#

House Speaker Sherman Packard said he did nothing wrong in his handling of the case of Troy Merner, the former state House member charged with illegal voting and lying about his residency. And, he told reporters Wednesday, he is done talking about the topic.

Packard (R-Londonderry) met with a small group of reporters to clear the air, set the record straight, and end the discussion about what he did and did not do when he first learned Merner did not live in his Lancaster district.

“We had to let the process play out since it was under investigation by the (New Hampshire Department of Justice,)” Packard said. “I never talked to Troy Merner the whole time about his residency.”

Saying it would be the last time he planned to talk about Merner, Packard often sounded defensive during the meeting with NHPR, the Union Leader, and NHJournal, saying he could not have taken action when his office learned last December that Merner’s residency was under investigation by the New Hampshire Attorney General’s Office.

“Do what? What would you have me do? Get in the middle of an investigation? That could be criminal. Which is what it turned out to be,” Packard said. “If I had gotten involved in it and screwed up the investigation, you guys would probably be jumping all over me for ‘Why did you get involved’… I lose no matter what the hell I do.”

The New Hampshire Attorney General’s Office charged Merner, 63, last month on counts of wrongful voting, theft by deception, and unsworn falsification following its investigation. Merner is scheduled to be arraigned on Thursday, Dec. 28 in Coos County Superior Court. 

Packard’s meeting on Wednesday was an attempt to put an end to the critical news stories that dogged his office since the news broke.

“We tried to put this to bed, and every time we try and put it to bed, somebody puts a report out or something of that nature and blows the whole thing up again,” Packard said.

Packard blamed the media and partisan politics for giving life to the controversy and not anything he did or did not do.

“Would this [interest in the Merner story] have happened if we or the other party had a 50-vote majority? Probably not. Let’s be realistic; there’s a lot of politics involved in this right now,” Packard said.

According to documents so far released in the case, the Attorney General’s Office emailed Terry Pfaff — Chief Operating Officer of the New Hampshire legislature — on Dec. 6, 2022, one day before the House Organization Day. The email alerted House authorities to questions about Merner’s living situation and the ongoing investigation. A Packard staffer contacted Merner soon after receiving that email, and Merner denied he was no longer a Lancaster resident.

At that point, according to Packard, he decided to wait for the attorney general.

“We didn’t jump into any type of investigation; we took the man at his word. We had no reason not to, regardless of what the investigation said, because it wasn’t finished,” Packard said. 

Merner, a member of the Lancaster select board, allegedly moved out of Lancaster before he was elected to the House last November. According to court records, Merner considered his Lancaster office, post office box, and intent to eventually move back enough to establish his residency in the district despite the fact he was actually living in Carroll with his wife.

Deputy Speaker Rep. Steve Smith (R-Charlestown) played wingman to Packard at Wednesday’s press conference, explaining that no one made a formal complaint for Packard to act on and brought proof that Merner was not a Lancaster resident to the speaker.

“Anybody could have brought a complaint, and nobody did,” Smith said.

Without a complaint, Smith said that Packard could not act, adding that the Speaker’s Office does not generally investigate alleged misdeeds, nor does it conduct surveillance on members.

“The Speaker’s Office has a chief of staff, a deputy chief of staff, and … a communications director. We’re not going to deploy them to stake people out,” Smith said. “We don’t have staff or resources for that based on a rumor.”

Merner finally resigned from the House in September aw the attorney general’s investigation neared conclusion. At that point, the Department of Justice provided Packard with proof Merner was not a Lancaster resident. Packard followed up on that information by pushing Merner to step down.

“Once proof was given to us by the DOJ, we acted immediately,” Packard said.

Even if Packard got involved, past House precedent showed nothing would have happened, Packard and Smith argued. They pointed to a similar controversy from 1990, when it was learned Democratic Rep. Cynthia McGovern did not live in her Portsmouth district but instead lived in Hampton. 

Then-Speaker Steve Shurtleff (D-Penacook) appointed a committee to investigate McGovern’s residency, which took years to bring a resolution ousting McGovern to the floor. Despite it being a clear case of a representative living outside their district, the House voted down a 1992 resolution to boot McGovern from her seat.

“If we did investigate, what would have happened? It would have been really hard to find any conclusion other than the 1992 committee report that saw something just like this,” Smith said.

Is Packard worried about accusations from Democrats that he mishandled the Merner situation or the impact of this incident on his speakership going forward?

“I’ve been in politics a long time. I can’t control what everybody thinks,” Packard said.

Legislation about behavior at school came down to a matter of attendance at the New Hampshire House on Thursday.

