#

Senate Republicans stand between the New Hampshire Advantage and dangerous judicial overreach in the ConVal decision that could force an income tax on Granite Staters, said Senate President Jeb Bradley (R-Wolfeboro).

Speaking before the Senate’s first session of the year at a Wednesday press conference in the Legislative Office Building, Bardley said the ConVal education funding decision essentially forces $536 million in new spending.

“There is no way, in my opinion, to do that without an income tax, or a sales tax or, possibly, both,” Bradley said. “That totally undermines the New Hampshire Advantage, and we just can’t go that route.”

Rockingham Superior Court Judge David Ruoff sided with the Contoocook Valley School District in its lawsuit against the state, ruling New Hampshire’s education funding system does not pay enough in adequacy grants and is, therefore, in violation of the state constitution. The Claremont state Supreme Court decisions from the 1990s found students have a right to an adequate education. That put the onus on lawmakers to define how much an adequate education costs and to come up with a fair way to fund it.

Ruoff’s decision, released in November, found the current adequacy grant of about $4,100 per pupil is too low and ought to be at least $7,300 per pupil. Ruoff left the final amount and funding mechanism up to the legislature. But Bradley said Ruoff’s decision puts New Hampshire on the road to an income tax. 

Worse, according to Bradley, it would force New Hampshire to revert to a donor town-type funding system where property taxes paid by homeowners in wealthier communities would be transferred to school systems in less-affluent cities or towns. That won’t happen while the GOP maintains control of the Senate, Bradley pledged.

“Between the 14 of us, an income tax, a sales tax, and donor towns are off the table,” Bradley said.

Some Democrats have already floated the idea of blocking the phase-out of the state’s tax on interest and dividends tax. Republicans say it’s just one step toward the longstanding goal of Granite State progressives to impose an income tax in the name of equity and social justice.

Gov. Chris Sununu is appealing Ruoff’s order to the New Hampshire Supreme Court. Bradley said it remains to be seen if the ConVal decision survives the appeal. 

Protecting New Hampshire’s strong economy and free way of life from a tax regime is one of the Senate GOP’s top priorities for the coming session, Bradley said.

“It’s vitally important that we protect hardworking men and women from higher taxes, allow small businesses to thrive, and maintain our economic status,” Bradley said.

Public safety is the second pillar of the Senate GOP’s agenda, he said, and that starts with bail reform. The House and Senate have competing proposals to fix the 2018 bail reform law. While it was supposed to end cash bail for non-violent offenders, it’s now blamed for returning violent criminals to the streets.

“Our bail system, with the best intentions several years ago, was reformed, and those reforms did not protect the public,” Bradley said.

Despite differences in the proposals, Bradley said he is optimistic a deal can be struck between the two chambers to fix the bail system one way or another. 

“I think the House has made a good faith effort,” Bradley said. “Nobody gets everything they want around here.”

The Senate is also looking to block sanctuary cities in New Hampshire, strengthen protections at the Northern Border, and pass mandatory minimum sentences for fentanyl traffickers, said Sen. Sharon Carson (R-Londonderry). 

The GOP agenda includes a parental transparency proposal that guarantees guardians access to school information about their children, a hotly-contested issue as some school districts insist teachers and administrators have the right to keep secrets – or even lie to – parents about their children’s behavior.

The senators will also push for local property tax relief, improvements to health care and mental health care, clean drinking water, investments in affordable housing, and a constitutional amendment to enshrine New Hampshire’s First in the Nation presidential primary into law. 

While the senators presented a united front for their agenda, there is a major fault line when it comes to marijuana legalization. Sununu reversed course last year by calling for the legislature to legalize recreational marijuana. Bradley admits the issue divides his caucus, but there will be a legalization effort this year he hopes everyone can agree to.

“There is the opportunity to get that done, but we’ll see what happens,” Bradley said.

Now that the campaign season has come to a close, it’s time for legislators to put aside political differences and get to work on the issues that matter most. They must recognize that here in New Hampshire, the legalization and commercialization of marijuana is not a political issue; it’s a public health and safety concern.

