, and could eventually lead to mandated full-day kindergarten.

I agree with @NHSpeaker. This is a huge issue 4 me. Parental & local control in jeopardy. Next step=Mandated K. #NHPolitics https://t.co/HuCwQVuCv9

— Victoria Sullivan (@VSullivan4NH) February 9, 2017

House Speaker Shawn Jasper told reporters Sununu’s full-day kindergarten proposal probably won’t be included in the House version of the budget.

“I think that is going to be a stretch,” he said. “I think if you looked around the hall, you probably didn’t see a lot of enthusiasm on the part of Republicans on that issue. We’ll have different priorities in some areas than the governor has, certainly. I don’t think there’s ever been a budget that’s gone into the House and come out looking the same way, but he’s given us a great starting point.”

The two-year budget must be passed by June 30 to go into effect on July 1 of the next fiscal year. The House Finance Committee will look at Sununu’s budget before making a recommendation to the full House. After the House passes its version of a budget, it goes to the Senate Finance Committee, which will recommend its own proposals to the full Senate, before going to the governor’s desk for his signature or veto in spring.

Follow Kyle on Twitter.

Another year is gone and New Hampshire is still one of the states hit hardest by the opioid crisis. Now, a new legislature is again trying to figure out how to curb the rampant use of opioids.

Lawmakers might be hesitant to allocate more funds to the effort, since it can appear previous funding has had little effect. But advocacy groups, health experts, and recovering addicts say money is only part of the solution. According to them, the state needs to be more flexible with how the funds are spent and amenable to creative solutions.

That was one of the themes discussed at the State House on Tuesday, where advocates asked the Senate Finance Committee to approve a bill funding the state’s Alcohol Fund.

It’s a unique mechanism created by the legislature in 2000 that takes 5 percent of the gross profits from the sale of alcohol to support alcohol and drug education, abuse prevention, and treatment programs. In the past year, approximately $19 million would have gone to service providers and recovery centers that are dealing with the opioid crisis at a local level.

The Alcohol Fund has only been fully financed one time in its history. In previous biennium budgets, the governor or legislature have transferred the revenue to the general fund and only appropriated a small amount to the Alcohol Fund.

Supporters of the bill say the fund is a creative solution the state should use because it already exists in law and is designed to aid prevention and treatment of issues like the opioid epidemic.

“Two governors have called substance abuse the biggest problem in this state,” Keene Democrat Sen. Jay Kahn said, noting Gov. Chris Sununu called for putting more money into treatment, prevention, and recovery in his inauguration speech.

“I completely agree,” Kahn added. “This legislation provides an innovative solution to the real problems confronting the state.”

A similar proposal was introduced in the Boston City Council, where councilors tried to add a 2 percent tax on alcohol sold in Boston to help fund substance abuse prevention programs. The council eventually voted against the proposal.

New Hampshire’s Alcohol Fund is different. In the “Live Free or Die” state, voters wouldn’t be too happy about a tax on their alcohol (a major reason why Bay Staters cross the border). The Alcohol Fund uses revenue the state is already making from sales.

That’s the reason former state Sen. Ned Gordon, R-Bristol, authored that 2000 law establishing the fund. And while it’s focus back then was mostly on alcohol abuse and prevention, the language was broad enough to evolve over time to include other substance abuse.

“The state adopted a policy that if we are going to aggressively market alcohol, we are going to accept the consequences,” Gordon testified Tuesday. “You can’t be just committed to a treatment program. You have to be committed to a recovery, so we need more resources going to prevention and recovery. Unless you provide the funding to do it, you won’t have the capacity to do it.”

While the Alcohol Fund revenue goes to the Governor’s Commission on Alcohol and Drug Abuse Prevention, Intervention, and Treatment for their determination on what contracts, programs, and centers need the funds most, advocates said more funding could be used for New Hampshire’s Safe Station programs — another unique and creative approach to the opioid crisis.

Safe Station is the brainchild of Chris Hickey of the Manchester Fire Department. The program launched in May 2016, and anyone who is struggling with drug addiction can go to any one of the 10 fire stations in the Queen City any time and connect with recovery resources.