The Parents Bill of Rights (SB 272) was “indefinitely postponed” by a vote of 195-190, meaning that the topic is dead under House rules for the rest of the current two-year legislative session.

“They completely nuked the bill,” said Rep. Erica Layon (R-Derry), a parental rights supporter. “It would take a two-thirds majority to bring it back, and that won’t happen.”

Polls show Granite State voters — and parents in particular — support the legislation, which would prevent school employees from keeping information about a student’s on-campus behavior secret from parents who ask about their own children. Because that includes behavior regarding sex and gender, Democrats have attempted to label the bill anti-LGBT, arguing that parents are too dangerous to be allowed to have this information about their children.

A handful of absences among GOP members and near-perfect attendance by Democrats in the closely-divided House left Republicans without a functioning majority. When Republicans began defecting to add amendments to the Senate bill, the battle was lost.

Majority Leader Jason Osborne (R-Auburn) drew equal boos and cheers as he made an angry statement about the vote from the House well.

“For the next two years, parents will have to continue to accept that school is a mysterious and secretive black box where they deposit their children. Who knows what will happen inside that box, and who knows what will come out the other side?” Osborne said. “By indefinitely postponing this bill, parents will have no choice but to avail themselves of the wildly successful Education Freedom Accounts.”

The writing was on the wall early in the day when Rep. Mike Bordes (R-Laconia) gave cover to Republican defectors with an amendment altering the bill so as to remove references to LGBTQ identities and remove the requirement that schools not lie to parents. Several other Democratic-sponsored amendments passed as well, with the net effect of essentially gutting the bill. 

Supporter Rep. Joe Sweeney (R-Salem) tried and failed to have the bill tabled, which would have meant it could be brought back in some form later in the current legislative session.

“We should not be cutting our legs off to continue to have this discussion,” Sweeney said. 

But the die was cast and, with the help of Republican Reps. David Bickford (R-New Durham) and Joseph Guthrie (R-Hampstead), Democrats notched a major win.

House Speaker Sherman Packard (R-Londonderry) said the state GOP will continue pushing for parents’ rights.

“I am disheartened House Democrats chose institutions over New Hampshire parents today,” Packard said in a statement. “They chose secrets over parent-involved solutions. They chose to ignore the majority of New Hampshire parents who made it clear they were looking for legislative support to help protect their rights and their children.”

Senate Republicans called on Gov. Chris Sununu to issue an executive order setting to affirm parental rights, saying Democrats have betrayed families.

“The decision by Democrats to block this important bill is a direct assault on parental rights and a clear indication of their misguided priorities. By denying parents the opportunity to exercise their inherent authority, Democrats have undermined the very fabric of our society, where the family unit and parental involvement play an essential role in the upbringing and development of our children,” Senate Republicans said in a statement.

“We urge Gov. Sununu to take a stand for Granite State parents and issue an executive order to affirm the rights they rightly deserve.”

Sununu did not respond to a request for comment.

Rep. Alissandra Rodrigues Murray (D-Manchester) spent time hugging and chatting with 603Equality founder Linds Jakows, who lobbied hard against the legislation. Jakows even offered a plane ticket to fly a vacationing Democrat from Florida so he could vote against the bill.

Asked to comment on the victory, Murray replied, “I don’t talk to New Hampshire Journal.”  

Rep. Gerri Cannon (D-Somersworth), who identifies as a woman, understands parental concerns about kids’ behavior at school. Cannon agreed parents should be able to know what’s in the curriculum and is being taught in classrooms, but added concern for the safety of LGBTQ children is paramount.

“If they don’t have the right to be themselves, it can put them at risk,” Cannon said.

Cannon was echoing the message New Hampshire Democrats have made the center of their opposition to parental rights: Parents are potentially too dangerous to the lives and safety of their own children to be given the same information about their kids that school officials have.

Enough Republicans agreed with Cannon and the rest of the Democrats to kill the bill.

“I think there are some people on the Republican side who support the rights of children just like any person, and there are people who understand there is the potential for harm,” Cannon said.

Even with the bill knocked out for the next two years, the parents’ rights issue isn’t going away. Shannon McGinley, executive director of the pro-family advocacy group Cornerstone Action, said parents let down by their lawmakers need to get active.

“As the House will not act, the next step is to fight this battle on the local level. All we need is for parents to be just as fearlessly, consistently engaged with their local school boards as progressive activists are,” McGinley said. “If you are too afraid of controversy to speak up, then the cultural left will always win by default.

“But if one New Hampshire school board will stand up to the intimidation and cynical legalese of these groups, then other school boards could fall like dominoes.”