As lawmakers, it is the duty of our senators and representatives to ensure that our state remains one in which our children grow up strong and supported. Time and again, scientific studies have shown that using marijuana during younger years, when young brains are developing, can have long-term negative health effects.

Our brains are built from the bottom up and are still developing through our early to mid-twenties. Using harmful substances such as marijuana during these critical years has the potential to negatively impact brain development and impair thinking, memory and learning functions. In addition, the earlier adolescents experiment with marijuana, or other illicit substances, the more at risk they are for developing substance use disorders later in life.

New Hampshire already has one of the country’s highest rates of binge drinking and substance misuse in young people, as well as the nation’s lowest perception of harm for marijuana. Simply put, our children are not aware of the dangers of marijuana use.

The legalization and commercialization of marijuana would only heighten these concerns by opening our state to the Big Marijuana industry, which would aggressively market its products to our young people, much like the tobacco and alcohol industries before them. We must show Big Marijuana that the health of our children and our state is not for sale.

We don’t have to look far to see the negative impacts of commercialization.  In other states that have legalized, sales of traditional marijuana have declined in favor of highly potent products, such as sodas, edibles, waxes and dabs. In these products, the amount of THC, the addictive component of marijuana, has increased significantly, reaching as high as 98 percent.

Furthermore, other states have reported that tax revenues from marijuana sales have failed to meet projections, and legalization has done little to close the illegal black market. Governor Hickenlooper from Colorado has gone on record saying there is still a black market for marijuana of $50 million to $75 million annually.  Law enforcement in Oregon recently intercepted $48 million worth of black-market marijuana headed to other states.

For these reasons and many others, legalization is not a good investment for our state, socially or economically. A recent report by the Centennial Institute at Colorado Christian University concluded that, for every dollar earned in tax revenue from marijuana sales, Coloradans spend approximately $4.50 to mitigate the effects of legalization. These increased costs include accidental poisonings, traffic fatalities, court costs for impaired drivers, and employer-related charges, among many others.

In New Hampshire, substance misuse already costs our economy more than $2.6 billion a year in health care costs, lost worker productivity and other charges. We already have some of the nation’s highest rates of youth substance use, and we struggle to fund effective prevention programs. Legalizing and commercializing marijuana will only increase costs and further expose our youth to another addictive substance. That’s a risk we Granite Staters can’t afford.

It felt like the last day of school at the New Hampshire State House on June 22. Lawmakers were signing each other’s session books (the political version of yearbooks), shaking hands, and taking pictures together. It had been another eventful legislative session that saw many highs and lows for Gov. Chris Sununu, the first Republican in the corner office in 12 years.

The Republicans didn’t always get along during this legislative session. Remember the defeat of right-to-work legislation and the House failing to pass their own version of a budget earlier this year? Despite the varied ideological depth of the New Hampshire Republican Party, they were able to show they can work together and give Sununu some final wins at the end of the first year of the 165th General Court, including full-day kindergarten and a budget getting passed.

Now, the lawmakers head home for the summer months and it’s time to decide the winners and losers of the session:

WINNERS:

With his wife Valerie at his side Republican candidate for governor Chris Sununu speaks to supporters early in the morning Wednesday, Nov. 9, 2016, in Concord, N.H. Sununu said his race with Democratic challenger Colin VanOstern was too close to call. (AP Photo/Jim Cole)

Gov. Chris Sununu: As much as Democrats wanted Sununu to not do well his first term in office, several of his campaign promises and policy priorities made their way through the legislature and became law. One of his first wins in office came from the repeal of a license requirement for concealed carry firearms. It was something he said he would do on the campaign trail, and it got done within the first two months of his term.

That’s not to say that Sununu didn’t have some setbacks during the legislative session. The governor, who didn’t have prior legislative experience before taking office, saw the defeat of right-to-work under his watch and the House failed to pass a budget for the first time in recent memory. Some critics claim Sununu could have done more to get right-to-work passed, but the Republican infighting revealed a divided party that would prove difficult for GOP leadership to navigate.

With the budget, Democrats attempted to paint Sununu as not in control of his own party, but Sununu actually stood as the most to gain from the House’s failure. The House cut several of Sununu’s budget priorities in its version, but when the Senate drafted its own budget, it used Sununu’s proposal as a guide. What was ultimately passed at the end of June was a compromise of House, Senate, and Sununu’s priorities.

