#

The U.S. government just told American households should expect to see their heating bills jump as much as 54 percent over last winter.

The many Granite Staters who rely on heating oil and propane could wind up spending $500 more to heat their homes this year, it reported.

Here in New Hampshire, a state that already pays the fifth-highest electricity prices in the continental U.S., the New Hampshire Electric Cooperative (NHEC) announced an overall bill increase for most residential members of about 17 percent starting next month.

New Hampshire’s Consumer Advocates Donald M. Kreis says “Your electric and natural gas bills are about to go up, substantially, and you are not going to be happy about it.”

State Rep. Michael Harrington (R-Stafford) a former member of the Public Utility Commission (PUC) agrees. “Regrettably, Don is correct. Rates are going way up this winter,” he told NHJournal.

And that’s on top of a 30 percent surge in the cost of gasoline in the past year, from $2/gallon to around $3.10.

That’s a lot of economic pain, which would traditionally mean an opportunity for political gain. So, why aren’t any New Hampshire politicians talking about energy prices?

It’s not hard to make the case that New Hampshire’s congressional delegation is on the wrong side of the issue. The top reason for rising prices is the lack of access to natural gas, and New Hampshire’s federal legislators are supporting policies to restrict natural gas production.

“In New England, most of our electricity is produced by burning natural gas,” Kreis notes, observing that on a typical day, “56 percent of the electricity in New England was being produced by natural gas generators.  So when the price of natural gas goes up, our electricity rates increase as well.”

That is certainly the case for co-op customers. “Natural gas and electricity prices in New England are closely linked,” said Brian Callnan, NHEC Vice President of Power Resources & Access. “As the price of natural gas has risen over the past several months, so has the cost to purchase electricity to serve our members.”

Natural gas prices are soaring in part because we had a relatively warm summer. Gas that would have been stored for the winter was used to generate electricity for AC. But they’re also rising because global demand is surging, while the Biden administration and Democrats in Congress are discouraging natural gas production and transportation.

Pipeline politics are popular among Democrats. On his first day in office, President Biden issued an executive order canceling the Keystone XL pipeline. In July, Dominion Energy and Duke Energy announced they were canceling the Atlantic Coast pipeline due to “legal uncertainty” in the face of repeated challenges from progressive pipeline opponents. And the plug was pulled on the PennEast pipeline just months after winning a major victory before the Supreme Court for similar reasons.

Then there are the restrictions on production. “Under the Biden administration, no new drilling has been allowed on federal lands,” Harrington says. “Remember, the Bureau of Land Management owns about 10 percent of the land west of the Mississippi River. So over the past eight months, existing wells have closed, as all wells do eventually. But unlike last year, new ones didn’t open. As this continues, prices for natural gas will continue to go up.”

If this looks like a perfect storm of pain for energy customers, the forecast is actually worse. The Build Back Better plan backed by Sens. Maggie Hassan and Jeanne Shaheen includes huge increases in energy costs for consumers, according to analysts. A big one is the $150 billion “Clean Electricity Performance Program,” which will raise costs on utilities that don’t increase their level of carbon-free electricity each year.

That, in turn, will force Granite State utilities into price competition for that in-demand power and costs are all but certain to rise — thanks to policies pushed by Democrats. Those policies can be defended as part of the fight against climate change, but it’s hard to argue they aren’t adding to consumers’ costs.

If you’re a member of Congress running for re-election, this is not an argument you want to have. And in the past, Reps. Annie Kuster and Chris Pappas, along with Hassan and Shaheen, have largely been able to avoid the most extreme green politics in their party. The “Green New Deal” resolution in the House has more than 1oo cosponsors, but none of them are for New Hampshire. Hassan and Shaheen have repeatedly refused to take a position on the legislation, either.

But if the expensive green policies currently in the Build Back Better reconciliation bill are still there when Democrats pass the bill, the Granite State’s delegation will have no place to hide.

Senator Maggie Hassan has no comment on reports that the Department of Homeland Security — which she oversees as a member of the Senate’s Homeland Security Committee — is considering a plan to send some of the migrants pouring across the southern border up to Vermont and New Hampshire.

According to the Center for Immigration Studies, “more than 1.472 million aliens have been apprehended entering illegally at the Southwest border in just FY 2021.” That’s equal to the entire population of New Hampshire. U.S. Border Patrol reported “nearly 200,000 encounters with migrants along the U.S.-Mexico border in July, the highest monthly total in more than two decades.”

