#

When it comes to Medicaid expansion in New Hampshire, Gov. Chris Sununu is in a tight spot. It’s not just him, actually. A lot of Republican governors across the country are having a difficult time figuring out how to balance the “repeal and replace” rhetoric on Obamacare within their party, while also seeking to protect certain provisions of the health care law, like Medicaid, that help the residents of their states.

It’s a balancing act that Sununu, the first GOP governor in the Granite State in 12 years, waded into last week. He said in its current form, he’s not “signing on” to the House Republicans’ American Health Care Act due to his concerns over Medicaid funding and coverage.

“The bill that’s been proposed in Congress gives us concerns on a lot of different levels,” Sununu said on Tuesday. “Expanded Medicaid is part of that discussion. There’s no doubt expanded Medicaid has provided [drug] recovery, treatment options for a lot of folks that otherwise may not have had that option available.”

The Congressional Budget Office estimates that $880 million less in federal money would be spent on Medicaid over the next decade. The Republican plan phases out the program by 2020 with states receiving funding for existing expansion recipients as long as they maintain continuous Medicaid coverage.

The Medicaid provisions in the Republican’s bill are reigniting a longstanding debate between conservatives and moderates of the party. Conservatives are critical of the program’s cost and performance, while moderates are worried that cuts to the program will result in a loss of funds in their state’s budget, leaving patients without help.

Sununu falls into the latter category. He has previously indicated his support for Medicaid expansion, yet doesn’t want to make the program permanent. He’s waiting to see how the Medicaid battle plays out in Congress before taking any action in the state.

New Hampshire was one of 31 states that expanded Medicaid under former President Barack Obama’s Affordable Care Act. Former Democratic Gov. Maggie Hassan, now a U.S. senator for the state, signed the plan into law in 2014 after working with Republican legislators to approve it in two-year increments. She signed the latest expansion bill in 2016, with the program scheduled to expire at the end of 2018. New Hampshire has more than 187,000 individuals enrolled in either traditional or expanded Medicaid, according to state health officials.

During Sununu’s 2016 gubernatorial bid, he said extending the state’s Medicaid program until 2018 was “probably a good step forward,” but lawmakers shouldn’t keep doing it every two years.

“I like the idea that we’re moving forward without any tax payer burden, any tax burden on the taxpayers back,” he told NH1 News in February 2016. “We have essentially a public-private partnership helping to fund it as we move forward, and those are very positive steps. What I would like to see is a long term strategy for this state, not simply taking it in two- or four- year chunks.”

Democrats attempted to paint him as opposing Medicaid expansion because of his 2014 Executive Council vote against a $292 million state contract to implement Medicaid expansion. However, the item was added to the agenda at the last minute and he tried unsuccessfully for a two-week delay to fully understand the contract. He said the council shouldn’t vote on something that hasn’t been read thoroughly.

Yet, throughout the campaign, he was ambiguous about his plans for the future of Medicaid in New Hampshire. He didn’t indicate if he was supportive of extending past 2018 or would support an outright repeal of the program.

Those in New Hampshire who were concerned about Medicaid’s future were also not consoled by a letter Sununu sent to Congressional GOP leadership in January. With Republican President Donald Trump in the White House and GOP majorities in the U.S. House and Senate, it appeared that the repeal of Obamacare was imminent.

As a result, Sununu sent a letter to U.S. House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy, urging Congress to give states as much flexibility as possible to design their own health care systems.

“We urge Congress to untie the hands of the States,” he wrote in the letter. “Let us have the flexibility to design a New Hampshire system for New Hampshire citizens.”

However, his letter left out any mention or comment on Medicaid expansion.

It wasn’t until February that Sununu became more clear on what he thinks about the program. He said “there’s no doubt that it’s [Medicaid expansion] been helpful.”

“It was a price tag of somewhere between $400 and $500 million,” he told NHPR. “We’ve been able to do it to date without a single New Hampshire taxpayer dollar. No state taxes go into it.”

