The House, Wednesday, March 22, 2023

Rep. Douglas Trottier (R - Belk 8)Thank you, Mister Speaker. Good morning my honorable colleagues. Today I rise before you in support of HB 189 in hopes of renaming a portion of Route 140 in the Town of Gilmanton in honor of Private First Class Nicholas Cournoyer. Nicholas Cournoyer was born in Concord, New Hampshire and was raised in the Town of Gilmanton. He was a graduate of the Gilford High School class of 2000. Private First Class Cournoyer enlisted in the US Army and trained in Fort Benning, Georgia to serve in the Infantry Division. Private First Class Cournoyer was assigned to deploy to Iraq with the 2nd Battalion 22nd Infantry First Brigade Combat Team, which is part of the 10th Mountain Division out of Fort Drum New York. On May 18, 2006, Private First Class Cournoyer made the ultimate sacrifice while serving his country and the people of New Hampshire in Iraq during a time of active war. Private Cournoyer died in Baghdad, Iraq from injuries he sustained when an improvised explosive devise detonated next to his Humvee during active combat operations. I feel it is our obligation to honor this New Hampshire hero, his family and his community by renaming a portion of Route 140 in the Town of Gilmanton in memory of Private First Class Cournoyer for his service and ultimate sacrifice he made fighting for our freedom. I ask that each and every one of you press the green button and pass this bill to allow his legacy to live on in his community and the great State of New Hampshire. Mister Speaker, I ask for a roll call vote. Thank you.

Speaker PackardA roll call has been requested. Is that sufficiently seconded? It is sufficiently seconded. This will be a roll call vote. Members, please take your seats. The motion before us is Ought to Pass on HB 189. This is going to be a roll call vote. The Chair recognizes Rep. Sue Newman for a parliamentary inquiry.

Rep. Sue Newman (D - Hills 4)Thank you, Mister Speaker. Good morning colleagues. It's good to see you all here and in the gallery. Mister Speaker, if I know that HB 189 had the unanimous support of the Public Works and Highways Committee and that the Selectboard in the Town of Gilmanton wrote that naming this highway section is appropriate for Private First Class Nicholas Cournoyer and will leave a lasting and visual memory of his exemplary service and honor his memory, would you please all press the green button and vote Ought to Pass on this bill? Thank you.

Speaker PackardThe motion before us is Ought to Pass on HB 189. This is a roll call vote. If you are in favor, you'll press the green button. If you are opposed, you'll press the red button. Voting stations are open for 30 seconds. Have all members present had an opportunity to vote? The House will attend to the state of the vote. In a very rare occurrence, we have a unanimous vote.

Rep. Tim Cahill (R - Rock 4)Thank you, Mister Speaker. Honored colleagues, special guests and the citizens of New Hampshire. On May 3rd, 2023, it will mark the 20th year since the Old Man of the Mountain collapsed. I remember getting the news from home, Grama Grant called us to tell us the news. It was a sad day. I remember making the journey to see the Old Man when I was kid. My father took me there. Nothing is more Granite State than the Old Man of the Mountain. Reading about a father and son team that worked to keep the Old Man together was an inspiring story when I was younger. They climbed out on the rocks and ledges, working to keep the Old Man of the Mountain together so that everyone could enjoy him. That was inspiring. For years David Nielsen and his father worked to preserve the Old Man every year. Risking their lives so that New Hampshire would still have its mascot: the Old Man of the Mountain so we the people could still have our iconic symbol. They embody the best of the Granite State. Live Free or Die. When the Old Man fell, then Governor Benson was right when he said, "So what do we do now?" The Old Man falling was akin to the Twin Towers for many in the Granite State and around the world. I was in DC on September 11th. I was also in DC on May 3rd. Soon after that I made up my mind I wanted to come back home to New Hampshire and today I am standing in these honored chambers before all of you, standing for the people. So, what do we do now? What an amazing way we could promote and remember the Granite State's iconic mascot, whose likeness appears everywhere and on everything in New Hampshire. From our money, our tee shirts, our bumper stickers, signs, and our license plates. The Old Man is everywhere. The Old Man is New Hampshire. This is the answer to Benson's question. This is what we do now. I ask you to vote Ought to Pass on HB 96 and join me in honoring the Old Man in the Mountain for generations to come. Thank you, Mister Speaker.