Now, the Border Patrol is reportedly considering sending some of those migrants to the “Swanton Sector,” which includes all of Vermont, part of New York,  and Coos, Grafton and Carroll counties in New Hampshire.

“Federal immigration agencies are preparing contingency plans for a chaotic fall and winter that include looking to states thousands of miles away for assistance,” the Washington Free Beacon reports, based on a memo they’ve obtained. “DHS is husbanding resources for the ‘unconfirmed’ transfer of migrants to [the Swanton Sector] and awaiting a response from Border Patrol about the number of additional processing machines required,” they report.

“A spokeswoman for Customs and Border Protection declined to address the [Swanton Sector] relocation plans, saying the department does not comment on leaked information.”

A spokesperson for Vermont’s Gov. Phil Scott (R) told a reporter last week the administration was “unaware” of any such plans.

Customs and Border Protection spokesperson told the Vermont Daily Chronicle: “U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) continually evaluates possible contingency plans and adjusts its operations as circumstances dictate, but currently there are no plans to transfer migrants from the Southwest border to the Northern or Coastal borders.”

But nothing is stopping the Border Patrol from locating migrants here — certainly not Sen. Hassan.

And even if DHS doesn’t send would-be illegal immigrants to the area, some are making their way here, anyway. Just last week, Border Patrol agents “apprehended 21 people encountered in multiple events after they illegally entered the U.S. near the towns of Alburgh, Franklin, Richford & West Berkshire,” the Swanton Sector Border Patrol tweeted. “They were citizens of Guatemala, Honduras, Mexico & Canada.”

More significant, however, is the lack of information from Sen. Hassan, who will not answer questions about the border or DHS policy from NHJournal. She hasn’t made any public comment or issued a statement on the report, either.

Meanwhile, former Border Patrol Chief Rodney Scott revealed last week the Biden administration is paying contractors not to build a wall on the southern U.S. border. “For a while, it was almost $5 million a day between DOD and DHS.” Hassan voted against funding a border wall in 2017.

In a recent NHJournal poll,  New Hampshire Republicans picked the border security issue as their top concern. At the same time, Biden is getting poor marks across the political spectrum for his handling of the border crisis. Just 25 percent of Americans approve of Biden’s immigration policy, while 67 percent disapprove, according to a new Quinnipiac poll.

As for the situation at the Mexican border, just 23 percent approve, while 67 percent disapprove. Only half of Biden’s fellow Democrats approve of his handling of the border situation.

Despite mounting pressure from Granite State political leaders, Sen. Maggie Hassan is defending her decision to keep intern Caitlin Marriott on the job and instead used the intern’s profane attack on the president as an opportunity to attack Donald Trump.

Calls for Marriott’s firing began as soon as news broke that the person who shouted “Mr. President, F— you!” at the Commander-in-Chief as he walked through the Capitol building was an intern in Hassan’s DC office.  Instead, Hassan has suspended the intern for a week and had her ID badge revoked, and she defended her decision by pointing to the behavior of the president.

“I think it’s really important to understand that this behavior shouldn’t be equated with the president’s destructive and divisive actions, like ripping health care away from people by failing to protect pre-existing conditions; going out, gutting the ACA; like separating children from their parents at our southern border,” Hassan said in an interview with the Washington Post.

When asked how should would respond to complaints that the punishment for a student intern shouting profanity at the President of the United States should be more severe, Hassan replied: “I would point them to the fact that she has been held accountable for her actions that she took full responsibility for and that’s an example I wish our president would [follow].”

Turning the intern incident into an attack on Trump appears to be a page from the Democratic Party’s playbook. NH Democratic Party chairman Ray Buckley also responded to requests for comment about Marriott’s attack by commenting on Trump.

“Between their heartless attempts to kick millions off of health insurance to Trump’s racist policy of locking up children in cages, it is the Republican Party that has created a culture of hate,” Buckley said.

New Hampshire Republicans from Governor Chris Sununu to the grassroots GOP have called out Hassan for her decision to keep the intern on the job.

“I wouldn’t tolerate it in my office,” Sununu said of the incident. “There would be a termination.”

The NHGOP launched a social media push to get voters to call Hassan’s office and demand the intern be fired.

