#

Granite Staters can continue to cook free or fry as the state stays out of the New England anti-gas stove push.

This Monday the attorneys general of Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Vermont and New York signed on to a letter demanding that the federal government crack down on gas stoves.

The letter to the Consumer Product Safety Commission from 11 AGs was led by D.C. Attorney General Brian L. Schwalb, who claims that gas stoves put lives at risk and need strict government regulation.

“Gas stoves emit air pollutants that put people – particularly children – at risk of asthma and other respiratory illnesses,” Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) said in his letter. “Along with other State AGs, I urge the CPSC to develop uniform performance and ventilation standards for gas stoves and to increase consumer awareness about the health risks these appliances pose.”

Unlike New York Democrat Gov. Kathy Hochul, the AGs aren’t calling for an entire ban on gas stoves or new natural gas hook-ups — yet. Last week the Empire State became the first in the country to ban natural gas and other fossil fuels in most new buildings. The Hochul-backed law bans gas-powered stoves, furnaces and propane heating. All-electric heating and cooking in new buildings shorter than seven stories is mandated by 2026, and 2029 for the rest.

Instead, the AGs want the CPSC to start regulating gas stove ventilation and emissions by creating mandatory standards for these home appliances. The standards for gas stoves are currently voluntary.

“Mandatory performance standards could include, among others, standards for gas stoves to address methane leakage, including automatic shut-off valves, and standards that address the elevated levels of hazardous pollution emissions, including sensors,” Schwalb wrote.

The available data show that the attacks on gas stove use are based on evidence that is dubious at best. As Kimberley Strassel notes at the Wall Street Journal:

One frequently cited study from the Rocky Mountain Institute—claiming to find a link between gas stoves and childhood asthma—was co-authored by two RMI staffers, neither of whom has a science degree. Another favorite study by New York University’s Institute for Policy Integrity claims gas stoves cause “dangerous levels of indoor air pollution.” It was written by two lawyers, and it cites . . . the RMI study. Ah, science.

When CPSC commissioner Richard Trumka told Bloomberg that banning gas stoves was an option to deal with the home pollution they cause, there was an immediate backlash. CPSC chairman Alexander Hoehn-Saric tried walking that statement back, saying there are no plans to ban gas stoves in the works. Hoehn-Saric did say the CPSC is investigating gas stoves.

“CPSC is researching gas emissions in stoves and exploring new ways to address any health risks,” Hoehn-Saric said.

Opponents of a ban were dismissed as rumor-mongering kooks at the time. “You have to laugh at the ‘gas stove ban’ narrative being cooked up by the MAGA GOP,” said Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) in February. Around that same time, NHPR broadcast a program claiming “there is no ban in the works… Banning things is about top-down control. It fits nicely into readymade stories about government control or tyranny.”

New York is the first state to pass an outright ban, but activists say it won’t be the last. Massachusetts’ lawmakers are already making the push, in addition to the efforts of their Attorney General Andrea Joy Campbell.

Not every state is playing along, however. New Hampshire’s Attorney General John Formella’s signature is absent from the letter. And the Granite State signaled its position on gas stoves when Gov. Chris Sununu signed a law banning local municipalities from restricting gas hookups in new construction.

The 2021 law prohibits all counties, cities, towns, village districts and local land use boards from adopting any rule that prohibits or restricts anyone from “installing a safe and commercially available heating or other energy system of their choice.” 

Sununu has long supported more natural gas in New Hampshire as a way to cut down on high energy prices in the state, telling InDepth NH in December that New Hampshire needs access to natural gas pipelines. 

“What hurts us the most is because we are essentially at the end of the line and farthest away from the source so prices here are higher than the national average,” Sununu said. “At the end of the day, we have to say ‘yes’ to the natural gas.”

Unitil may have to start paying some employees overtime after the utility giant lost its legal battle to get a labor lawsuit dismissed. 

U.S. Labor Secretary Marty Walsh is suing the Hampton-based utility, claiming that about 50 employees qualify for overtime pay. The company maintains those employees do not qualify for the extra wages.

Unitil won the first round of the fight, when United States District Court Judge Landya McCafferty dismissed the case via a summary judgment, siding with the power provider. The Biden administration’s Department of Labor notched a win last week when the First Circuit Court of Appeals in Boston overturned the dismissal and sent the case back to the district court.

The First Circuit’s order found that the employees in question — dispatchers and controllers — are often required to work more than 40 hours a week monitoring the gas and electric systems throughout the utility. Those employees are required to respond to automated alerts about system function and decide if those alerts require a crew to go out into the field or some other action.

Unitil has argued dispatchers who monitor the electric systems and controllers who monitor the gas systems perform primarily administrative and management functions and are therefore exempt from overtime regulations. The First Circuit Court found that argument lacking based on all of the tasks these employees perform in monitoring the systems.

“Unitil Service has not demonstrated that the dispatchers’ and controllers’ primary duty consists of work ‘directly related to the management or general business operations’ of its customers such that the employees fall under the (federal) overtime exemption,” the order states.