Rep. John Potucek (R - Rock 13)Thank you, Mister Speaker. Mister Speaker, the Old Man in the Mountain is the iconic symbol of New Hampshire. It was featured on a 3-cent stamp back in the 1950's. I have a collection of them because my dad was a stamp collector and there is a plate block of that same stamp down in the Visitor's Center for those of you who might want to look at it. It's also in the 2000 quarter. A bill which was sponsored by a good friend, HCR 13 in 1999, a resolution urging the selection of a final design of the New Hampshire commemorative quarter, which includes the state motto, Live Free or Die and nine stars representing New Hampshire as the ninth state to ratify the constitution and the Old Man of the Mountain. Had this bill not passed this body, the federal reserve would have put on the New Hampshire quarter whatever they wanted to. This bill, I believe, is needed because I proposed this bill and I thought about it for about two years. I talked to a bunch of people, and I selected four people to co-sponsor this bill, the Speaker, Rep. Shurtleff, the former Speaker, Jeb Bradley, excuse me, two people from the other side of the wall who are in leadership on both sides of the aisle. They agreed that it is about time that somebody recognized the Old Man of the Mountain and I've talked to so many people. I've gotten so many emails. I've talked to constituents in Derry, Londonderry, Windham and wherever I visit to do whatever I need to do, and they all said it's about time. We've let this sit for 20 years and I believe that the 20th anniversary should be a commemorative year. The bill itself, I don't know if you have read it, but the bill states Old Man of the Mountain Day, the Governor shall issue an annual proclamation calling for the proper observance of May 3rd as Old Man of the Mountain Day in honor of the day the iconic rock formation collapsed. It doesn't ask you to do anything. It doesn't require you to do anything. It's just a day of remembrance. Sometime during the day, stop and reflect on what the Old Man meant to you. So, I'm asking you to vote no on ITL. Thank you, my colleagues, and thank you, Mister Speaker.

Rep. Steve Shurtleff (D - Merr 15)Thank you, Mister Speaker. Mister Speaker, in a cabin in the White Mountains there are some days I feel like the Old Man in the Mountain. Mister Speaker, I understand that committees vote on this and ITLing and every session they get bills to recognize distinguished people from the Granite State with a permanent day, but this bill is somewhat unique in so far, we are not talking about a person. We are talking about a symbol. That is not just my opinion that the Old Man is a symbol. In 1945, legislators sitting in this hall voted to name the Old Man of the Mountain the official symbol of the Granite State and that's why today we still see the profile of the Old Man on Department of Transportation signs. I know we have a long day so I'm going to cut this short. I'm not going to talk about Nathaniel Hawthorne's wonderful book, The Great Stone Face. I'm not going to talk about Daniel Webster's outstanding quote about what the Man in the Mountain stands for and that symbolism. Let me tell you a story instead. Now the Old in the Mountain is recognized by both the Abenaki Indians and the Mohawk Indians with great reverence. There is a story in Abenaki lore about a great chief named Pemigewasset. He fell in love with a beautiful Native American woman by the name of Minerwa, whose father was a chief of the Mohawk tribe. They married and because of that union, for years there was peace between the waring Mohawks and the Abenakis. One day, Minerwa got a message from her father saying, "I'm dying of an illness. Going through the village. Please come and see me." She told Pemigewasset I will return just as quickly as I can. Chief Pemigewasset told her, every night that you are gone on top of what is now Cannon Mountain, I will light a bonfire so that when you return to our village, if you do so at nighttime, you will be able to find your way back to me. Every night Chief Pemigewasset climbed Cannon and lit that bonfire for his wife, Minerwa. One night his brother approached him, climbed the mountain and said, "I've got bad news. We've just learned that your wife died of the same disease that killed her father." As the brother started down the trail from Cannon, he turned around to see if Pemigewasset was following him. Where there had been a bonfire, there was now a great stone face, the Old Man in the Mountain. The Great Spirit turned Pemigewasset into the Old Man and had him facing towards the trail that Minerwa would come back when she returned to Pemigewasset. On May 3rd in 2003, when I heard that the Old Man had fallen, I thought back to that story I heard years ago, and I wondered does this mean that Minerwa and Pemigewasset were finally reunited? The Old Man of the Mountain is a very iconic representation of the Granite State. It's important and I ask you to overturn the ITL so another motion can be made. I would like to see a permanent day dedicated to the Old Man of the Mountain so that future generations will stop and pause and think what the great stone face meant to us in the state, not just to the early settlers, but to our Native American population. I would ask you to please vote red on the ITL so another motion can be made. Thank you, Mister Speaker.