NHGOP Party Chair Jeanie Forrester released a statement:

“The revelation that it was indeed Senator Maggie Hassan’s intern who shouted an obscenity at our President in the Capitol Rotunda should disgust, anger, and embarrass Granite Staters. But, alas, it should not be a surprise. Just this week, Democrat Congresswoman Maxine Watters encouraged violent protest, and White House Press Secretary Sarah Sanders was thrown out of a Virginia restaurant just for working for the Trump administration. Democrats are showing they don’t want to work with anyone to solve our nation’s biggest challenges. They would rather obstruct and point fingers. Senator Hassan owes it to her constituents, to the U.S. Senate, to the Office of the President, and to future interns to send the right message.”

Sen. Hassan’s spokesperson Aaron Jacobs responded to requests about guidance given to her interns by citing a statement given to them when they begin their service: “Use proper language and exhibit appropriate behavior at all times.”

When they don’t, the punishment is not termination–at least, if they’re directing that improper behavior at the president.

On June 5th, 2017, Sens. Jeanne Shaheen and Maggie Hassan joined their fellow Democrats in a unanimous vote reaffirming their commitment to the Jerusalem Embassy Act of 1995.  That act also passed with massive Democratic support (the only Senate Democrat to vote against it was former Klansman Robert Byrd of West Virginia) and was signed into law by Democrat Bill Clinton.

But on Monday, when the Shaheen/Hassan-supported law’s mandate that “the United States Embassy in Israel should be established in Jerusalem” was finally put into effect,  Sen. Shaheen was silent. Sen. Hassan said nothing–despite repeated requests for comment.  The top Democrat in the Senate, Chuck Schumer of New York, released a subdued statement “applauding President Trump” for the embassy move. But from New Hampshire–nothing. Why?

It hasn’t always been “no comment” from the New Hampshire delegation. When President Trump announced his intentions regarding the US Embassy in December, Sen. Shaheen criticized the proposal, saying it was “harmful to both U.S. and Israeli interests” and “moves all parties further away from a peaceful solution.”

Is that still her position?  You’ll have to ask her–though you might get some insights from J Street as well. They are one of Sen. Shaheen’s top contributors, donating more than $112,000 since 2013.  And they’ve given more than $200,000 to Sen. Hassan as well.

J Street has been described as a “liberal fringe group” by some, and it certainly has a pro-Left, pro-Obama, anti-Netanyahu view of Middle East policy.  Unsurprisingly, they oppose the embassy’s move.

But what about Sens. Shaheen and Hassan?  Do they regret their support for the Jerusalem Embassy Act less than a year ago? Has something changed?

Is the GOP playing the gender card to get President Donald Trump’s CIA nominee through the US Senate? And will it work on the two women representing New Hampshire?   That’s the word from the Washington Examiner’s Susan Ferrechio:

Republicans are hoping that Gina Haspel’s gender might help her win the Senate votes she needs to become President Trump’s next CIA director.

Republicans are playing up the idea that she would be the first woman ever to be confirmed to run the spy agency, which could make it much harder for lawmakers, particularly women, to vote “no.”

Gina Haspel’s proponents say other Senate “yes” votes could come from Sens. Maggie Hassan and Jeanne Shaheen, both New Hampshire Democrats.

Both Hassan and Shaheen voted against previous CIA Director Mike Pompeo’s elevation to Secretary of State over issues unrelated to international diplomacy such as his personal views on LGBTQ issues.  Haspel, on the other hand, was directly involved in the CIA’s use of enhanced interrogation and its aftermath.

Will New Hampshire’s two women senators break with their fellow Democrats and back a female nominee? One nominated by President Donald Trump and who has a troubled past regarding the issue of “torture?”

People with anxiety and depression are disproportionately prescribed painkillers. That’s what new research from the Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center suggests, adding a complex layer to the opioid epidemic ravaging the United States and encouraging calls from New Hampshire’s congressional delegation to not move forward with the repeal of the Affordable Care Act.

The findings, which appear in the July issue of the Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine, show that nearly 19 percent of the 38.6 million American adults with mental health disorders use prescription opioids compared to only 5 percent of those without a disorder. Adults with depression and anxiety receive 51 percent of the 115 million opioid prescriptions distributed each year in the U.S., the study found.

“Because of the vulnerable nature of patients with mental illness, such as their susceptibility for opioid dependency and abuse, this finding warrants urgent attention to determine if the risks associated with such prescribing are balanced with therapeutic benefits,” said Brian Sites, an anesthesiologist at Dartmouth-Hitchcock and one of the co-authors of the study.