Later that month, he expanded on what he wanted to see from Medicaid in the GOP’s health care plan.

“When we hear the term block grants coming out of Washington, especially with healthcare, the opportunities are tremendous for us,” he said at a meeting of the Concord Chamber of Commerce. “We spend tens of millions of dollars on the state level on things we simply don’t need. So give us a block grant.”

When Republicans initially rolled out their health care plan, block grants weren’t included. The House plan focused on paying states a fixed per-capita amount to cover their population based on their average expenses, but a Republican amendment to the bill allowed the option for states to choose a Medicaid block grant in lieu of the capped reimbursement model.

Under current health care laws, when an eligible person enrolls in Medicaid there are matching federal funds to ensure that they get care. The block grant proposal caps that federal share, letting states decide how to spend the dollars on care. However, many health care professionals say capping Medicaid funding in block grants could hurt access to quality health care for the poor, children, and elderly by cutting the amount of federal dollars available.

It’s not immediately clear if Sununu approves of the most recent, updated version of the American Health Care Act, but Sununu said he would work with Trump to to ensure that the bill gives states the opportunity to create “flexible” and “nimble” health care program.

Democrats in the state, including Hassan, believe block grants would fail to sustain the expanded Medicaid program. It’s a position that’s shared with many advocacy groups, including AARP, which released a “fact sheet” last week about how changing Medicaid to a block grant or per capita cap could hurt New Hampshire residents.

“The House bill will impact health care seriously, but what it would do to Medicaid expansion … it would in fact repeal it,” Hassan said at a press conference last week. “That [block grants] will make health insurance out of reach for thousands of Granite Staters, and it hurts the ability of those on the front lines to save lives and fight this [opioid] epidemic.”

New Hampshire has one of the highest drug overdose death rates in the country. Nearly 500 people died from drug overdoses in 2016 and approximately 6,000 Medicaid expansion recipients have accessed treatment, state health officials said.

Sununu, and other state Republican leaders, believe block grants will allow them to allocate the money to places that need it most, such as towns hardest hit by the opioid crisis. Yet, some policy experts argue that block grants will severely strain state budgets and leave states vulnerable when they have to deal with unexpected issues, like drug outbreaks that raise the average cost of treating individual patients.

Sununu said he has spoken with Trump and Vice President Mike Pence about the importance of Medicaid with treatment and recovery for the opioid crisis, and how that requirement should continue under the GOP plan.

The N.H. Senate tabled a bill Thursday, without debate, that would make Medicaid expansion permanent. The senators said they wanted to wait to see what will happen at the national level before they tackle it in the state.

As conservatives and moderates battle it out on Medicaid provisions in the GOP health care bill, it appears New Hampshire, and Sununu, will wait for the dust to settle.

Follow Kyle on Twitter.

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

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.

U.S. Sen. Maggie Hassan met with Supreme Court nominee Judge Neil Gorsuch on Monday to discuss issues important to the freshman senator from New Hampshire. Republicans were quick to criticize her statement about the meeting, saying it’s riddled with hypocrisies and calling on her to support a full Senate hearing for Gorsuch.

“I appreciated the opportunity to meet with Judge Gorsuch and to discuss the importance of a strong and independent judiciary,” Hassan said in a statement after the meeting. “In our conversation, I highlighted the critical role the judicial branch plays in protecting the civil rights of all Americans, including a woman’s constitutionally protected right to make her own health decisions. I also emphasized the importance of ensuring equality for LGBTQ individuals, as well as my concerns with the influence of unlimited corporate and dark money in American politics. I will continue to thoroughly vet Judge Gorsuch’s record and views throughout the hearing process.”

Hassan and her Democratic colleague, Sen. Jeanne Shaheen, have expressed concerns about Gorsuch, but have also called for a full confirmation hearing and vote by the Senate.