Anyone who visits the fire stations will go to Serenity Place, an outpatient program focusing on recovery work, or a similar center, and no one is turned away if they go through that method. Safe Station doesn’t receive any direct funding from the state, which can place limits on the program. Overall it’s seen as a success for the city, but it may still be too early to tell. Nashua also opened their first Safe Station in November.

From May to December 2016, there were 509 overdoses and 49 deaths — a slight drop from the same time period in 2015.

The American Medical Response group recently announced there was a slight increase in overdoses and deaths from 2015 to 2016 for Manchester and Nashua.

In 2015, Nashua saw 250 overdoses, with 19 fatalities. In 2016, the city’s total overdose number rose to 365 with 40 fatalities. For Manchester, there were 729 overdoses with 88 fatalities in 2015 and then 785 overdoses and 90 fatalities in 2016.

Traci Green, associate professor of emergency medicine at Boston University School of Medicine, is hopeful those numbers will decrease in 2017 as the Safe Station programs expand.

“I hope this is one new entree into an expanded hub for people to enter,” she told NH Journal. “There is great hope in trying to think about how public health and public safety can work together to get people to go to a place where it’s safe and connect with other peers in a time when they’re feeling extremely vulnerable. It seems like a great working relationship.”

Green called for states to be more creative in their thinking on how to address the opioid crisis, and make sure that it fits with the individual needs of their towns and cities. She applauded fire departments, law enforcement, and public health groups taking a role in prevention, treatment, and recovery rather than one entity trying to do everything.

“The entree into treatment and recovery seem to really work in Manchester, and people can have their clear roles and responsibilities,” she said. “I think that’s really important.”

It may be difficult to replicate Safe Station programs throughout New Hampshire, since fire stations must be staffed 24/7 and have access to a treatment center or emergency shelter nearby. It’s a problem the state will wrestle with as they decide how to disburse funding to all communities.

“Manchester has available resources that a place like Concord just certainly wouldn’t have,” James Vara, the state’s “drug czar,” said in September. “So, you have to look at them and temper that with the fact that these approaches may not all work. Safe Station is a great access point for people who are suffering, but they also have available resources like Serenity Place, which many of your districts wouldn’t have.”

It’s possible Sununu could address solutions like funding the Alcohol Fund and Safe Station programs throughout the state in his proposed 2018-2019 biennium budget, scheduled for released Thursday. Sununu said the opioid crisis was the state’s top priority, and funding to fix the crisis is expected to be a significant part of his budget proposal.

Combatting the epidemic is usually a bipartisan issue, though it may depend on how creative lawmakers in the State House can get.

Follow Kyle on Twitter.

Despite several inches of snow in most parts of the state, substance abuse prevention advocates and recovering addicts made the trek to the State House to show support for a bill that would be able to fund more recovery programs in the Granite State.

“What are we waiting for?,” deputy director at New Futures Kate Frey asked at a Tuesday press conference. New Futures is a nonprofit advocacy organization looking to prevent and reduce substance abuse in the New Hampshire. According to her, the state is suffering a serious epidemic and needs creativity to get out of it.

One of those creative solutions unique to New Hampshire and endorsed by New Futures should be fully funding the state’s Alcohol Fund.

The New Hampshire Alcohol Fund was created in 2000 as a non-lapsing and continually appropriated fund to support alcohol and drug education, abuse prevention, and treatment programs. The law provides 5 percent of the gross profits from the sale of alcohol to support such programs. The funds would be allocated to the Governor’s Commission on Alcohol and Drug Abuse Prevention, Intervention, and Treatment to pay contracts for service providers in the communities hardest hit by opioid abuse.

The fund began during the 2003-2004 biennium and was fully funded in that budget. But every year since, the 5 percent funding has been suspended by either the governor or the legislature, and revenue transferred to the General Fund. In the subsequent years, the legislature appropriated only a small amount of general funds — significantly less than the 5 percent that was mandated by law for prevention and treatment.