Image Credit: Dartmouth-Hitchcock

Opioid prescribing in the U.S. quadrupled between 1999 and 2015, and during that time more than 183,000 people died from overdoses related to prescription opioids, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Sites also notes that because pain is subjective, “the presence of mental illness may influence the complex dynamic between patient, provider, and health system that results in the decision to write an opioid prescription.”

The study does not give a specific reason why people with mental disorders are more frequently prescribed opiates. The study encourages more research on this population to understand opiate addiction.

Those patients may have some form of physical pain, but their mental condition may cause them to feel that pain more acutely or be less able to cope with it, leading to increased requests for something to dull the pain. As a result, doctors trying to be empathetic to their patients’ complaints may tend to overprescribe opioid painkillers, Stiles said.

Research also shows that patients are more likely to take opioids when there aren’t specialists nearby. A study published earlier this year found that the number of seniors in rural America who take at least three prescribed psychotropic drugs ― including opioids and antidepressants ― tripled over a nine-year period. The study found that many of these prescriptions were given without a proper diagnosis.

Being able to identify a subset of the population that could be more likely to use opioids could help providers and policymakers address opioid use. It “suggests that there may be additional patient- and provider-related factors specific to those with mental illness that increase the likelihood of receiving prescription opioids,” the authors wrote.

U.S. Rep. Annie Kuster, D-N.H., was present for a press conference about the study on Monday. She said repealing Obamacare could be disastrous for New Hampshire’s opioid epidemic.

“This is critically important in New Hampshire, as we have gone from second in the nation in deaths from the opioid crisis and heroin to first for fentanyl,” she said. “That’s not what we want to be known as first in the nation for.”

The U.S. Congress is currently in a heated healthcare battle. The Senate is working on legislation to repeal the healthcare law, but a vote on the bill has been delayed due to opposition from Republicans. New Hampshire Democratic Sens. Jeanne Shaheen and Maggie Hassan have both stated their opposition to the healthcare overhaul and have sent many press releases condemning “Trumpcare.”

“This new study is yet another reminder that, to combat the devastating opioid crisis, we must make mental health treatment affordable and accessible,” Shaheen said in a statement.

Hassan said she opposes proposed cuts to Medicaid that would affect coverage of mental health and substance abuse services.

“As we work to combat the horrific substance misuse crisis that is devastating our communities and taking a major toll on our economy in New Hampshire, this study highlights how dangerous Trumpcare, which includes massive cuts to Medicaid, would be for our state,” Hassan said in a statement. “We need a comprehensive, holistic approach to combating this epidemic that addresses the underlying causes of addiction, including mental health issues.”

To address the overprescription problem within the mental health community, Sites has suggested physicians need more access to alternative medicine besides opioids, including acupuncture, massage therapy, physical therapy, and non-opioid pharmaceuticals.

Follow Kyle on Twitter.

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

As with the rest of the country, it appears New Hampshire is pretty divided on the Paris Climate Agreement. At the state level, Republicans are applauding President Donald Trump’s decision to pull the United States out of the global climate pact, while Democrats are hoping to use the issue as political ammo in next year’s elections. At the local level, a couple cities, colleges, and universities are figuring out how they can commit themselves to reducing carbon emissions to show the rest of the world that not everyone agrees with Trump.

That division was very apparent Thursday during one of the last full House sessions of the year. Several House Republicans staged a walkout after Rep. Lee Walker Oxenham, D-Plainfield, was granted the right to speak on the House floor about Republican Gov. Chris Sununu’s decision not to join the U.S. Climate Alliance, a group of 12 states and Puerto Rico that are committed to upholding the Paris climate deal.

NH Reps narrowly ok member to speak on Climate Change. GOP choose to walk out. Forced to return. pic.twitter.com/uhO10aNfX7

— Raymond Gagnon (@gagnon03743) June 8, 2017

The representatives that walked out were forced to return to their seats because House Speaker Shawn Jasper needed quorum in order finish the day’s business. In her speech, Oxenham mentioned Trump’s withdrawal from the Paris climate accord and Republicans let out a cheer. The New Hampshire Democratic Party was quick to criticize Republican members for their actions.

“Rather than hear their colleague on a key issue, Republicans decided to continue to plug their ears in ignorance on climate change,” said Ray Buckley, NHDP chairman, in a statement. “In doing so, they are standing with Governor Sununu and President Trump against the rest of the world. This Republican walkout is symbolic of their willful ignorance on basic science.”