“It is not in our interest to deny a hearing to Neil Gorsuch,” Shaheen said at a Friday town hall. “That’s what’s prescribed under the Constitution. Let me tell you something. I’m not going to go out and say it’s wrong for them and then say that it’s right for us.”

Last year, the GOP Senate leadership refused to hold a hearing or vote for former President Barack Obama’s nominee, Merrick Garland. There has been some discussion among Senate Democrats who want to filibuster or block Trump’s nominee, similar to what Republicans did to Garland. The GOP has been calling for an “up-or-down” vote on Gorsuch, meaning a direct “yay” or “nay” vote on him without any obstruction.

Hassan and Shaheen have not made a final decision on how they will vote for Gorsuch. His confirmation will require 60 votes, or a cloture vote, according to Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer.

“I think it is absolutely appropriate and right for us to do our constitutional duty and have a hearing,” Hassan said.

New Hampshire Republican Party Chairman Jeanie Forrester is going to hold Hassan to her promise, noting that last year, the former governor called for a hearing and confirmation vote for Garland.

“If she doesn’t call for an immediate hearing and vote on Judge Gorsuch, she will be in direct contradiction of her past statements,” Forrester said.

Hassan penned an op-ed in the New Hampshire Union Leader in February 2016, calling on the Senate to hold a hearing and vote to fill the Supreme Court vacancy left by the death of Justice Antonin Scalia

“As is often said, justice delayed is justice denied. A stalled Supreme Court will not move our country forward; it will only exacerbate the deep political divide and gridlock in Washington,” Hassan wrote.

America Rising Squared (AR2), an arm of the Republican opposition research group America Rising, is also pushing for Hassan to call for an up-or-down vote for Gorsuch.

“After spending nearly a year talking about the importance of having a ninth justice on the Supreme Court, Senator Hassan should join Senator Shaheen in calling for an ‘up-or-down’ vote for Judge Gorsuch,” said Nathan Brand, spokesman for AR2, in a statement to NH Journal. “If she instead joins in Senator Schumer’s obstructionist games, it reaffirms her hypocrisy and the fact that she puts her partisan agenda before the interest of Granite Staters.”

There was some confusion earlier this month on Shaheen’s comments about calling for an up-or-down vote. On the Senate floor, she surprised many people when she said on February 7 that she would support an up-or-down vote, going against what Schumer wants. Shaheen met with Gorsuch on February 15.

“Unlike the Republican majority, I haven’t heard any Democrats saying we don’t think that Judge Gorsuch should get a hearing or that he should get an up-or-down vote,” she said. “Everybody I’ve talked to agrees he should get a hearing and an up-or-down vote.”

However, Ryan Nickel, Shaheen’s communications director, took to Twitter to correct the record saying she meant a cloture vote, or 60 “yeas” to be approved.

Ar2 also criticized Hassan’s statement, specifically when she said she has “concerns with the influence of unlimited corporate and dark money in American politics.”

The New Hampshire Senate race between Hassan and former GOP Sen. Kelly Ayotte was the second most expensive race in the country, with more than $90 million spent in outside funding. Only the Pennsylvania Senate race topped it with more than $119 million in outside spending.

Hassan and Ayotte had the opportunity to avoid big spending by outside groups in the race, but a pledge failed to come to fruition.

Ayotte proposed a “People’s Pledge” similar to one adopted in Massachusetts in the 2012 race between Sen. Scott Brown and Sen. Elizabeth Warren — requiring that a candidate who benefits from a third party ad donate 50 percent of the ad’s total cost to a charity of the other candidate’s choice.

Hassan countered Ayotte, declining to sign the pledge and suggesting limiting each candidate’s spending to $15 million. “This move is politician speak for ‘I do not want to sign the People’s Pledge,’” Ayotte said. The candidates could not come to an agreement and the outside group money flooded into the state.

The Center for Responsive Politics wrote an article about the staggering amount of dark money in the New Hampshire Senate race titled, “Dems in New Hampshire supported by the secret money they rail against nationally.” The article exposed the issue of Democratic candidates being against dark money and outside spending, yet letting it happen anyway.