The 2016-2017 state budget allocated only 1.7 percent to the Alcohol Fund. That total amount equated to about $6.6 million, instead of the $19 million had the fund received the total 5 percent. In the previous legislative session, lawmakers allocated an additional $2.5 million from the General Fund for prevention, treatment, and recovery in 2017, bringing the total to $9.1 million.

But a bill in the Senate would fully fund the Alcohol Fund for the 2017-2018 biennium at the 5 percent rate. At a hearing for Senate Bill 166 on Tuesday before the Senate Finance Committee, prime sponsor Sen. Jay Kahn, D-Kenne, said if the state is going to be serious about addressing the opioid crisis by focusing on prevention, intervention, treatment, and recovery, then legislators should be doing everything possible to get ahead of the problem.

“Where we invest our money is a direct reflection of our priorities, and our priorities ought to be with people in New Hampshire who need care,” he said. Kahn also called for creative ways to fight to crisis with “yankee ingenuity.”

But it might not be an easy task to convince the Legislature that this is a worthwhile endeavor.

In the last biennium budget, lawmakers approved $42 million in substance abuse funding. Former Gov. Maggie Hassan was criticized for originally vetoing the budget, delaying the appropriation of the funds by three months. The total amount was $14 million more than the 2014-2015 budget. During the legislative session, lawmakers approved at least $5 million in additional funding.

Some legislators on the Senate Finance Committee were concerned that the state has already spent a significant amount of money, yet didn’t seem to fix anything.

“If we just throw money at the problem, we don’t necessarily solve the problem,” Sen. Bob Giuda, R-Warren, said.

Gov. Chris Sununu is scheduled to release his budget proposal for the 2018-2019 biennium on Thursday, so it remains to be seen how much money he’s putting towards the opioid crisis or if he plans to fully fund the Alcohol Fund. During his bid for the corner office, Sununu and his Democratic challenger Colin van Ostern said they supported returning the Alcohol Fund to 5 percent.

In his inauguration speech, Sununu said getting the opioid crisis under control was the state’s top priority.

“I believe we need to start in the beginning in terms of our schools,” he said on January 5. “Aggressive prevention programs in our schools that start earlier, that are more aggressive. And I think we need to start bringing in the parents and the stakeholders into those programs. There is a different path for everybody and we need to be open to all the paths. We need to put resources behind our words and take real action.”

NH Journal previously reported fully funding the Alcohol Fund had bipartisan support among most of the gubernatorial candidates. And when the fund was first debated in 2000, it received widespread, bipartisan support in the House and Senate. Former Gov. Jeanne Shaheen vetoed the original legislation establishing the Alcohol Fund, but a two-thirds majority in the House and Senate overrode her veto, so it has the potential to appeal to lawmakers on both sides of the aisle.

Follow Kyle on Twitter.

While House leadership said that bills restricting abortion rights would not be a priority for the Republican majority, there are still some bills before the New Hampshire Legislature tackling the contentious issue.

After the November election, House Speaker Shawn Jasper outlined his top priorities for the 2017 legislative session, which included concealed carry and right to work, but not any abortion bills.

However, that didn’t stop several state representatives from putting them forward. With a Republican-controlled State House, some bills that seek to restrict abortion rights could quietly make it far in the legislative process. While pro-life and pro-choice groups are paying attention to the issue, most eyes will be on the budget, right-to-work legislation, or other bills dealing with election laws.

Rep. Keith Murphy, R-Bedford, is hopeful his bill, which would ban abortions after “viability,” passes the House. He introduced a similar version of the bill last year, when it was deemed “ought to pass” in the House Judiciary Committee, but failed by three votes in a House session.

Murphy blamed the defeat on the fact that it was “the end of a long day and a lot of people already left.” He also thought some of the representatives did not fully understand the bill.

“I have vowed this year to be different,” he told NH Journal.

House Bill 578 would prohibit any person from performing or inducing an abortion on a woman when it has been determined that the age of the “unborn child” is 21 weeks or older, unless there is a medical emergency in order to save the woman’s life or stop physical harm. The bill also sets penalties for doctors who perform abortions in violation of the law.