Unitil spokesman Alec O’Meara said the company is confident in its case as it heads back to the lower court.

“We expect the same result as previously from the district court,” O’Meara said.

The DOL brought the lawsuit in 2019 after investigating Unitil’s labor practices. The department’s investigation found the dispatchers were working 60- and 70-hour weeks, according to court records.

However, the company challenged that investigation in court claiming the DOL investigator Divya Sood used inadmissible hearsay in her investigative report. Sood interviewed six employees at Unitil; of the six, only one employee agreed to sign the statement Sood wrote detailing their conversation, according to court records. Sood’s submission uses anonymous statements that lack factual context, the company claims.

Sood’s report included statements from anonymous employees who said they do not have the discretion to make decisions and must defer to a supervisor or the company manual and set procedures. Not being able to take independent action would be appropriate for a non-managerial employee, according to the DOL’s argument.

Judge Landya McCafferty, who first heard the case in the Concord federal court, found the DOL’s argument lacking in this regard. Reporting to a supervisor or checking with a manual does not negate management duties, she wrote.

“Making an informed decision or recommendation about which set of actions to take depending on the present circumstances after consultation with training materials, supervisors, and personal experience is a paradigmatic exercise of discretion and independent judgment,” McCafferty wrote in the original order dismissing the case.

With the First Circuit’s ruling, the case heads back to McCafferty.

Unitil serves 200,000 customers in New Hampshire, Maine, and Massachusetts. Like other utilities in New Hampshire, the company gave customers a huge shock this year when it doubled the electric rates heading into the fall and winter heating seasons. Unitil’s rate went from 10 cents per kilowatt hour to 26 cents per kilowatt hour, sending customer bills soaring.

President Joe Biden may see himself as another FDR or LBJ, but progressive Democrats worry that, if he is the party’s banner carrier in 2024, their political hopes will be DOA.

And so, with Biden’s approval ratings languishing around 41 percent and new polls showing him losing a head-to-head match-up against Gov. Ron DeSantis (R-Fla.), the progressive group RootsAction has launched an ad in New Hampshire featuring Granite Staters urging, “Don’t Run, Joe!”

The ads will air on WMUR during evening news broadcasts as well as on late night talk show Jimmy Kimmel Live, according to a statement from RootsAction. In the ad, Rep. Ellen Read (D-Newmarket) summarized the message by saying, “Our ideas are way more popular than Joe Biden is.”

Reached this week by NH Journal, Read said the ads are meant to spark a conversation among Democrats about a better way forward than the current status quo. Biden, who was first elected to the U.S. Senate the same year Richard Nixon was re-elected president, is part of what is wrong with current American politics, Read said.

“He’s part of the old guard who does the bidding of crony capitalists,” Read said. “Joe Biden represents that last 40 years of the same old, same old.”

And when Read says “old,” she means it.

“It is clear that Democrats can put forward a better candidate than Joe Biden,” Read said. “And it is clear he has some cognitive decline. He has some good days and some bad days.”

Read, a vocal supporter of Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders during the last two presidential primaries, said the Democratic Party needs to strongly consider moving away from Biden and the way things have been done. Biden is too moderate and too old, she said.

It’s a sensitive issue for the 80-year-old Biden, according to media reports. In response to the drumbeat of coverage regarding his age and mental acuity, Politico quotes the president barking at a staffer “You think I don’t know how f—ing old I am?”

In a new poll released by Newsweek on Tuesday, nearly 60 percent of voters said Biden should not run again, and most cited his age as the reason. In June, a University of New Hampshire poll found 65 percent of Granite Staters said they did not want Biden to run in 2024. More significantly, just 54 percent of self-identified Democrats wanted Biden on the ballot, down from 74 percent a year earlier.

Another area of common interest could be Biden’s ongoing battle to strip New Hampshire Democrats of the first-in-the-nation presidential primary. When news broke about the calendar Biden pushed on the DNC, RootsAction immediately spoke up.

“We believe President Biden’s move to replace New Hampshire with South Carolina as first-in-the nation is motivated by naked political self-interest, and nothing more,” RootsAction co-founder Jeff Cohen told NHJournal.

“Joe Biden should climb down from attempting to manipulate the Democratic primary schedule for his own narrow political purposes. As we pointed out when announcing the Don’t Run Joe campaign, ‘A president is not his party’s king, and he has no automatic right to renomination.'”

All of which means the Don’t Run Joe campaign could find fertile political ground in the Granite State. The push began just hours after last month’s midterms elections ended with text messages to local Democrats. “It’s up to NH Democrats to choose a bold leader who can defeat the fascistic Republican Party and help other Dems win,” one of text read.

RootsAction says Biden’s “moderate” policies on a host of issues like climate change, student loan debt, voting rights and healthcare have failed, and he is not likely to win in 2024.

Read has been disappointed in the anti-worker politics coming out of the Biden Administration, citing the recent railroad worker contract as an example. Biden’s team stopped rail workers’ unions from striking by forcing them to work under a contract already negotiated.