Sununu stated last week that he “stands by” Trump’s decision to leave the Paris Climate Agreement and he said Monday that New Hampshire would not join the U.S. Climate Alliance.

“Not at this time, especially when we do not yet know its impact on our economy and environment,” he told the Concord Monitor.

That drew criticism from U.S. Sens. Maggie Hassan and Jeanne Shaheen, and U.S. Reps. Carol Shea-Porter and Annie Kuster — all four members of New Hampshire’s Democratic congressional delegation — who wrote a Wednesday letter to Sununu encouraging him to change his mind.

“Governor, we write in support of New Hampshire joining the U.S. Climate Alliance. It is vital that the Granite State continues to be a leader on climate change and clean energy,” they wrote. “Just as the United States’ withdrawal from the Paris Climate Accord cedes American global leadership, New Hampshire’s refusal to acknowledge the clear consensus on climate science will similarly damage our state’s reputation.”

New Hampshire already participates in a regional cap-and-trade pact with nine other states in the Northeast that works to reduce carbon emissions. Under the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative, fossil fuel power plants have to buy allowances for every ton of carbon dioxide they emit. Sununu has previously indicated he would be support withdrawing from RGGI, but only if other states also did it.

While lawmakers battle it out at the State House on climate change, several cities and universities in New Hampshire are reaffirming their commitment to reducing greenhouse gas emissions.

A national movement called “We Are Still In” has gained steam since Trump made his announcement last week. As of Monday, a total of 1,219 governors, mayors, businesses, investors, and colleges and universities across the country declared their intent to ensure the United States remains a global leader in the effort to combat climate change.

“In the absence of leadership from Washington, states, cities, colleges and universities, businesses and investors, representing a sizable percentage of the U.S. economy will pursue ambitious climate goals, working together to take forceful action and to ensure that the U.S. remains a global leader in reducing emissions,” the statement reads.

While no Granite State cities have signed on to that specific statement, two colleges have joined the cause — the University of New Hampshire and Southern New Hampshire University.

In a separate statement from the Mayors National Climate Action Agenda, 274 mayors committed to adopt, honor, and uphold the Paris Climate Agreement goals.

“We will continue to lead. We are increasing investments in renewable energy and energy efficiency. We will buy and create more demand for electric cars and trucks,” the statement reads. “We will increase our efforts to cut greenhouse gas emissions, create a clean energy economy, and stand for environmental justice

Nashua Mayor Jim Donchess and Portsmouth Mayor Jack Blalock have signed on to that statement, but not the one from “We Are Still In.”

In other communities in the Granite State, Durham officials held a Tuesday forum about the feasibility of scaling down the targets of the Paris agreement to a municipal level. The town of Hanover also voted in May to establish a goal of transitioning to 100 percent clean and renewable energy by 2050.

Dartmouth College President Phil Hanlon didn’t sign on to the “We Are Still In” statement, but he signed onto a similar letter with the presidents of 11 other leading research universities. That letter commits the universities to transition to low-carbon energy and enhance sustainability practices on their campuses.

In the letter released Monday, the presidents “reaffirm that commitment, which is consistent with the Paris Agreement and recognizes the concerted action that is needed at every level to slow, and ultimately prevent, the rise in the global average temperature and to facilitate the transition to a clean energy economy. Universities have a critical role to play in reducing our own greenhouse gas emissions, continuing to advance evidence-based understanding of the causes and effects of climate change on the environment, the economy and public health, and developing solutions.”

The other signatories include all the Ivy League institutions, except Princeton University, and also Duke University, Johns Hopkins University, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and Stanford University.

Earlier this year, Dartmouth announced it would reduce greenhouse gas emissions from campus operations by 50 percent by 2025 and by 80 percent by 2050. They also pledged to transition their campus to renewable resources by 2025.

In its announcement, Dartmouth admitted that it had fallen behind some of its peer institutions on a number of sustainability fronts.

“Although Dartmouth has substantially reduced campus energy use and made other significant advances over the last decade, we lag our peer institutions with respect to commitments, actions, and reporting in the sustainability domain,” the college released in its sustainability report. “Our report recommends principles, standards, and commitments in the areas of energy, waste and materials, water, food, transportation, and landscape and ecology.”

Follow Kyle on Twitter.