New Hampshire is one of eight states that does not place a specific restriction on abortions at a certain point in pregnancy, according to the Guttmacher Institute, a research and policy organization focused on sexual and reproductive health.

“New Hampshire tends to be a fairly moderate state on the question of abortion,” Murphy said. “I think this bill has an excellent chance [of passing] because it protects children who are viable, who will live if they are removed from the womb. There is no reason to kill these children because they will survive.”

Kayla Montgomery, director of advocacy and organizing for Planned Parenthood NH Action Fund, said the bill would criminalize doctors and make “it impossible for women who face complex pregnancy complications or severe fetal abnormalities to access abortion as currently provided in New Hampshire.”

“Equally as problematic, the bill requires an intrusive data collection system which would create a registry of women who obtain abortions and doctors who provide them and store this information at the Board of Medicine and the Department of Health and Human Services,” she told NH Journal.

While Murphy understands that his legislation might not be a priority for the House leadership, he said he has spoken to House Majority Leader Dick Hinch about the bill and “Speaker Jasper has indicated in general that he will go where the House takes him.”

“I don’t think he is dictating the outcome of the bill,” he said. “If the House passes it, it will be supported.”

If enough Republicans rally behind the bill, it could make it to Gov. Chris Sununu’s desk, and Murphy said he is optimistic that the Republican governor would sign it.

Sununu describes himself as a pro-choice Republican and said he stands by his vote to approve of state funding for Planned Parenthood last year. But he also said he opposes late-term abortions. He has not been specific about what that means.

“We can generally say third trimester, but some say 20 weeks,” he told the New Hampshire Union Leader in October. “I think we can look at those options, but I am not going to put a timeline on it now.”

Planned Parenthood, though, is expecting Sununu to protect women’s health.

“We will be watching the budget process closely to ensure that women’s health programs are protected and fully funded,” Montgomery said. “Gov. Sununu campaigned as someone who supports abortion rights and pledged to stand up to his party to protect women’s health, and that’s what we are expecting of him. New Hampshire has a long bipartisan tradition of respecting individual privacy. Support for access to safe, legal abortion in New Hampshire is among the strongest in the country. Defeating attacks has always been accomplished by bipartisan efforts, and we expect no different this year.”

There are two near-identical bills in the House and Senate that would allow prosecution of a person, such as an impaired driver or abusive domestic partner, whose actions cause a woman to lose a pregnancy that she has chosen to carry. It does not apply to abortion or to any act performed with the mother’s consent.

Senate Bill 66 specifies a “viable” fetus, which is a “developing human” that has basic human qualities. House Bill 156 is just a fetus, which is defined as after the eighth week of a pregnancy until birth.

The House Bill is known as Griffin’s Law, which has been introduced in the Legislature before by former Rep. Leon Rideout, R-Lancaster, whose daughter lost her baby in 2013 after another driver ran a stop sign and crashed into her. His daughter suffered serious injuries and despite an emergency C section to keep the child alive, he succumbed to injuries from the crash.

Rep. Jeanine Notter, R-Merrimack, is the prime sponsor of Griffin’s Law in the current legislative session. But the future of the bill remains unclear. It has failed in the Legislature before, so it will remain to be seen if it has more widespread support this time. The House bill will hear public testimony in the House Criminal Justice and Public Safety Committee on Tuesday.

Montgomery said the House and Senate bills do not have a “direct impact on the health services that Planned Parenthood of Northern New England provides.”

“We do share concerns that have been raised regarding implications of recognizing fetal rights prior to viability,” she said. “There are examples of similar bills in other states which have led to the prosecution of women for their own behavior during pregnancy.”

Montgomery said Planned Parenthood would also be watching House Bill 589, which would repeal the “buffer zone law,” which was passed in 2014, allowing for a 25-foot zone outside abortion facilities where no one would be allowed to protest or impede anyone from entering the facility.

“Now, more than ever, health centers need the flexibility to adapt buffer zones if they feel the privacy and safety of patients are at risk,” Montgomery said. “Undoing this law would be a step backwards and removes an important tool from the toolkit.”

Sununu has indicated during the campaign that he would support repealing the law.

Follow Kyle on Twitter.