Read does not have a specific candidate in mind to replace Biden just yet. But she said with the midterms done it is time for liberals and progressives to reassess priorities. She said Biden has too often used progressive positions like student debt relief and marijuana decriminalization as campaign tools in a cyclical ploy for votes.

“We need people who will not play partisan games anymore,” she said. “Everyone is sick of the bitter divide we’re experiencing. The answer is not more (centrism,) the answer is good faith engagement.”

Mainstream New Hampshire Democrats have largely stayed out of the question about Biden’s reelection. Senator Maggie Hassan (D) for example, rarely mentioned Biden during her campaign this fall and dodged questions about his possible 2024 run. One establishment Democratic insider told NHJournal that “Biden’s victories and accomplishments” in recent weeks have made the president more popular among Democrats, and that if he runs, he’ll certainly be the nominee.

Progressives are still pushing the other way.

Former Rep. Sherry Frost, D-Dover, is an early backer of the effort to oust Biden.

“I am eager to support a candidate who understands the fatal dysfunction in our economy and is willing to hold the ultra-wealthy individuals and corporations to their obligations,” Frost said in a statement. “I am not confident that Biden is that candidate, and while I appreciate his rescuing us from another Trump term, I believe we need someone else to champion the big and systemic changes we need to continue to strive toward our more perfect union.”

Biden is expected to formally decide whether he will run again sometime around Christmas. So far, the only declared candidate in the 2024 race is former President Donald Trump.

Read is not concerned about the optics of the Don’t Run Joe campaign possibly harming Democrats. The campaign is meant to get Democrats thinking about alternatives, but it won’t interfere with Biden if he does get into the race. The Biden dissidents will stand down for the good of the party, she said.

“The Don’t Run Joe campaign ends after (he) decides whether to or not to run,” she said.

If the Democrats had a secret weapon Tuesday during their surprise showing for the midterms, it may have been young voters acting as a seawall against the anticipated “Red Wave.” And that was especially true in the Granite State.

Votes are still being counted, but instead of handily losing control of both houses of Congress as expected, Democrats may be a few seats behind the GOP in the House and have a realistic chance of maintaining the current 50-50 tie in the Senate.

They were so key to the Democrats’ success, President Joe Biden gave Gen Z voters a shoutout during Wednesday’s post-election presser.

“I especially want to thank the young people of this nation,” Biden said during his White House remarks. “They voted to continue addressing the climate crisis, gun violence, their personal rights and freedoms, and student debt relief.”

In the fight for the state legislature, Gen Z voters helped cut the size of the GOP House majority down to just 203-197 — before recounts. Republicans, like House Majority Leader Jason Osborne (R-Auburn), said they are confident their majority will hold. “The voters of New Hampshire have spoken and have sent Republicans back into the majority in the House for the 2023-2024 term,” he said in a statement.

But the final outcome will be directly impacted by the youth vote.

Democrat-aligned organizations spent millions focusing on mobilizing the youth vote. One of those groups, NextGen America, spent $25 million on the election, according to its president, Cristina Tzintzún Ramirez. Those voters were natural targets for the continual messaging on abortion and fighting extremism from the Hassan, Kuster, and Pappas campaigns.

“Young people are relentlessly committed to building the infrastructure needed to harness the full power and potential of the largest and most diverse generation in American history,” Tzintzún Ramirez said. “From abortion access to economic justice, young people recognized the stakes and mobilized to address some of the most challenging issues our country has ever faced. Young people just sent a clear message: The future belongs to us–and there’s no room for hatred, greed, or fear in the country we will continue to build.” 

Part of NextGen’s plan was to find voters on college campuses, targeting 245 colleges nationwide. The group used direct mail, texts, calls, and influencers to reach close to 10 million young voters ahead of Tuesday’s election. The success was evident in Tuesday’s results.

“Our initial data from Youth Vote Indicator Precincts shows that young people NextGen registered or pledged to vote turned out at 6 points higher than young people overall during the early voting period. And early turnout among young voters in precincts organized by NextGen exceeded nationwide averages,” Tzintzún Ramirez said. 

In college towns like Durham, home of the University of New Hampshire, and Hanover, home to the Ivy League’s Dartmouth College, college students surged to the polls. The Granite State has the highest percentage of college students in its population in the country.

According to Durham officials, 1,446 people registered to vote on Tuesday, out of more than 5,900 total ballots cast. Most of those new voters were UNH students. As a result, Democrats won big. Sen. Maggie Hassan and Rep. Chris Pappas scored nearly 4 to 1 margins over Republicans Don Bolduc and Karoline Leavitt respectively.

Carson Hansford, president of the UNH College Republicans, said the state party put time and money into getting out the vote in Durham, but could not match the intensity of the young Democrats.

“College campuses tend to be more liberal. That was proven again last night,” Hansford said.