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

New Hampshire became the latest state to have three residents die of overdoses from one of the most deadly opioid drugs in the world, adding to the growing list of communities nationwide trying to handle the crisis. Gov. Chris Sununu and public health officials announced last week that for the first time in the Granite State, the synthetic opioid carfentanil was found in the bloodstream of three people who died from overdoses in March.

Two of the deaths were in Manchester, and the third was in Meredith. The substance 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.

“Unfortunately, today is the first day that we’ve been able to confirm this,” Sununu said at a Tuesday press conference. “And worse yet, I think we all understand that it is likely not the last day that we talk about this issue.”

New Hampshire is the first New England state to have confirmed deaths from carfentanil and its effects are being felt by many key players in the opioid crisis, including public health officials, first responders, and treatment and recovery providers.

While these are the first confirmed cases in New Hampshire, the rise in carfentanil overdoses has been happening throughout the United States over the last few months. At least 96 heroin users overdosed in one devastating week in August in just one Ohio county, with several of the overdoses linked to carfentanil. In September, the Drug Enforcement Administration issued a nationwide warning about the powerful opioid.

Tom Pifer, forensic lab director for the N.H. State Police, said the drug was developed in the mid-1970s by a pharmaceutical company, but was never made public due to its high potency.

It takes just two milligrams of carfentanil to knock out a 2,000-pound African elephant. When veterinarians or zookeepers do that, they wear gloves and face masks to prevent exposure to the drug because a dose the size of a grain of salt could kill a person. A dose may even be lethal when absorbed through the skin or potentially through inhalation. That’s why the state asked law enforcement and first responders to stop field testing drugs. The problem is that users might not know they are even taking the drug since dealers have been cutting heroin with fentanyl or carfentanil to give it a boost and stretch their supply further.

“You cannot tell the difference between heroin and fentanyl and certainly not fentanyl and carfentanil,” Pifer told New Hampshire Public Radio. “You are literally rolling the dice with any sort of dosage unit you’re purchasing on the street.”

It’s not only incredibly powerful, but it’s also incredibly resistant to naloxone — also known as Narcan, the opioid antidote that can save someone’s life from a heroin overdose. A typical overdose requires one or two shots to work, but when a dosage is laced with carfentanil, it could require six or more shots to be effective — if it works at all.

Even though there is an abundant supply of Narcan in states battling the opioid crisis, an increase in carfentanil overdoses could deplete the antidote supply fairly quickly and drain money from states who need to purchase more. With drug overdose deaths rising, state crime labs could also see a backlog of cases to investigate. In New Hampshire, there are thousands of cases dating back from 2015 that have yet to be investigated.

A criticism in New Hampshire of government officials is that funding from the state and federal government to tackle the crisis has been slow to come out.

Congress signed the 21st Century Act in December, which would provide more funding to states for the opioid crisis. In April, U.S. Sen. Jeanne Shaheen, D-N.H., said $485 million in grants would soon be administered to states. It’s not clear exactly when that would happen.

New Hampshire is ranked as the second hardest hit state in the opioid crisis based on per capita deaths. Yet, it’s only supposed to receive $3 million out of the $485 million promised to states since the formula is based on total mortality. Shaheen is urging Trump’s administration to revise the funding formula for next year.

The other Democratic senator from New Hampshire, Maggie Hassan, and Shaheen wrote in a letter last week to U.S. Health and Human Services Secretary Tom Price that the formula should be re-tooled. Officials have indicated that they will review the formula and the two senators were optimistic after their meeting with New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, who is heading President Donald Trump’s national opioid commission.

In March, Trump created The President’s Commission on Combating Drug Addiction and the Opioid Crisis with Christie at its helm to start fulfilling his campaign promise to end the opioid crisis.

Trump promised the people of New Hampshire that he would build a wall between the U.S.-Mexico border to curb the opioid crisis and stop the flow of drugs into the area.

“New Hampshire has a tremendous drug epidemic,” he said in October. “I am going to create borders. No drugs are coming in. We’re going to build a wall. You know what I’m talking about. You have confidence in me. Believe me, I will solve the problem. They will stop coming to New Hampshire. They will stop coming to our country.”

While heroin supplies mostly come from Mexico, synthetic opioids, like fentanyl and carfentanil, are believed to originate in China. Even though it’s illegal there, secret labs in the country manufacture the drug before shipping it to the United States. People can order it online, and it’s shipped through the U.S. Postal Service before it makes its way into the local heroin supply.