On the final day of the session, Sununu also saw the passage of full-day kindergarten and a key school choice bill. It might not have been a perfect process, but the governor saw several items from his policy wish-list reach his desk.

Marijuana: For several years, New Hampshire has been the only state in New England that still criminalized possession of small amounts of marijuana. For many lawmakers, they saw a connection between the rampant opioid crisis and marijuana being used as a potential gateway drug. Historically, the Senate has voted down various bills relating to looser pot laws, but advocates fought long and hard to see marijuana decriminalization passed. After compromising with the House on an amount, the Senate finally found a bill that it could handle.

In June, the legislature decriminalized three-quarters of an ounce of pot and Sununu signed it into law. Marijuana advocates applauded lawmakers for taking the first step, although they are continuing to work toward full legalization.

Libertarians: The Libertarian Party of New Hampshire had a banner election year in 2016. It obtained 4 percent of the vote in the gubernatorial election to qualify for the ballot in 2018. It also had three sitting lawmakers switch their party affiliations from Democrat or Republican to Libertarian. The last time the Libertarian Party had an official caucus in the State House was in the 1990s when it had four members.

While Libertarians haven’t been the deciding votes on any controversial bills during the session, it is clear that some members of the major parties are unhappy within their own caucuses. The Libertarian Party needs to garner 4 percent of the vote again in 2018 to remain on the ballot, but with political partisanship at an all time high, voters could see Libertarians as a more moderate choice. That’s how many Granite Staters felt when they voted for Libertarian presidential candidate Gary Johnson over Republican Donald Trump and Democrat Hillary Clinton.

Gov. Chris Sununu signs HB 262, declaring the common blackberry to be the berry of the biennium. (Image Credit: Gov. Chris Sununu’s office)

Blackberry and painted turtle: Every year, the state’s fourth graders learn how the state government works, and every year, legislation gets filed on their behalf. This year, lawmakers saw a bill from students at Simonds School in Warner naming the blackberry the official state berry of the biennium. It made its way through the House and Senate, and Sununu signed the bill in June.

Another group of students from Main Dunstable School in Nashua wanted the painted turtle to be the official state reptile for the biennium. That bill was also signed by Sununu.

It’s an annual tradition at the State House and while some lawmakers believe it’s a waste of time, some say it’s a good opportunity to get students involved and interested in the political process.

Of course, no one will forget the time in 2015 when students in Hampton Falls proposed making the red-tailed hawk the state raptor and a lawmaker suggested the creature would be a better mascot for Planned Parenthood. That became a national news story.

Luckily, no incidents like that happened this year. And Sununu enjoyed snacking on some blackberries with the fourth-grade students when he signed the bill into law.

LOSERS:

Democrats: The New Hampshire Democratic Party struggled to find its footing this year. For the first time since 2010, Democrats were fully the minority party in the State House — Republicans had majorities in the House, Senate, Executive Council, and the corner office. The party couldn’t decide if it wanted to work with Republicans or be the party of resistance to their agenda.

Their lack of a mission or agenda was evident in the legislature. While Democrats banded together to help defeat right-to-work and the House’s budget, there were times when some members disagreed with party leadership and voted their conscience. When it became clear that it was very likely that a budget wouldn’t be passed in the House, some Democrats advocated for at least passing something on to the Senate.

While Democrats have long pushed full-day kindergarten, they didn’t like that the final bill tied its funding to the lottery game Keno. Most Democrats voted against it, and that could be a major policy issue when they face reelection next year.

But the question still remains: will Democrats work with Republicans in the next legislative session in January or will they resist? National politics will definitely influence their decisions, and it will also be an election year. More partisanship is likely.

Right-to-work: The bill called for prohibiting unions from charging fees to nonmembers for the costs of representation, but even in a GOP-controlled legislature, Republicans couldn’t get the votes. A lot of different factors went into its defeat in the House, including disagreements between Sununu and House Speaker Shawn Jasper, as well as some Republicans who are part of unions or know people in unions. This was a major bill that some lobbyists and advocacy groups pushed for, including the Koch-funded Americans for Prosperity-New Hampshire. Simply, the votes were not there and lawmakers voted to not bring up the issue again until at least 2019, but expect to see another bill if the GOP retains its majority in the legislature.