Rep. Chris True (R - Rock 9)Thank you, Mister Speaker. Mister Speaker, the committee found HB 96 Inexpedient to Legislate because we do not believe that putting a day into statute is the proper way to memorialize any day, including the Old Man in the Mountain. This year is the 20th anniversary of the day the Old Man of the Mountain came tumbling down the mountain. Placing the day in statute will not memorialize the day. What will memorialize the day of the famous granite face is that New Hampshire's citizens will choose to gather and to celebrate and to honor the tradition. In closing, please allow me to quote from one of the greatest, British bohemians, disco bands of all time, Queen. Yes, that granite face was sadly caught in a landslide. I am asking you to press the green button and support the committee report of ITL because I do not believe that in New Hampshire we need a statute in the RSAs to remind us of when to celebrate. I remind everyone that without their being a statute in New Hampshire law, for anyone who wishes to keep alive the remembrance and the history of that iconic rock face, please attend the 20th anniversary this May 3rd at Profile Plaza in Franconia commemorating the memory of the Old Man in the Mountain. Thank you very much, Mister Speaker.

Speaker PackardA division has been requested. Members take your seats. The motion before us is the majority committee report of Inexpedient to Legislate on HB 96. This is a division vote. The Chair recognizes Rep. Schuett for a parliamentary inquiry.

Rep. Dianne Schuett (D - Merr 12)Thank you, Mister Speaker. If, as a long-time member of ED&A, a committee which is predisposed to deny codifying every person, day or critter that is brought to the legislature, I usually agree with that philosophy. But if I know a bipartisan minority of our committee, including myself, believes that this bill should be the exception to that standard. And if I know that certain dates like December 7th or 9-11 are dates that stand out in our national history and believe enacting this bill would be the surest way to ensure that May 3rd will be remembered by future generations in our state as the date we lost our most famous icon, would I then vote no on this ITL motion so that another motion may be brought forward? Thank you.

Speaker PackardThe Chair recognizes Rep. Goley for a parliamentary inquiry.

Rep. Jeffrey Goley (D - Hills 21)Thank you, Mister Speaker. Mister Speaker, if I know the ED&A committee heard numerous bills already this year on naming days and ITL'd those bills and summarized that those individuals that came forward reach out to the Governor for their cause on a yearly basis to keep it going. And if I know just putting into statute where it will be with the other 28 days that I couldn't read off the top of my head that are in statute, then as a matter of fairness to those organizations that we have in this body said no to in naming days, would I do the same and support the committee report of Inexpedient to Legislate? Thank you.

Speaker PackardThe motion before us is the majority committee report of Inexpedient to Legislate on HB 96. This is a division vote. If you are in favor, you'll press the green button. If you are opposed, you'll press the red button. Voting stations are open for 30 seconds. Have all members present had an opportunity to vote? The House will attend to the state of the vote. 181 voting Yea, 198 voting Nay, the motion of Inexpedient to Legislate fails. For what reason does the member rise?

Rep. Steve Shurtleff (D - Merr 15)Thank you, Mister Speaker. I move the question and ask the body to vote Ought to Pass.

Speaker PackardThe motion before us now is Ought to Pass. Are you ready for the question? All those in favor, say Aye; those opposed, Nay. The Ayes have it and the Ought to Pass motion passes.

Rep. Mike Belcher (R - Carr 4)Thank you, Mister Speaker. I rise today to speak against HB 572 for a few simple reasons. We've heard recently that some of these bills came to us with a fiscal note with no fiscal note. This was one of those bills, however, I ran some numbers myself and I ran them multiple times just to get a baseline idea of where we are going to be at. Let me tell you it goes very high. So, what this bill actually does is it increases the ability of students to get a free lunch in schools from the current federally mandated 185% poverty level to 300% of poverty level. The thing is the federal government will not reimburse for anything over 185%. That puts the rest of that money on the New Hampshire taxpayers. Now when you increase that to 300%, you're increasing it well above the median household income in this state. It's reasonable to think at that point you're going to be encompassing the vast majority of students in our public schools. If a large number of those students, perhaps 70,000 out of the potential 90,000, were to sign up for this program, we could easily be looking at a 9-figure bill, 9 figures, $100 million annually to New Hampshire taxpayers. That is a reasonable assumption given all of the data that we know from this. On top of that, it's worse. Not only does the New Hampshire taxpayer foot the bill, but this remains a federally regulated program because we remain in the USDA free and reduced lunch program, which means all of this money, most of which at this point will be coming from New Hampshire taxpayers, is still going to be regulated by the federal government. They will determine the nutritional standards. They will determine any curriculum standards that need to come along with federal dollars. This is the worst of both worlds. Thank you.