It’s still not immediately clear how the drug made it into New Hampshire. It’s likely that either someone bought it online, or it was purchased in another state and then followed the traditional route of heroin and fentanyl into the Granite State, which is from major distribution centers like Philadelphia and New York and then through Massachusetts.

Follow Kyle on Twitter.

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

If Congress doesn’t pass a long-term budget bill by the end of the month, federal funding for state infrastructure development or affordable housing might dry up, leaving cities and towns with less money in grants to fund these projects.

The Community Development Finance Authority (CDFA), the state agency that doles out those dollars, recently said it has to pause in handing out more than $2 million in community development block grants because Congress has yet to pass a continuing resolution to fund the federal government and its programs for the next year. They have an April 28 deadline.

“Towns across New Hampshire depend on these federal funds,” said Taylor Caswell, executive director of the CDFA, in a statement. “Dozens of local municipalities across the state use these resources to bring new jobs, help treat drug addiction, build workforce housing, and revitalize downtowns, among other important community and economic development projects.”

The CDFA has awarded more than $126 million in grants to projects across the state since 2003. The YMCA in Concord recently won a $500,000 federal grant for improvements on the building that hosts its child care facility and it’s assuming it will be approved by the governor and Executive Council.

However, money for four other organizations — including a child advocacy center renovation in Laconia and affordable housing in Exeter — might not receive funds, even though they would have if the CDFA had more funds. Those projects are suspended until Washington reaches a solution.

The state usually receives about $8 million each year in community development block grants and the CDFA typically finds out in January how much it will see that year. Yet, the funding for this year is in jeopardy since Congress’ stopgap spending plan expires at the end of April and the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), which administers the block grants to states, has yet to release funding figures for the year.

“When a resolution in Washington D.C. is reached and HUD provides specific allocation amounts for fiscal year 2017, and it has been determined that funding level is adequate, CDFA will move swiftly to finalize awards for the remaining four projects, as well as restart suspended application reviews,” the CDFA said in a statement. “CDFA deeply regrets this situation and is in touch with New Hampshire’s federal delegation in Washington D.C. to urge swift resolution of this matter.”

New Hampshire’s Democratic Sens. Jeanne Shaheen and Maggie Hassan have been fervent supporters of the community development block grants and since the CDFA’s announcement, they’ve been sounding the alarm in Congress, encouraging lawmakers to reaffirm their commitment to funding these grants.

They joined 40 other senators earlier this month in urging federal appropriators to include $3.3 billion in federal funding for the block grant program for the 2018 fiscal year budget.

“The CDBG program is one of the federal government’s most effective means to revitalize low- and moderate-income communities across the country,” the senators wrote in a letter. “The importance of this funding to meet the unique needs of local communities is widely recognized and we find it troubling that the President’s budget proposes to eliminate the program altogether.”

President Donald Trump’s “skinny budget” called for the elimination of the block grant program, which has been used extensively in New Hampshire, especially in the North Country for low-income, elderly, and disabled residents.

Shaheen and Hassan called Trump’s proposal to eliminate the program “misguided and harmful” at a Wednesday press conference at the CDFA headquarters in Concord.

“He talked about helping those communities that are struggling with job creation to make sure people have opportunities in the future,” Shaheen said. “Well, this is totally counterproductive to what he was talking about, and this is the budget he’s proposing.”

Hassan echoed Shaheen’s sentiments saying any changes to the program would be “devastating.”

“These cuts would be devastating for New Hampshire, and I’ll do everything in my power, along with Senator Shaheen, to make sure it never happens,” she said.

Follow Kyle on Twitter.

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

New Hampshire’s infrastructure is crumbling, and it’s not just the state’s roads and bridges. A total of 12 infrastructure categories received a “mediocre” or “poor” rating, according to a Wednesday survey by the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE), highlighting the lack of time and investment the state has made into these projects.

Overall, the state’s infrastructure grade was a C-minus, which is a decrease from the last time the engineers conducted a survey of the state. In 2011, the state earned a C.

New Hampshire’s new grade is slightly higher than the United States’ grade, which was a D-plus.

“New Hampshire’s infrastructure is living on borrowed time thanks to past generations’ investments,” said Logan Johnson, chairman of the Report Card for New Hampshire’s Infrastructure. “We’re not investing in the maintenance and modernization our infrastructure needs to support a thriving economy.”