Transgender advocates: A controversial gender identity nondiscrimination bill was tabled in the House, much to the dismay of transgender advocates. The bill would have prohibited discrimination based on gender identity, extending gender identity the same protections under state law that exist for age, sex, sexual orientation, race, or creed. The protections would have applied to discrimination in housing, employment practices, and public accommodations.

House Speaker Shawn Jasper and other members of the GOP leadership sought to kill the bill, or at least get it off the agenda for the session. Their issue with the legislation mirrors the Republican opinion at a national level — the bill would have allowed transgender people to use the restrooms of their choice.

Advocates are hoping the bill could be resurrected next year.

Opioid crisis: The drug epidemic still has its grips on the Granite State, which is ranked as the second hardest hit state by per capita overdose deaths in the nation. Lawmakers passed some bills to help curb the crisis, but as with any legislative process, it can take a while for treatment and recovery centers to receive the necessary funds to make a difference.

The state is also now dealing with the rise of carfentanil, a synthetic opioid that is is so potent that it’s not intended for human consumption. It’s 100 times more potent than fentanyl and is commonly used to tranquilize elephants. There’s still a backlog at the state’s crime lab to investigate due to the increase in the number of drug overdose deaths.

While lawmakers seek political solutions for ending the crisis, advocacy groups say more creative solutions are needed, but it appears that the end of the epidemic is still not in sight.

UNDECIDED:

House Speaker Shawn Jasper (Photo Credit: Speaker Shawn Jasper Facebook page)

House Speaker Shawn Jasper and House Freedom Caucus: The conservative caucus threatened to kill the state budget unless their priorities were included. None of its members were on the conference committee to have a say in final negotiations, but House Speaker Shawn Jasper reached out to members to market the budget as a conservative one. Ultimately, some House Freedom Caucus representatives voted for the budget due to its inclusion of anti-abortion language and business tax cuts. But, Jasper’s control over the speakership is still in question. With defeats of right-to-work and a House budget, some representatives are questioning his ability to lead. If the GOP retains control in the House, expect several people to challenge him in 2018 to be speaker.

Follow Kyle on Twitter.

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

Earlier this month, Democrat Steve Marchand announced he would run for governor in 2018. It’s only three months into Republican Gov. Chris Sununu’s term, which is why Marchand’s announcement was surprising.

Marchand is a Manchester-native and is a first generation Granite Stater. His parents immigrated from Quebec. He was a small business owner, the former mayor of Portsmouth, and director of corporate relations for the University of New Hampshire. He came in second in the Democratic gubernatorial primary in September 2016.

Marchand has been laying the ground work for his gubernatorial campaign for the past few months, meeting with various Democratic groups and committees. He’s already being attacked by the Republican Governors Association for his position on taxes and single-payer healthcare.

NH Journal spoke with Marchand shortly after his announcement to discuss his campaign, what he learned from his previous run, and what voters can expect to see in the coming months. Some responses were lightly edited for length.

NH Journal: Tell me again why you decided to run, and why did you announce so early?

Steve Marchand: The reason I’m running really stems off of my experience last year. We live in a very challenging time in New Hampshire. I believe we need a mission statement that drives…our efforts and resources towards achieving a specific mission and that mission is to be the best state in America to start a family and to start a business. The reason I say that is because I think our two biggest challenges at stake if we are to thrive in the next [few] years is we need to get younger and we need to get more entrepreneurial and nimble as an economy. I don’t believe, with all due respect to our current governor, that there is a specific mission to what he’s trying to achieve, and I don’t believe the policies that he pursued up to this point would move us toward a more younger and entrepreneurial economy. I want to get us in the right direction. If you look at the lack of organization, the lack of focus, and the lack of success early on in 2017, it is a direct reflection of a lack of specific vision, purpose, and mission in Gov. Sununu.

NH Journal: But why did you announce so early? It’s only been three months into Gov. Sununu’s term.