With control of the state House of Representatives down to a handful of votes, New Hampshire Democrats continue to count on every vote from their caucus — including one member currently sitting in a Manchester jail cell. And while Rep. Stacie Laughton (D-Nashua) is a repeat offender accused of stalking a Hudson woman for years, Granite State Democrats have declined to denounce her or call for her removal from the caucus.

Laughton is currently being held without bail after 9th District Court Judge Kimberly Chabot found clear and convincing evidence that the incumbent state representative is currently a danger to the alleged victim and the community at large. According to court documents reviewed by NHJournal, Laughton’s harassment of her alleged victim extends back to at least 2019.

Laughton is facing dozens of misdemeanor charges ranging from making false 911 calls to stalking to criminal defamation, all related to her harassment of the alleged victim. NH Journal is not identifying the woman named as Laughton’s target.

Prosecutors are also asking the court to impose the suspended nine-month jail sentence from a prior case involving the same victim. According to court records, Laughton pleaded no contest to three misdemeanor counts in August alleging she called 911 to make false reports about the victim.

Laughton is due to appear in the Nashua courthouse this week for a status conference hearing. It is not known if her public defender, Elliot Friedman, plans to argue for her release. Friedman was not available for comment on Tuesday.

Laughton’s next big date is Organization Day at the State House on Dec. 7, when House leadership positions will be decided and the secretary of state will be elected. With the GOP’s majority a slim 201 to 198 (with one tie outstanding), it is possible Democrats could hold the majority, depending on attendance. Every vote will count, including one cast by an accused criminal.

Rep. Matt Wilhelm (D-Manchester), the progressive recently elected leader of the Democratic Caucus, did not respond to a request for comment. Would Democrats allow Laughton to participate as part of the caucus if she is still behind bars?

Under the New Hampshire Constitution, state representatives cannot be stopped from attending a House session for any reason, including arrest. If Laughton gets a ride from Valley Street Jail in Manchester to Concord on Dec. 7,  will she be sworn in?

House Clerk Paul Smith said that while he is not a lawyer, he does not think Laughton can get out of jail for the day to get sworn in and vote on leadership.

“I can’t imagine that a member-elect (who could theoretically be sworn any time) would be released for the purposes of being sworn in,” Smith said.

Anna Fay with the New Hampshire Secretary of State’s Office said the protocol for a member who is being held on bail is not clear. However, members who are convicted of felonies are ineligible to serve, she said.

Former House Speaker Bill O’Brien said New Hampshire’s Constitution protects House members from being arrested while performing their duties, but he does not think that protection extends to cases like Laughton’s.

“When the framers of the New Hampshire Constitution in 1784 included Article 21, they were seeking to avoid the experience of about a hundred years prior in England when Charles I was seizing members of Parliament on their way to London to vote against him or while they were attending Parliament,” O’Brien said. “While seeking to avoid that, the framers surely weren’t intending to allow legislators to violate anti-stalking protective orders without consequence.”

Laughton has a long history of illegal behavior. She was convicted in 2008 of credit card fraud for stealing from a person in Laconia. In 2015, Laughton was charged with a crime after calling in a bogus bomb threat at the Southern New Hampshire Medical Center hospital in Nashua. Those charges were later dropped as Laughton claimed she was suffering from a mental health crisis at the time.

Laughton won a seat for state representative in 2012 but was forced to resign soon after her 2008 credit card fraud arrest became public. Laughton tried to run again to fill the seat in a special election after her resignation, but that bid was cut short when it was deemed, she was legally ineligible for office at the time since she was still technically serving her suspended sentence for the felony credit card fraud case.

Laughton has been engaged in harassing the woman and her parents for years, according to court records. She used her radio show and social media accounts to stalk and harass the woman and repeatedly called 911 to falsely report the woman was suicidal, according to court records. Alarming to the victim, at one point, Laughton referred to the woman as her “wife.”

Laughton, New Hampshire’s first transgender state representative, is already married to a different woman.

None of this stopped state Democratic Party chair, Ray Buckley, from giving Laughton a shout-out as part of the “backbone of the Granite State” in a June 2022 op ed celebrating Pride Month.

With the House so closely split, it’s possible the vote to pick the next Speaker could come down to a single vote. If that vote belongs to Stacie Laughton, will Democrats take it?

New Hampshire Republicans tell New Hampshire Journal they believe this week’s House session will hinge on which party’s members best heed the advice of Woody Allen: “Eighty percent of success is just showing up.”

Vital issues like vaccine mandates, bail reform, and abortion are all on the docket as the legislature gets to work on Wednesday.

The question is, will Democrats show up to vote?