In Hanover, close to 800 people registered to vote on Tuesday, again mostly students from Hanover, according to town officials. Griffin Mackey, a conservative Dartmouth student with the Dartmouth College Republicans, said voter sentiment in towns like Hanover did not reflect the reality of the rest of the state. Dartmouth students largely come from wealthy families that already skew liberal, he said.

“Dartmouth students are 1) not from New Hampshire and generally do not engage with the local community beyond their campus; 2) do not pay for food or rent, and 3) do not have cars or pay for gas,” Mackey said. “How on earth could Gen. Don Bolduc, or any other conservative candidate for that matter, appeal to those students?”

According to national exit polls, 63 percent of Gen Z and Millennial voters, aged 18 to 29, voted for Democrats. Just 35 percent backed the GOP.

Bolduc focused on economic issues impacting working families, like “heating or eating,” and most other GOP candidates hit the economy, record high inflation, and soaring fuel costs as part of their campaigns. Mackey said messages about economic insecurity generally fell on deaf ears in affluent Hanover.

“This is a foreign concept for many Dartmouth students who believe that the fossil fuel industry is evil and who want everyone to be vegan,” Mackey said.

Granite Staters are paying more at the pump, paying double the price for electricity, and are now getting slammed with heating oil costs heading into winter.

And according to the American Energy Alliance (AEA), the state’s top Democrats have done nothing to help. 

New Hampshire’s federal delegation, Democratic Reps. Annie Kuster and Chris Pappas, and Sens. Maggie Hassan and Jeanne Shaheen, all scored a “zero” on the 2o21-2022 AEA report card on energy policy.

“All the proof of their rejection of affordable energy policies will show up in the energy bills for people in New Hampshire this winter,” said AEA President Thomas Pyle. “New Hampshire is not California and yet the entire delegation votes for California-style energy policies.”

The energy debate isn’t an abstract one in New England, where ISO New England Inc., has warned that an extremely cold winter could potentially result in rolling blackouts due to lack of supply.

“If we get a sustained cold period in New England this winter, we’ll be in a very similar position as California was this summer,” said Nathan Hanson with LS Power Development, which operates two gas-fired power plants in the region.

The AEA looks at what lawmakers have done to “promote affordable, abundant, and reliable energy,” as well as the steps they have taken to “expand economic opportunity and prosperity, particularly for working families and those on fixed incomes.”

In her debate with Republican Don Bolduc on Tuesday, Hassan was asked for her solution to rising energy costs. She touted her support for green energy spending, government subsidies to help consumers pay the higher prices, and her call for President Joe Biden to release more oil from U.S. reserves. She did not mention increased domestic energy production, and she repeated a debunked claim that “Big Oil” was manipulating energy prices.

Democrats have been scrambling ahead of the midterms to do something about the high prices. This week, Biden announced he was releasing 15 million gallons of oil from the nation’s Strategic Petroleum Reserve in a last-ditch ploy to tamp down prices before people vote. His use of the SPR is being applauded by Hassan and Pappas as they fight for their political lives in tight races.

Hassan signed on to a letter asking Biden to do more, like release oil from the Northeast Home Heating Oil Reserve.

“With lower inventories of crude oil, propane, and natural gas and the continued global disruption caused by the Russian invasion of Ukraine contributing to a sharp rise in residential energy costs, we urge the administration to closely monitor the energy needs of the Northeast and release stock from the Northeast Home Heating Oil Reserve,” Hassan’s letter states.

But as The Wall Street Journal reports, the problem isn’t Russia’s drop in exports — just 560,000 barrels a day out of a global supply of 101 million — but “a lack of investment, especially in the U.S., which had been the world’s swing producer.”

“Now the swing producers are Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates. OPEC countries and their allies, which account for 45 percent of global oil production, accounted for 85 percent of new supply in September,” WSJ reports. That new production cannot come from the U.S., in part because Biden has slashed the number of new oil and gas leases by 97 percent.

Pappas is pushing for more funding for the Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program to help people through the winter. But, like Hassan, he has a record of opposing expanded oil and gas production.

Don Bolduc, Hassan’s GOP challenger, said Democrats are hurting the country with short-sighted energy policies that ultimately drive up the cost without addressing the need for energy independence.

“Now, facing the brutal consequences and with a midterm election looming, their only solution is releasing more of our emergency supply of oil, leaving us vulnerable to future supply shocks and whims from evil despots (in Venezuela.) It never had to be this way: America has the resources to power our country right here at home,” Bolduc said. “For those facing tough choices between heating and eating, you’ve got Joe Biden and Maggie Hassan to blame.”

Craig Stevens, spokesman for the GAIN Coalition, blamed Biden.

“With each passing week, it grows more evident that President Biden has no real strategy for lowering energy prices. From Day One, the president has put American energy producers and pipeline operators in his crosshairs,” Stevens said. “Now, with gas prices up 59 percent since his inauguration and electricity prices set to double this winter, every American is dealing with the consequences of his unprecedented hostility to the energy sector.”

NOTE: Early Thursday morning, the Biden administration announced a “tentative deal” to avert a strike, though it must go to the union membership for final approval.