Rep. Muriel Hall (D - Merr 9)Thank you, Mister Speaker. Today I rise in support of HB 572, as amended. This bill, which came out of committee with bipartisan support, is a product of extensive interim study work that involved many community stakeholders. The intent of this bill is two-fold. To help support a wider range of low to middle income families by raising the eligibility cap for free school meals to 300% of the poverty level. And two, to fund the cost of providing these free school meals through the existing federal reimbursement program combined with a newly considered supplemental state reimbursement program. Kids' access to school meals has been curtailed at a time when many families continue to struggle with the rising costs of putting food on the table. HB 572, as amended, ensures that our most vulnerable children and adolescents receive at least one, and when possible, two nutritious meals per day. When someone says to you, "Ah, I'm starving." Have you ever thought to yourself, no you're not. You are just hungry. Hunger. That's what this bill is about, childhood hunger. No child should go hungry because of circumstances beyond their control. Imagine yourself in a situation where you are being asked to learn a new skill. Maybe one that will affect your ability to do your job, but all you can think about is the fact that you are hungry. Now imagine that some child's reality is their next meal might be a day away. We are asking kids to be their best selves under the worst of circumstances. We can do better than this. We must do better than this now. The importance of food in a child's education is obvious. School meals play a critical role in a student's attendance, wellbeing and academic success. A healthy diet can give a child the energy to think, work and play. We heard an administrator testify that the toughest part of his job as a school superintendent was having to make the decision to cancel school knowing that some kids would not get a meal that day. HB 572 does not attempt to feed every child, only those whose families who meet the income illegibility guidelines. At a time when considerable attention has been given to the state's surplus revenue, shouldn't we consider what we need in addition to what we want? What we need is to end childhood hunger in New Hampshire and this bill is a reasonable start. Taxpayers provide students with computers, textbooks and Internet access. Let's do our part to ensure that our kids have something in their bellies when using these tools at least during the school day. The majority of House Education is committed to assisting Granite State families in reducing food insecurity and expanding the opportunity to feed those who need it most. Please join me in voting Ought to Pass on this amendment on HB 572. Thank you, Mister Speaker.

Rep. Hope Damon (D - Sull 8)Thank you, Mister Speaker. Colleagues, I rise today to support HB 572. My career and expertise as a dietician make it so clear that feeding children is essential to their ability to learn and succeed. Food insecurity distracts from any other focus a person might have. After breathing, being adequately fed is the most essential component of wellbeing. We might like to believe that hunger is not a New Hampshire issue, but we would be profoundly wrong. Hungry children are cognitively impaired. They cannot learn efficiently. Hungry children have less mood regulation and less control of their behaviors. HB 572 presents a thoroughly researched, carefully developed approach to reducing childhood hunger that is very cost effective. Regardless of the reasons a family is not providing adequate nutrition for their child, that child should never be left hungry. Federal school meal programs are not perfect, but they are much more adequate than they are usually perceived as, and they have improved greatly in the last 10 years. They provide far better nutrition than what hungry children experience without school meals. Please join me in supporting HB 572 to feed our children. No child should ever be left hungry.

Speaker PackardThe motion before us is the majority committee report of Ought to Pass as Amended on HB 572. A division has been requested. Members take your seats. This will be a division vote. The motion before us is the majority committee report of Ought to Pass as Amended on HB 572. This is a division vote. The Chair recognizes Rep. Ladd for a parliamentary inquiry.

Rep. Rick Ladd (R - Graf 5)Thank you, Mister Speaker. If I know this bill requires each school board to make at least one real meal available without cost to a child that qualifies based upon household income less than or equal to 300% of the federal poverty guidelines. And if I know that the department states this bill would increase costs at the local level for providing an increased number of meals at no cost and at the state level for staffing and the administration of the new program. And if I also know the bill creates a need for a new form of determining eligibility as the current process is under USDA, would I then press the red button so an alternative motion can be brought forward? Thank you.

Speaker PackardThe Chair recognizes Rep. Ellison for a parliamentary inquiry.

Rep. Arthur Ellison (D - Merr 28)Thank you, Mister Speaker. If I know that many children in our schools are going through the school day without either breakfast or lunch because their parents cannot afford these meals. And, Mister Speaker, if I believe that as a State Representative, I have the responsibility to help feed our children, would I now push the green button to pass HB 572, as amended, and take a giant step forward on behalf of hungry kids? Thank you, Mister Speaker.

Speaker PackardThe motion before is the majority committee report of Ought to Pass as Amended. This is a division vote. If you are in favor, you'll press the green button. If you are opposed, you'll press the red button. Voting stations are open for 30 seconds. Have all members present had the opportunity to vote? The House will attend to the state of the vote. 201 voting Yea; 177 voting Nay, the committee report is adopted.