“If hypocrisy is the coin of the realm in politics, then spending by a Democratic dark money group in New Hampshire’s Senate race could be Exhibit A,” the article stated. “For years, Democrats have blasted Republicans’ use of unlimited secret money in elections. There’s one problem: Hassan herself is receiving millions of dollars in ground support…” from outside groups.

More outside money was spent against Republicans in the New Hampshire Senate race. Nearly $45 million was funneled to the Granite State opposing Ayotte, while $34.8 million went against Hassan.

Gorsuch is making the rounds through the Senate, led by Ayotte, who is helping President Donald Trump’s nominee through the confirmation process. The Senate Judiciary Committee’s confirmation hearings are scheduled to begin on March 20.

Follow Kyle on Twitter.

It’s never too early to be thinking about the 2018 midterm elections. For the incumbent party in the White House, it usually means losing seats. However, Republicans are poised to retain control of the House and Senate, barring any major catastrophe, which would give Democrats the advantage.

In New Hampshire, it could mean tough races for Democratic incumbent Reps. Carol Shea-Porter and Annie Kuster, and their final campaign finance filings for the 2016 election cycle can provide clues on what to expect for their reelection campaigns.

Assuming they run again for their seats, Kuster and Shea-Porter enter the 2018 contests with a significant difference between them in their total cash on hand.

Shea-Porter only has approximately $3,800 in the bank as a result of a tough election against former Republican Rep. Frank Guinta and Independent candidate Shawn O’Connor. Out of the 435 representatives in the House, she has the fifth lowest cash on hand total.

Kuster, on the other hand, sits modestly with just over $1 million stashed away.

The median amount that lawmakers who won their races in 2016 have in the bank is about $367,000, according to the Center for Responsive Politics (CRP), a nonpartisan research group tracking money and lobbying in elections. Specifically for House candidates, it’s about $361,000.

Of course, for party leaders they have the biggest war chests since they are expected to raise money to help their colleagues. House Speaker Paul Ryan had the highest cash on hand in the House with $9.1 million.

“The typical pattern is that campaigns that are in tough reelections or open seat battles will almost never have any money left,” said Caleb Burns, a partner at Wiley Rein LLP, to the CRP. “But conversely, the opposite is also true, where members of Congress have extraordinarily safe seats and don’t feel the pressure of having to raise a lot of money.”

That’s especially true for New Hampshire’s representatives. Kuster was assumed to have a relatively safe seat in the Granite State’s 2nd Congressional District, while Shea-Porter in the 1st Congressional District was always going to have a tough time ousting Guinta.

So what does this mean going into next year’s race?

Well, it shouldn’t come as a surprise, but the National Republican Congressional Committee (NRCC) included Shea-Porter and Kuster in their initial 36-member target list.

Kuster spent nearly $2.2 million against Republican challenger Jim Lawrence. He spent less than $100,000, and yet, Kuster only defeated Lawrence by 5 percent, 50-45 percent, respectively, with Libertarian John Babiarz receiving 5 percent. The NRCC figures that if they can recruit a decent candidate and put a little money into the race, they could have a chance at ousting Kuster.

For Shea-Porter, the 1st Congressional District is always a toss up, mostly because it’s been a Shea-Porter versus Guinta contest every two years since 2010. The NRCC and the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee usually throw a decent amount of funds toward the district’s candidates. It also helps the NRCC that Shea-Porter has been kicked out by voters before and she defeated Guinta in a crowded field. She won by a margin of 162,080 to 156,176, while independents O’Connor and Brendan Kelly and Libertarian Robert Lombardo garnered a total of 46,316 votes among them, possibly to the detriment of Guinta.