Despite moving this week’s House session to the exposition center in the DoubleTree by Hilton in Manchester, many Democrats have expressed concerns about having an in-person session during the Omicron COVID-19 wave.

Democratic leaders like Hampton’s Rep. Renny Cushing and Nashua’s Rep. David Cote did not respond to requests for comment, but many in the rank and file have expressed concerns about the session.

Rep. Jeffrey Salloway, D-Lee, an epidemiologist, told InDepth NH the House session has the potential to be a “super-spreader event.” Rep. Bill Marsh, D-Wolfeboro, a physician, said he will only go to the session while wearing an N95 medical-grade mask.

“I don’t believe we are taking sufficient precautions to keep everybody safe,” Marsh told InDepth.

Cushing, who is dealing with a terminal cancer diagnosis, tried to force the Republican-controlled House to meet remotely, even filing a federal lawsuit. But GOP House Speaker Sherman Packard is going with the in-person session. Meeting in the 30,000 square-foot convention center will allow for people to safely socially distance themselves. Facemasks will be optional, Packard said.

“With hospitalizations at record levels and community transmission still high, the responsible thing to do is to maintain health and safety protocols for our legislators and hold off on returning to the House chamber, at least for now,” he said in a statement about the move.

House Majority Leader Rep. Jason Osborne, R-Auburn, expects his party to be in the building.

“I cannot speak for the other caucus, but I do know with only a couple exceptions Republicans will be present and ready to do the people’s business,” he said.

The House has met at various times during the pandemic at the University of New Hampshire’s Whittemore Center ice arena, outside on an athletic field, and inside a Bedford athletic complex.

During one of last year’s sessions, Democrats staged a walk-out in an attempt to deny Republicans a quorum. Instead of shutting down the session, Packard had the doors locked during the ensuing chaos to keep the quorum and keep out the Democrats who walked out first. The Republican House then easily passed two controversial abortion bans.

Osborne said Democrats are unlikely to make the same mistake twice.

“I am pretty sure House members now realize that a frenzied stampede is neither an appropriate nor effective parliamentary tactic. These are the kind of lessons that need to be relearned from time to time given the high turnover of membership biennially,” Osborne said.

If Democrats fail to show up it could backfire again. For example, Sen. Jeb Bradley, R-Wolfeboro is sponsoring a bill to roll back part of the recently-passed bail reforms. SB 92 would require people charged with serious crimes like murder, kidnapping, and domestic violence to be required to spend up to 72 hours in jail awaiting arraignment.

Bradley’s bill is opposed by Black Lives Matter and the New Hampshire ACLU, as well as the libertarian Americans for Prosperity.

The House is also expected to vote on a measure that would push back the ultrasound provision of the state’s 24-week abortion ban. The ultrasound provision is opposed by Gov. Chris Sununu and Democrats. Sources tell NHJournal to expect a GOP-engineered compromise to clarify the mandate only applies in cases when there’s a legitimate question as to whether the pregnancy has extended beyond the six-month time period.

If Democrats stay home, they would also be helping anti-vaccine extremists who want to ban private businesses from setting their own vaccine policies. A proposed amendment to HB 255 would make it illegal for New Hampshire employers to require employees to get the COVID-19 vaccine.

Republicans are split on this, with the New Hampshire Liberty Alliance opposing the measure along with Democrats.

If any of the votes end up being close, MIA Democrats could come to regret not being in the building.

For the third time this legislative session, a House Democrat switched party affiliation in New Hampshire, highlighting that Democrats are also struggling to remain unified in Concord. It’s been well-documented that House Republicans still have deep wounds from the 2016 election, with two conservative caucuses that have caused trouble for GOP leadership. However, with three lawmakers jumping ship from the party, there are some internal conflicts happening within the Democratic caucus.

Rep. Joseph Stallcop, L-Keene (Credit: N.H. House website)

In total, four lawmakers have changed their party affiliation since the November election. Two Democrats left the party to join the Republican Party and a third left for the Libertarian Party of New Hampshire (LPNH). The fourth representative left the Republican Party for the LPNH.

Rep. Joseph Stallcop of Keene was the latest House members on Wednesday to switch his party affiliation. He switched from the Democratic Party to the LPNH.

“Personally witnessing the situation at Standing Rock showed me the danger of relinquishing power and authority into an institution, while my time in Concord reinforced the ineptitude that can exist by those in charge,” he said. “I originally joined the Democratic Party in hopes of making a difference through critical thinking and my classical liberal viewpoint, yet with the lack of unbiased data in caucuses as well as backlash on votes I’ve independently made, it seems there is no longer a place for me here.”