A pending rail worker strike could shut down passenger rail serving in New Hampshire and hobble businesses that rely on freight for transportation.

The clock is ticking for the freight rail industry and holdout labor unions to reach an agreement on a new contract by Thursday night or face the possibility of an economy-crippling strike just weeks ahead of the midterm elections.

Nine of the 12 unions representing rail employees have bargained an agreement with the industry, based on a framework forged by members of the Presidential Emergency Board (PEB) appointed by the Biden administration. However, two unions—the International Association of Sheet Metal, Air, Rail and Transportation Workers (SMART) and the Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers and Trainmen (BLET)—are the most prominent holdouts as they push their demands.

And on Wednesday came news that the 4,900 members of the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers voted to reject the tentative agreement negotiated by their leadership, adding to the turmoil.

In the Granite State, eight freight railroad companies move goods vital to area businesses, said Michael Skelton, president and CEO of the Business & Industry Association. He said a strike would devastate businesses that rely on rail transportation. He wants to see more done to avoid any work stoppage.

“(We echo) the U.S. Chamber’s call that a voluntary agreement by all parties is the best outcome, which can include extending the ‘cooling off’ period for negotiations that ends at 12:01 a.m. Friday,” Skelton said.

Of greatest concern, rail industry experts say, is the large amount of petroleum products like propane and oil, moved by rail. According to the Association of American Railroads, freight rail delivered more than 172,000 tons of petroleum products to New Hampshire in 2019. With winter approaching and energy prices already rising, a rail shutdown could create serious problems.

New Hampshire’s Department of Transportation has been in contact with the freight operators to assess how much of an impact the spike would pose. It was not clear yet how hard the state economy could be hurt by the strike according to the DOT.

One area where the Granite State economy may dodge a bullet is its forestry industry.

“The vast majority of raw forest products (logs, pulp, chips) in New England are transported via trucks intra-state and to Canada,” said Patrick D. Hackley, Director of the Department of Natural & Cultural Resources.

However, Skelton added the strike could do damage beyond the freight end of the rail business. Passenger service may also be impacted.

“A strike would also shut down Amtrak service, leaving approximately 12.2 million daily riders in 46 states without transportation. This includes New Hampshire, which sees more than 200,000 annual boardings at Granite State stations connected to the Vermonter and Downeaster lines,” Skelton said.

Nationally, the American Petroleum Industry on Tuesday warned of severe consequences to energy supplies in a letter to congressional leadership.

“Last Friday, representatives of the oil and gas industry began receiving notifications from the railroads that they intend to begin curtailing shipments of hazardous materials and other chemicals as of today, to ensure carloads of product are not stranded on the tracks if a work stoppage occurs. This curtailment alone, could have profound impacts on the ability of our industry to deliver critical energy supplies to market,” wrote Senior Vice President of Policy, Economics and Regulatory Affairs Frank Macchiarola.

“API requests that Congress prepare to act if negotiations this week fail to produce an agreement to facilitate a workable settlement and prevent catastrophic disruptions to the freight rail network.”

While it is still unclear whether Congress will act, Marc Scribner, senior transportation policy analyst at Reason Foundation said there is increasing pressure for Washington to get involved.

“Members of Congress from both parties are growing increasingly frustrated with union intransigence and are unlikely to tolerate a strike given current supply chain problems and the timing so close to their midterm elections,” Scribner said.

If a strike occurs, Scribner could see Congress acting within 24 hours to “end the strike and impose the PEB recommendations as a final settlement.”

A strike could hurt a national economy still reeling from supply chain problems. And Tuesday’s inflation number, holding close to steady at 8.3 percent annually, included news that grocery prices rose 13.5 percent year over year.

No goods on trains mean no products on trucks and even higher prices in stores due to supply and demand. As a result, organizations including the Beer Institute and Retail Industry Leaders Association (RILA) are, like the American Trucking Association, urging Congress to get involved.

“Reports indicate a strike could impact the economy by up to two billion dollars each day in lost activity,” said RILA’s Michael Hanson. “Absent a voluntary agreement by the Sept. 16 deadline, Congress should take swift action to implement the PEB recommendations.”

Additional reporting by Damien Fisher

The three Republican candidates vying to take on Democratic Rep. Annie Kuster this fall clashed over immigration and abortion Monday night during the New Hampshire Journal debate at Saint Anselm’s New Hampshire Institute for Politics. 

Bob Burns, the “pro-Trump” candidate from Pembroke, spent most of the night on offense. He attacked his opponents, Weare’s Lily Tang Williams and Keene Mayor George Hansel, over their stances on illegal immigration. 

Burns accused Tang Williams of supporting a path to citizenship for illegal immigrants and called out “Woke George’s sanctuary city, Keene.”

“So, you’re lying again, Bob, as usual,” Hansel responded. “Keene is not a sanctuary city.”

Hansel said Keene’s police chief assured him the department will cooperate with federal agents when enforcing immigration laws, as opposed to the policies in actual sanctuary cities where police do not assist federal immigration agents.