A team of professional engineers from across the state assessed the 12 categories and found these areas need upgrades to stay operational:

Credit: American Society of Civil Engineers Report Card for New Hampshire’s Infrastructure

The state’s energy and airport systems received the best score with a C-plus, but the ports, wastewater, and storm water systems scored the lowest grade with a D-plus.

Much of the focus at the legislative level will be on roads and bridges.

According to the state Department of Transportation (DOT), there are about 17,000 miles of roads in the state. The ASCE says there are 3,848 bridges, including 2,160 state bridges, and 1,688 municipal bridges in New Hampshire.

The state also has about 150 red-listed bridges, meaning they are in poor condition, must be inspected every two years, and be at the top of the state’s priority list of funds for repair or replacement. The ASCE found that 492 of New Hampshire’s 3,848 bridges — approximately 13 percent – were structurally deficient.

Gov. Chris Sununu has been a big proponent of improving the state’s infrastructure. In his budget, he proposed creating a $84 million Infrastructure Revitalization Fund to address some of the problems identified in the ASCE’s report, like with bridges and roads.

“This is one of the highest numbers in the country of red listed bridges,” he said during his gubernatorial campaign. “These are where our priorities need to go. Infrastructure is absolutely critical in a small state like New Hampshire, a state that’s centralized to the entire New England region. We have to get our priorities straight and we have to make tough decisions to get those projects done.”

The problem is that the estimated cost to repair or replace some of the red-list bridges is more than six times the amount Sununu proposed. That’s something Victoria Sheehan, commissioner of the N.H. DOT, said would happen if infrastructure funding is constantly kicked down the road in the legislature.

“When we defer investment, it can cost three or four times as much to get back to the same level condition,” she recently told New Hampshire Public Radio. “So, for example, if we can keep up with pavement conditioning, doing pavement preservation treatments, that’s a much lower cost in maintaining the infrastructure. Once [roads have] deteriorated, to do a full reconstruction or rehabilitation can cost a lot more money to the taxpayer. We are so underfunded at times, we make those per investment choices that end up costing more in the long run.”

U.S. Sen. Jeanne Shaheen, (D-N.H.), reintroduced legislation in the Senate that would begin to address the more than 56,000 structurally deficient bridges across the country. The Strengthen and Fortify Existing Bridges (SAFE Bridges) Act, which was also cosponsored by New Hampshire’s other Democratic senator, Maggie Hassan, would establish a program to provide funding specifically for repairing and replacing structurally deficient bridges. It would authorize an additional $2.75 billion annually through 2020 to enable state’s to fix their bridges and funding would be allocated through a needs-based formula according to their share of the nation’s deficient bridges.

“The condition of New Hampshire’s bridges is unacceptable,” Shaheen said in a statement. “Their disrepair hurts our economy, increases traffic, adds wear and tear to vehicles, and puts public safety at risk. The consequences of bridge failures are catastrophic and it is critical that Congress prioritize this infrastructure. My legislation provides a long overdue initial investment to help repair and replace New Hampshire’s structurally deficient bridges while putting Granite Staters to work.”

The ASCE survey also found that the state’s dams were increasingly at risk of being structurally deficient. About 60 percent of New Hampshire dams were built before modern dam safety engineering standards were developed.

The “years of inattention” resulted in shoddy conditions at many of the state’s ports and extensive flooding could happen unless the state makes some adjustments in how it manages storm water.

The Legislature recently made drinking water and storm water a priority during this legislative session. Both areas need improvement, according to the ASCE survey, which gave New Hampshire’s drinking water a C-minus and storm water a D-plus. The Senate is working on legislation that would give more funds to cities and towns to improve their drinking water, after recent developments which found high traces of harmful chemicals in several seacoast towns’ water supply. Sununu also is hoping the Environmental Protection Agency rolls back some storm water regulations poised to go into effect that could cost municipalities millions of dollars to comply.

The ASCE report notes that in order for the state to meet its infrastructure needs, “lawmakers need to pursue consistent policies and funding sources to ensure sustained support for infrastructure and enable long-term planning. The state needs to pursue more locally sourced funding for infrastructure, rather than relying so heavily on federal funding and financing to supplement the state’s budget for infrastructure investment.”

The report also called for consistent policy and funding sources and for the state to to pursue “more locally sourced funding,” like fully funding the Water Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act, identifying “dependable, long-term sources of funding” for the cleanup of contaminated sites, and considering a toll increase to finance major turnpike projects.

Follow Kyle on Twitter.

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