Rep. Caleb Dyer, L-Pelham (Credit: N.H House website)

LPNH is having a banner year since the November elections. Another lawmaker, Rep. Caleb Dwyer of Pelham switched from the Republican Party to the LPNH in February. The party also garnered enough of the votes in the gubernatorial race to give them official ballot access in 2018.

Max Abramson ran as the Libertarian candidate in 2016, against now-Gov. Chris Sununu and Democratic nominee Colin Van Ostern. He received 4 percent of the vote, the required amount to gain ballot access.

It’s the first time in 20 years that the LPNH had ballot access. When they last had it in the 1990s, the party had four members in the Legislature. Then in 1997, ballot access laws changed to increase the vote threshold needed for a party to retain ballot access from 3 percent to 4 percent.

LPNH Chairman Darryl W. Perry called Stallcop’s switch a “historic day” since it’s the first time in two decades that they have a Libertarian caucus.

Rep. Mariellen MacKay of Nashua changed her Democratic affiliation to Republican in April and Rep. Robert Theberge of Berlin also changed from Democrat to Republican right after the November election.

(L-R) Reps. Mariellen MacKay, R-Nashua, and Robert Theberge, R-Berlin (Credit: N.H. House website)

So now, the House membership is 221 Republicans, 170 Democrats, and two Libertarians. There are six vacancies due to death, resignation, or appointment to a position in Sununu’s administration. One representative has not been officially sworn in yet.

In a House with 400 members, one would think that party changes are pretty common. That’s actually not the case in New Hampshire, or even nationally. According to Ballotpedia, there have only been 79 current legislators in State Houses across the United States who have switched parties since 2007. One of the last people to switch parties in New Hampshire was Sen. Lou D’Allesandro of Manchester. After serving two years as a Republican in the House, in 1998 he ran as a Democrat for the Senate where he still holds a seat and is still a Democrat.

Jumping on the chance to criticize the Democratic Party for losing members, NHGOP Chair Jeanie Forrester blasted out a statement once the news came out on Wednesday that Stallcop was leaving the party.

“Would the last one in the New Hampshire Democrat Party please turn out the lights? Yet another former Democrat has concluded that the party of big government and obstruction is no longer worth being a member of,” she said. “Meanwhile, a significant majority of Granite Staters approve of the job Republican Gov. Chris Sununu is doing in the Corner Office. That’s because working families know that from improving education to investing in infrastructure to strengthening the economy, Republicans are working hard to improve the quality of life for Granite Staters every day.”

House Minority Leader Steve Shurtleff said people shouldn’t read much into three people leaving his caucus.

“It’s just kind of a shakeout,” he told the New Hampshire Union Leader.

However, other Democratic representatives are saying there is a lot of “dissatisfaction” in the caucus.

“Most Democrats would think with the controversy around Trump, we might gain some Republicans, more moderates, and yet we are losing Democrats,” said Rep. Peter Leishman, D-Peterborough.

The current dynamics of the New Hampshire Democratic Party often mirror the national party on what its role should be in GOP-led politics. For the first time in nearly a decade, Democrats are fully the minority party. The U.S. Congress is Republican-run and the White House has a Republican president. The same is true in New Hampshire where Democrats are in the minority of a GOP-legislature and the first Republican governor in 12 years.

The problem is that there are differences of opinion between Democratic lawmakers on what their role is in the New Hampshire House. They’re trying to figure out how to navigate their position and get their legislative priorities passed.

At the national level, many Democrats have been adopting the “resistance” mindset by voting against any GOP bill or watching Republicans fight amongst themselves, as exhibited during the health care debate.

So far, New Hampshire House Democrats have been largely sitting back and watching Republican Party infighting derail the GOP’s own political agenda. Yet, some Democrats want the party to push back more against the Republicans.

This conflict was on full display during the chaotic budget debate in April. After the House failed to pass a budget on the first day due to conservatives voting against it, some Democrats were willing to work with Republican leadership to get something passed. Two Democrats took to the House floor to encourage its caucus to vote for the state budget rider, which was in direct opposition to what Shurtleff told them to do. In the end, 14 Democrats voted in favor of the bill to get a budget passed, but it failed 169-177.

While their party disagreements aren’t as noticeable as the Republicans, its crucial that there is unity within the caucus if they want to block future GOP bills, like they did with right-to-work earlier this year. It’s also important when it comes time to craft a message for elections next year.

One of their next big tests will be in June when the final state spending plan comes back to the House. If conservatives still vote against the budget, House Speaker Shawn Jasper might need to ask them for support. What they do in that moment could set the tone for 2018.

Follow Kyle on Twitter.

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