Tang Williams also accused Burns of lying about her record. She supports a pathway to citizenship for people who qualify for the DACA program, those brought to the U.S. illegally when they were children and who were raised in America. However, she said she does not support a pathway for people who came illegally as adults.

“Bob’s campaign has been attacking me from the very beginning,” Tang Williams said. “Who needs Democrats when you have Republicans attacking you?”

They also differ on abortion considering the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in the Dobbs case. Burns said if elected he will push for a federal heartbeat bill that would limit abortions nationally.

“Instead of codifying Roe v. Wade, we should be codifying life,” Burns said.

Tang Williams supports the recent Supreme Court ruling to send the question of abortion back to the states, allowing local voters to make their own decision. Tang Williams does not support any new federal law regulating or banning abortion, saying the matter needs to be left to the people in each state.

“It should always belong to the states to let local people decide it,” she said.

Hansel, who is pro-choice, agrees with the Dobbs ruling, saying it allows states to craft laws that make sense for their own people. He does not support any federal law regarding abortion.

“This is an issue that is firmly with the states, which is where it belongs,” Hansel said. “This is a contentious issue, and the decisions belong as close to the people as possible.”

Hansel said voters are very concerned about record levels of inflation and soaring energy prices, issues where President Joe Biden’s administration has failed and they are not up for fighting more culture war battles.

“It’s all about inflation, it’s all about the higher costs that people are paying here in New Hampshire because of Joe Biden and Ann Kuster’s reckless Washington agenda,” Hansel said.

Both Tang Williams and Burns sent out press releases Monday night claiming victory in the debate.

The full debate, hosted by NH Journal, is available for streaming online at NH Journal’s Facebook page.

Citizens may have a lot of questions about Manchester School District’s policy of keeping students’ transgender activity secret from their parents. But thus far, officials in the state’s largest school district are not talking. Asked about the policy, school board officials, including Mayor Joyce Craig, all declined to defend it.

The district is currently being sued by a parent who claims it uses the policy to lie to her and other parents about their children and their gender identification. According to a motion to dismiss filed on behalf of the district, the district’s defense is its belief Manchester parents have no right to know what is going on in the schools when it comes to gender issues.

“(T)his motion can be easily resolved by answering one discrete question: Do school districts have a legally enforceable duty to inform parents when a student uses a name or gender pronoun different than that assigned at birth? Because the answer to this question is no, the Complaint should be dismissed,” MSD’s filing states.

Craig, who chairs the school board, declined requests for comment on the policy. She also would not answer questions about whether she supports the policy. None of the members of the board’s policy committee, Leslie Want, Nicole Leapley, Peter Perich, Sean Parr, or Jason Bonilla, would discuss the matter, either.

Andrew Toland, communications director for the district, declined to discuss the lawsuit. Toland pointed to language in the motion to dismiss to counter the claim that the district requires staff to lie about transgender students to their parents.

“In other words, contrary to plaintiff’s characterizations, the district’s policy does not completely prohibit District staff from disclosing a student’s gender identity and expression to parents, nor does it require District staff to ‘lie,’” the motions to dismiss states. “It does not even contain an express mandate at all. It simply recognizes that the student has a right to privacy and that staff ‘should not’ disclose such information unless the student has authorized it.”

Critics note the policy, as stated, expressly strips authority from parents and gives it to children and teachers.

That is not how school board member Ken Tassey understands the policy. Speaking as a parent, Tassey said in practice, the policy would force school staff to use a student’s preferred pronouns and gender identity in school, but use that same child’s birth pronouns and identity when talking to parents who may not know what is going on.

“The policy requires that school staff lie to parents. It usurps the parent’s right to be informed about their children’s health and to exercise their parental love,” Tassey said. “The policy places the school district and the employees above the child’s parent, which is bizarre and arrogant.”

Tassey said the policy is predicated on the idea that all parents are potentially abusive toward their LGBTQI+ children, and that disclosing a child’s nonconforming identity would put that child in danger. That is simply not the case, he said.

“The vast majority of parents are going to hug their kids and say I love you,” he said.

Tassey is also concerned the policy does not have an age range and would apply to students as young as first or second grade. If a child disclosed gender dysmorphia to a guidance counselor or teacher, who may or may not be trained to deal with such a psychologically complex issue, that child’s parents would be kept in the dark if the child wished it.

Jonathan Butcher, the Will Skillman Fellow in Education with the conservative Heritage Foundation, said Manchester parents are not alone when it comes to school districts keeping secrets about their children.

“The issue of school officials hiding information about a child’s confusion about their sex is a real concern. Districts and even state departments around the country have made such secrecy to be official policy, including in New Jersey, Kansas, and elsewhere,” Butcher said. “Except in very specific cases related to a child’s safety, educators should be required to inform parents about any health-related issues concerning their child. Public school officials should not make it a policy to keep secrets about a minor child from his or her parents.”