However, Republicans swept the 1st District in every other federal race. Donald Trump defeated Hillary Clinton by about 6,000 votes, former Sen. Kelly Ayotte beat Sen. Maggie Hassan also by about 6,000 votes, and Gov. Chris Sununu defeated former Executive Councilor Colin Van Ostern by about 18,000 votes. With the right candidate, the NRCC believes they can flip the district again.

Any ideas on who’s going to run against Shea-Porter or Kuster?

As recently as Wednesday, one Republican has indicated that he’s “seriously” interested in challenging Shea-Porter in the 1st District.

John Burt, a four-term New Hampshire House member from Goffstown, told WMUR that he has spoken with conservatives throughout the state and region about running for Congress. He said he hopes to make a final decision in the coming weeks.

“I have no doubt that I can beat Carol Shea-Porter,” he said. “In 2018, it’s going to be another 2010-type sweep of Republicans heading to D.C. and also to the New Hampshire State House.”

Other Republicans being talked about as possible candidates include state Sen. Andy Sanborn from Bedford and former state commissioner of the Department of Health and Human Services John Stephen, who is also a former gubernatorial and congressional candidate.

Don’t be surprised if Guinta makes another run for the seat he lost. Neither Shea-Porter nor Guinta ruled out running again in 2018 if they lost.

Earlier this month, the DCCC made Kuster the chair of its “Frontline” incumbent retention program, which gives special attention to vulnerable Democratic incumbents, so they must feel confident that she can win again in 2018.

However, former state Rep. Joe Sweeney of Salem previously told WMUR that he is “in the very early portion of exploring a run” for the 2nd District against Kuster.

“I firmly believe that Congresswoman Kuster does not adequately represent the district, and her performance and voting record presents a winnable path,” he said.

Senate President Chuck Morse could also be a potential candidate. The Salem senator is listed on the National Governors Association’s website as a former governor of New Hampshire. He served as acting governor for two days from January 3 to 5, when former Gov. Hassan resigned early to be sworn in as U.S. Senator. The New Hampshire Union Leader sees him as an option for Republican Party operatives still looking for a candidate.

Voters shouldn’t rule out seeing the two Republican frontrunners from the 2nd District GOP primary on the ballot either. Former House Majority Leader Jack Flanagan from Brookline indicated that he was hearing from supporters to run again in 2018. He lost the GOP primary to Lawrence by about 5,000 votes. Also, with Lawrence’s close finish to Kuster in the general election, he heard calls from supporters to consider yet another run. If he did, this would be his third congressional bid in six years.

Follow Kyle on Twitter.

Some local headlines of the Betsy DeVos confirmation hearing showed Sen. Maggie Hassan making her mark early in her first term.

“Hassan emerges as fierce critic of Trump’s Cabinet nominees,” reads an article from the Associated Press. Hassan’s questioning of President Donald Trump’s nominee for secretary of education earned her 15 minutes in the national spotlight after she hammered DeVos on the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act and school vouchers.

But a look at Hassan’s record shows she has taken advantage of school choice, despite questioning DeVos about it.

Hassan sits on the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor & Pensions (HELP) and voted against DeVos’s nomination on Tuesday in a committee vote. The freshman senator, whose son has cerebral palsy, is an expert on public education for students with disabilities. Her son, Ben, went to public high school.

But DeVos has received a significant amount of criticism from Senate Democrats and the media due to her lack of experience in the public school system and for being in favor of school choice and school vouchers. The National Education Association (NEA) and the American Federation of Teachers (AFT) are also against her nomination.

However, six of the 10 Senate Democrats on the HELP committee attended private or parochial schools, or have children and grandchildren attending them, according to information obtained by The Daily Caller News Foundation Investigative Group.

Sens. Robert Casey Jr. of Pennsylvania, Sheldon Whitehouse of Rhode Island, and Michael Bennet of Colorado sit on the committee and have never attended public school, according to the investigation.

For Hassan, her husband Tom, served as the principal of the elite Phillips Exeter Academy, where their daughter, Margaret, attended, as well. Tom was censured last year for failing to disclose sexual misconduct charges against a faculty member.