Marchand: It is a little bit earlier than usual, but these are unusual times. A lot of that is driven at the national level with President [Donald] Trump who is already doing rallies for 2020. Gov. Sununu was doing fundraising in Washington for his 2018 campaign. Because we live in these unusual times…it means that if you want to move in the right direction, you don’t have the luxury of waiting while others move forward, no matter how early on the calendar it happens.

NH Journal: You came in second in the Democratic primary after jumping into the race late in the game. Besides announcing early, what is going to be different about this campaign?

Marchand: I got in awfully late last year. It was not a strategy. It was just the way life foregoes. A number of people approached me in March of last year suggesting I would make a very good candidate because they know my background. I had very little money, very little time. I spent about $100,000 total. I got outspent 18 to 1 by the person who beat me [former Democratic gubernatorial nominee Colin Van Ostern]. With very little time and no TV ads or direct mail, it really was the definition of a grassroots effort. So I believe that the message, which is a data-driven message, focused on the mission as I mentioned earlier, resonates not just with Democrats, but across the political spectrum. So starting early allows to me invest more time on the ground. It will make me a better governor. I will continue to learn from people as I campaign. It also means I start with a base of significant support and name identification that simply was not there a year ago when I started.

Photo Credit: Steve Marchand for New Hampshire Facebook page

NH Journal: You ran as a progressive, but fiscally responsible candidate last time. Is that still you? Are there any changes in your platform from before?

Marchand: My value set and my view of the priorities will look very familiar to people who followed my candidacy in 2016. There are some places where there has been a refinement or continued development of knowledge. I am a proud progressive and I’ve got a proud record of fiscal responsibility, and I’m always looking for ways to move ideas and turn them into law.

NH Journal: Gov. Sununu has made encouraging new businesses to come and stay in the state a priority. How would you plan on doing that?

Marchand: I’ve known Gov. Sununu for a long time and he’s a good guy, so it’s obviously nothing personal. However,…the policies he has pursued to grow the economy, largely run 180 degrees from what the data tell us we should be doing if we actually want to create jobs and see economic growth. For example, Chris and the Republican legislature want to cut the Business Profits Tax. Anybody who has spent anytime with entrepreneurs or being an entrepreneur will tell you that most new businesses don’t make a profit in the first five years. They lose money at the beginning. It’s really hard to start a business and see it to the point where it becomes a profitable entity. When we cut the Business Profits Tax, we accelerate what has been going on in the state for 50 years under both Democratic and Republican administrations and that is the downshifting of responsibilities and cost from the state level to the town and local level. If you focus on local property taxes and cutting the Business Enterprise Tax, you will be directly and positively impacting the segment of economy where 80 percent of net new job growth comes to fruition. I think that Chris is focused on talking points when he focuses on the Business Profits Tax, but we need to focus on the data. And the data tells me that focusing on the Business Enterprise Tax and on reducing local property taxes is the winning formula for tax reform that will lead to job creation and economic growth.

NH Journal: You say that it’s crucial to have young people in New Hampshire to become the best state in America. How do you plan to encourage them to stay in the state?

Marchand: I think of dealing with the younger population as a two-part challenge. I don’t think the current governor thinks of it this way. I don’t think our legislature thinks of it this way. I call them [young people] the numerator and denominator problem. The denominator problem is how can we attract young people to come work and live in the state. The problem with that is when you have an ever shrinking number of young kids in the state, you can’t keep 100 percent of them, even if you made college free for everyone. We have to be the most inclusive state that we can be as it relates to immigration. The states that are getting the youngest are seeing the largest influx of immigrants. Some of the rhetoric that has come from President Trump, Gov. Sununu, and members from the Republican legislature make it more difficult for immigrants to see New Hampshire as a great place to come. That’s a shame. If we’re going to get younger and more entrepreneurial, aggressively pursuing pro-immigration policies is going to be an important part of solving our denominator problem because the numerator problem is how can we keep more kids that are already here in the state. The pilot program between higher education and New Hampshire businesses I would pursue that would cost approximately $5 million a year in three programs: computer science, nursing, and education because those are three places where we don’t have enough talent to match the demands. It would create a debt-free college experience for students that enter the program…to work with New Hampshire-based companies or entities. And if they did that, kept their nose clean, kept their grades up, and then worked for one of those New Hampshire-based employers for a period of years after graduation, they would have no debt. It would be half-paid by the private sector participants and half-paid by the targeted state grant for these programs.