A proposed legislative solution, the Parental Bill of Rights, would have required schools to make those disclosures to parents. The bill was shot down this year when Democrats and some Republicans objected, claiming that it would put children in danger from their own parents. U.S. Rep. Chris Pappas, D-Manchester, strongly opposed the Parental Bill of Rights.

“This legislation will do real, lasting harm to kids and should not become law. It’s so important that LGBTQ+ youth in New Hampshire know that we see them, we support them, and that they can be themselves,” Pappas said earlier this year when the bill was pending.

The Parental Bill of Rights was also opposed by New Hampshire Attorney General John Formella and Gov. Chris Sununu. Assistant Attorney General Sean Locke, with the Department of Justice’s Civil Rights Unit, testified before lawmakers in May that parts of the bill were legally problematic.

“This language could be construed to require school staff to effectively ‘out’ students–against the student’s wishes–to their parents if and when those students seek to avail themselves of protections pursuant to the school’s gender expression or identity policies,” Locke said in a statement. “This language targets students based upon their gender identity or expression for different treatment from other students, which denies those students the benefits of the particular policies designed to protect them from discrimination in schools.”

Butcher said much of the concern about outing students stems from the actions being undertaken by President Joe Biden’s administration. Biden is proposing changes to the Title IX program to combat bullying against trans students which change the definitions of sex and gender.

“It essentially proposes that schools must treat ‘sex’ to mean ‘sexual orientation and gender identity’ [as opposed to biology] and so schools would have to adopt policies to conform or risk an (Office of Civil Rights) investigation,” Butcher said.

Biden recently issued an executive order to increase access to so-called gender-affirming health care.

Butcher said the Biden team is pursuing a radical agenda that rides roughshod over parents when it comes to the care of their own children.

“Such policies could include one that says educators may not tell parents when a child wants to ‘assume’ a different gender at school. Thus, the overall policy does more to advance radical gender ideas instead of affirming parents as a child’s primary caregiver,” Butcher said.

GOFFSTOWN — The five Republican candidates competing to take on Sen. Maggie Hassan in the fall burnished their conservative bona fides during Monday night’s debate hosted by New Hampshire Journal.

Retired Gen. Don Bolduc, bitcoin businessman Bruce Fenton, entrepreneur Vikram Mansharamani, State Sen. President Chuck Morse and former Londonderry Town Manager Kevin Smith mostly stuck to criticizing what they say are Hassan and President Joe Biden’s failed policies, though Fenton and Smith did go on the attack at times against the other Republicans.

Smith targeted Bolduc several times during the debate, questioning his temperament and attacking his past statements on the war in Ukraine. Smith referenced a March 2022 Fox News interview in which Bolduc appeared to urge the CIA or military to “get in there on the ground” in Ukraine, using “indirect fires and direct capabilities” to attack Russian targets. At one point, he said the U.S. could use “special operations troops in a way that we get in there,” though without “boots on the ground.”

“These are Democrat tactics, attacking Republicans like this,” Bolduc said in response to Smith’s attack. “Yeah, I have in the past, and I acknowledged that and said hey, like anybody else you regret some of the things you say. That’s being honest, that’s being truthful. This up here is political theater because he polls at two points.”

Fenton repeatedly attacked Morse for what he said was a lack of leadership during the COVID-19 pandemic, and for being a “deal maker” and a rubber stamp for the Republican Party. Morse did not respond to any of the attacks launched throughout the debate. Immediately after the debate ended, his team declared victory.

“The difference between me and them is I’ve actually done it,” Morse said in a statement.

Morse touted the fiscally conservative budgets passed during his time in the State House, and his socially conservative achievements like getting Education Freedom Accounts passed and a 24-week abortion ban made into law.

The candidates largely agreed on the issues; they want energy independence, lower taxes, stronger border enforcement, and they are opposed to abortion and gun control. All five said they would not support a federal abortion ban imposed by Washington, D.C.

Where they differ is in their emphasis on the issues.

Fenton, for example, says he can bring along Free State libertarians and independents as part of his coalition. He repeatedly hit the COVID-19 pandemic response as an example of the tyranny he is fighting.

“A senator doesn’t have that much power, but what you can do is disrupt and I’m a disrupter. I’ve been a disrupter my whole career. And this is what we need now. We need a disrupter desperately because of what have going on in our country,” he said. “If I had sat on this stage four years ago years ago and told you that a scientist was going to be able to shut down millions of businesses and put people out of their jobs and people were going to be forced to wear a mask, you’d have thought I was insane.”

Smith made the case for himself as the most electable conservative with experience going back to his time as a 19-year-old state representative, and his years leading the town of Londonderry.

“We’re going to need the strongest, most electable conservative candidate as our nominee in order to win this race. And I believe I am that person,” Smith said. “The reality is we’re going to need the Glenn Younkin model for our nominee to win this race. I’ve said all along we’re going to need not just conservative Republicans, we’re going to need Trump Independents and we’re going to need Regan Democrats as well.”