Hassan received approximately $10,000 from the NEA during her Senate campaign and the union also spent $1.5 million against her opponent, incumbent Republican Sen. Kelly Ayotte. AFT also spent $4,400 against Ayotte.

“It’s just bizarre to see people who have exercised those school options suggesting that it’s somehow problematic or malicious to extend those options to all families,” said Frederick Hess, executive editor of Education Next, to the Daily Caller.

Hassan’s record on school choice is also revealing. While she was a supporter of public charter schools as governor, she did veto a bill that would enable small school districts to pay tuition, at public or private schools, for students of any grade level if it is not available within their resident district.

On a recent interview with NPR, Hassan reiterated her support for charter schools, but she took issue with DeVos position of a voucher system.

“I am a proud supporter of public charter schools here in New Hampshire, as well,” she said. “But there is a real difference between public charter schools, which can be established working with local communities and educators to fill a particular need in the public school system and provide more alternatives and more choice for learning styles and families – than a voucher system, which diverts money from the public school system, generally and often doesn’t cover the full cost of the private school that the student is attending.”

During DeVos’s confirmation hearing, Hassan also questioned her on her role in her family’s foundation, the Edgar and Elsa Prince Foundation. While it’s being debated if DeVos was accurate with statements during the hearing about having a role or not, she is also being charged that she and her family have donated extensively to groups which promote the idea that lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) students must undergo “conversion therapy.”

The claim comes from Rep. Mark Pocan, D-Wis., who cites their large donations to the Focus on the Family group as evidence. Politifact found his claim to be “Mostly False” saying they found indications that the group supports conversion therapy, but there was no evidence that they believe that LGBT students must undergo it.

A recent report by The New York Times, highlights another side of DeVos not seen in public. She has supported her gay friends and advocated for LGBT rights as far back as the 1990s. This shows her coming out in support significantly earlier than a lot of Democrats who are questioning her on these beliefs.

“At that time, two colleagues recalled, she made accommodations for a transgender woman to use the women’s restroom at a Michigan Republican Party call center,” the article states. She also used her political connections to help persuade other Michigan Republicans to sign a brief urging the Supreme Court to legalize same-sex marriage in 2015, though she did not sign it herself.”

“This aspect of Ms. DeVos’s personal story is not only at odds with the public image of her and her family as prominent financiers of conservative causes, but it also stands out in a nascent administration with a number of members who have a history of opposing gay rights,” the report continued.

Hassan has been a champion for LGBT rights in New Hampshire, dating back to her time in the state Legislature. In June 2016, she issued an executive order that banned discrimination in state government based on gender identity.  

However, her colleague, Sen. Jeanne Shaheen, hasn’t always been supportive of LGBT rights. Shaheen has announced that she will vote “no” on DeVos’s nomination.

As governor, Shaheen initially opposed same-sex marriage. After Vermont signed into law a “civil union” bill in 2000, Shaheen said she didn’t support it.

“I believe that marital unions should exist between men and women,” she said at the time.

However, she came out in favor of marriage for same-sex couples in 2009 and became a sponsor of the Respect for Marriage Act in the U.S. Senate. She also voted in favor of the repeal of the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy in the military and supported government recognition of same-sex spouses of military members and other government personnel.

Although Hassan and Shaheen didn’t mention DeVos’s stance on LGBT student rights when they said they wouldn’t vote in favor of her nomination, it is interesting to note the differences in time of support between them of LGBT causes.

Shaheen agrees with Hassan, saying that DeVos is “unqualified” to be the next secretary of education. The full Senate is expected to vote on DeVos’s nomination on Thursday.

It’s an issue that’s been put on hold since last May, but soon enough, New Hampshire lawmakers are going to have to tackle net metering again. And last time, it took some serious convincing to get everyone on board.