NH Journal: You have previously discussed legalizing and taxing marijuana, and increasing the gas tax as ways to increase revenue for the state. Are those positions you still support?

Marchand: Those are areas I continue to discuss. I do favor the legalization, regulation, and taxation of marijuana. I do feel it would have a net positive impact in terms of lowering costs for law enforcement and judicial [entities]. I also think that it will improve health outcomes and reduce addiction rates, and it will generate revenue. The gas tax is…not desirable. That’s definitely a flaw, but I believe when you can attach the revenue stream to the use of the revenue stream, that’s a more transparent system and because infrastructure is a priority. The business leaders I’ve talked to over the years also identified it as a priority. For now, the gas tax is one of the most direct tools in the toolbox. It is something I still have on the table because I think [infrastructure] is one of the biggest barriers we face to economic growth if we do not address and updated electric grid, ensured drinking water, improved Internet access particularly in rural areas, and improving our roads and bridges. Conservative business people tell me ‘why would I invest in New Hampshire, if New Hampshire doesn’t invest in New Hampshire,’ and they meant these infrastructure issues.

NH Journal: What about sales tax and income tax? You were against those previously. Are you still against them?

Marchand: That is correct.

Photo Credit: Steve Marchand For New Hampshire Facebook page

NH Journal: One of the most important issues still facing the state today is the opioid crisis. What do you think still needs to be done to tackle this problem?

Marchand: This is one area in New Hampshire where we have seen bipartisan efforts. I applaud people on both sides of the aisle. Over the last few years, I think they have taken this issue with the level of gravity that is required and I believe there are many more opportunities in the next several years to continue that bipartisan spirit. It doesn’t mean we’re anywhere near where we need to end up, but we have everyone rowing in the same direction about the situation. We need to continue to provide the resources that continue to give a suite of services to those in the midst of recovery, beyond simply detoxification of the addictive substance. Until recently, I think a lot of people in the world of politics saw recovery as largely detoxification. The reality is that if we simply just detoxify people and then we put folks back in a situation where addiction became the norm, the likelihood of relapsing is really high. We need to work together and it requires a level of collaboration that is not inexpensive. But it’s a hell of a lot less expensive than not doing it. That needs to be our attitude. I priced it out last year in that it would be an additional $8 to 10 million a year of resources that would provide a level of stability for local and regional recovery centers to focus less on having to worry about where the next grant will come from in order to stay open. It would allow these people who are doing amazing work in the field of recovery to be able to focus on their gifts and skills to help people. I think it’s a relatively low amount of money…that would improve lives, reduce costs, and directly address what New Hampshireites say is the most important issue facing us.

NH Journal: What do you think needs to happen next year in order for the Democratic Party to gain seats back in the Legislature?

Marchand: Once every four years, the country reorganizes what it means to be a Republican and Democrat. We are in the midst of the next resorting of how people look at what it means to be a Democrat and a Republican. We are not close to the end of that process. We are right in the middle of it. Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders understood better than most the level of economic anxiety that millions of Americans across party lines are feeling. There are a lot of people who are really angry and I get it. I believe that in 2018 and beyond, and it’s part of why I am passionate about this marathon that I’ve begun as a candidate, is to rebuild the future coalition that I believe can be a Democratic majority is one that is passionate about civil liberties, that is passionate about entrepreneurship as the centerpiece to economic growth, that understands that if you think about the economy right way, you can lower income inequality, which right now is splitting our country up in highly destructive ways. We need people that have spent time professionally, politically, and in their personal lives understanding these aspects of it and are unafraid and confident to use that data, experience, and information to lead that way forward. That’s part of what excites me about this marathon that I’ve begun is I feel I have a good idea about where we need to go as a state and want to help us get there.

Follow Kyle on Twitter.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

So what makes this campaign different than his last one?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Follow Kyle on Twitter.

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