Mansharamani, a newcomer to politics, told voters he would bring an independent, results-oriented view to the job

“The first thing to know about Maggie Hassan is she is a party-line voter. She doesn’t think for herself. Where I’ve written a book called ‘Think For Yourself,'” Mansharamani said.

The debate, sponsored by N.H. Journal, was held at the Saint Anselm College New Hampshire Institute of Politics auditorium. It was aired on Manchester Public T.V. Channel 16 and streamed online. N.H. Journal Managing Editor Michael Graham led the panel that included longtime New Hampshire GOP strategist and media personality Alicia Preston Xanthopoulos and Washington Times Capitol Hill reporter Haris Alic.

It was the first debate of the primaries for the race, but Smith started calling for four more debates before the event began. Mansharamani topped that, calling for 10 GOP candidate debates.

Matt Mowers, his wife Cassie, and their 10-month-old son Jack got up early on Mother’s Day and rushed to their local drugstore on a mission: Find one of the last few available containers of baby formula. 

“She literally ran into CVS while I waited in the car with Jack. Happy Mother’s Day,” Mowers said.

The Mowers family has been scrambling for baby formula for months, and the situation keeps getting worse. Mowers, who is running in the GOP primary to unseat Democratic U.S. Rep. Chris Pappas, has been using his downtime on the campaign trail to search for baby formula. One recent day of campaigning had Mowers checking three different stores in three different towns. And he still came up empty-handed.

“It’s very difficult to find what he needs,” Mowers said. “We usually use one of the sensitive formula brands because it’s easier for him to keep it down.”

The Mowers family isn’t alone. Nationwide, 40 percent of baby formula brands are now simply out of stock. Major retailers are restricting the amount of baby formula people can buy. The shortages and buying limits reverberate to people in desperate circumstances.

Alyssa Dandrea, with the New Hampshire Coalition Against Sexual and Domestic Violence, said women with infants who flee an abusive home for a shelter don’t have the formula they need.

“We’ve heard from our crisis centers throughout the state that survivors are having an increasingly difficult time finding baby formula for their children,” Dandrea said. “Although not all of our programs have infants in shelters, advocates shared that new store policies now limit how much formula one person can buy and that has added to this challenge. Survivors of domestic violence already face so many economic barriers, and the lack of food and other essential products present additional challenges for survivors seeking to reestablish their lives.”

Kevin Daigle, president and CEO of the New Hampshire Grocers Association, said customers are anxious as the supply is inconsistent.

“It’s hard to come by. Grocers are getting customers out there inquiring about it, and they’re worried and concerned. They’re not able to get their hands on it,” Daigle said.

While there are the familiar COVID-19 supply chain issues, like labor shortage and supply chain slowdowns, Daigle said there is more to the baby formula crisis.

A big part of the problem is the February recall that shut down a major manufacturer, Abbott Nutrition. It makes formula under several brand names, including generic brands. After the bacteria Cronobacter sakaaakii was found in one brand, Abbott shut down its Michigan plant. It still has not reopened.

“They still haven’t found the sourcing for it,” Daigle said.

However, Daigle said, the problems with the baby formula supply were known before the recall. Inflation and difficulty in sourcing ingredients were already impacting the industry.

Economists lay part of the blame at the feet of the federal government — in particular the Women, Infants and Children (WIC) program that supplements food for poor families. As part of the program, WIC essentially subsidizes the baby formula industry, warping the free market in the process.

“The overarching problem is that price signals in the baby-formula market don’t work well to begin with,” wrote National Review’s Dominic Pino. “A 2010 study from the USDA’s Economic Research Service estimated that 57 to 68 percent of all baby formula sold in the U.S. was purchased through the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC)” Pino wrote. “That means over half of the baby formula that’s consumed in the U.S. isn’t really bought and sold on a free market at all.”

Libertarian Reason magazine finds the government’s trade and tariff policies also partially to blame. Tariffs mean key baby formula ingredients are too expensive for American manufacturers, and American consumers are locked out from buying formula made overseas because of FDA regulations.

“Last year, for example, the FDA forced a recall of approximately 76,000 units of infant formula manufactured in Germany and imported into the United States. The formula wasn’t a health or safety risk to babies but merely failed to meet the FDA’s labeling standards. In this case, the products were banned for not informing parents that they contained less than 1 milligram of iron per 100 calories,” Reason states.

President Joe Biden’s administration claims it will solve the problem by having government officials working with manufacturers to ramp up production.

Mowers said his family goes through at least one container of formula a week for their baby and prices have more than doubled. He recently paid about $30 for a 32-ounce container of baby formula.

“We try to be careful. We don’t want to buy out the store because you want to leave some for other families. But that means every week you’re always running around looking for it,” Mowers said.

They tried doing an internet order, but that hasn’t worked either.

“We’re waiting weeks for one can,” he said.

Mowers said the last time he experienced a baby formula shortage was his time working in the State Department and the U.S. was getting food aid to Venezuela.

“This is something you see in failed states, not America,” Mowers said. “The FDA should have seen it coming. The recall happened in February, and they knew it was going to lead to shortages. This isn’t getting any better.”