Net metering is a policy that allows residents and businesses who use certain renewable energies, like solar, to sell excess electricity back to the grid at the same price they are spending when they buy energy from the grid. That means, when you get more electricity than you need or use in the summer months, for example, your local electric distributor keeps track of the surplus and gives you credit at their retail rate (for residents) for when you’re not getting enough during the dark, winter months. Larger consumers receive the wholesale rate, which is less than the retail rate.

But all of the state’s utilities are either approaching or have reached the statutory limits allowed for renewable energy, which is 100 megawatts — or 100 million watts. It’s apportioned to the utilities based on the number of customers each serves. That seems like a big number, but most people’s solar array for their homes run about 5 kilowatts (5000 watts).

Lawmakers created that arbitrary cap years ago when it was almost inconceivable that a limit would be reached. But over the years, solar energy increased in popularity and now many states are trying to figure out what to do.

The issue is that a lot of people don’t think this arrangement is fair. Electric utilities argue that solar customers still use the grid, but are zeroing out their bills with a “subsidy.” They say the costs are being pushed to electric customers who don’t have solar.

Solar advocates argue that there are benefits, such as reduced carbon emissions. Also, by having less demand on power lines during summer months, utilities can pass on those savings to other consumers.

Just last year, former Democratic Gov. Maggie Hassan signed a bill lifting the cap on net metering after most state utilities reached the limit. Originally, the net metering cap was 50 megawatts, but the House bill was raised to 100 megawatts. An earlier Senate version of the bill only increased the cap to 75 megawatts, but energy advocates said that wouldn’t be enough to fend off job losses in the solar industry, which ended up happening anyway. It took some Republicans a while to hop on board with raising the cap, which is why any bill on net metering could see some hurdles in the Legislature.

The bill also required the Public Utilities Commission (PUC) to review current net metering rates and set new ones. The results of their findings are expected to be released in May.

A new bill in the House Science, Technology and Energy Committee says it would eliminate the cap on net metering. However, the sponsor of House Bill 518, Rep. Richard Barry, R-Merrimack, said he plans on retaining the bill in committee until PUC releases its suggestions and then another public hearing would be held.

That didn’t stop solar advocates coming out in droves on Wednesday to list their concerns with the bill. Many attendees said they were excited about the possibility of eliminating the cap all together. But some of the language in the legislation led them to call it “a half truth and a booby trap for the growth of renewable energy.”

Specifically, they didn’t like how they eliminated the cap but were changing the net metering tariff to the average monthly wholesale energy rate, and not keeping it at the retail rate.

Holly Grossman, a resident of Barrington, said she has a solar array on her roof that takes care of all her energy needs.

“I would hate to see solar energy go down in the state,” she testified to the committee. “It’s very important for our economy. If we didn’t have it, what would we replace it with? Fossil fuels?”

It’s important to note that the legislation does not call for getting rid of net metering all together. That’s something solar advocates say would give too much control to monopoly utilities and could lead to new taxes on solar users and higher electricity rates for all customers. The bill calls for eliminating the cap, but it also includes the change in energy rate to the wholesale amount.

But that’s a change some businesses believe would be fairer.

Stefanie Lamb, vice president of public policy for the Business and Industry Association, said her group supports the bill and setting the tariff at the wholesale rate.

“People say we’re not supportive of the renewable energy industry by not opposing the bill,” she said. “We are supportive of it to help with the energy challenges in our state. But if our businesses are large energy users and make up a large part of our state’s economy. And then if they leave because the cost of business is getting outrageous, then we have a far bigger problem.”

Rep. Barry said it’s likely the bill would be changed or amended after PUC makes its recommendations. Most of the attendees applauded the move to table the bill until their study is done.

Other solar companies testified about how the bill in its current form would force them to close their doors and how they encourage young people to stay in New Hampshire, a problem the state is facing.

“Young people are leaving the state and we are providing clean tech jobs,” said Eric Shifflett of Granite State Solar. “Millennials are who we try to attract and hire. But this bill would put us out of business.”

Follow Kyle on Twitter.