Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong opposition to House Bill 1542.…
Rep. Wendy Thomas (D - Hills 12)Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong opposition to House Bill 1542. This bill is being sold as a refund. It is being dressed up as relief, but let's be honest about what it actually does. It raids the Renewable Energy Fund and redirects money away from the very investments that helped New Hampshire build a more stable, affordable, and resilient energy future. It is a penny-wise and pound-foolish policy. HB 1542 does not solve our energy challenges; it dodges them. The Renewable Energy Fund exists for a reason. It helps support solar, thermal, and other clean energy initiatives here in New Hampshire. It helps create the kind of forward-looking investments that lower costs over time, strengthen local energy independence, and prepare us for the realities of a rapidly changing world. This bill kneecaps that future. And what a reckless time to do it. Right now, I'm speaking. Right now, I'm still speaking. Right now, we are watching the disastrous effects of the Trump-led war in the Middle East ripple through global...
Deputy Speaker Steven SmithWe're so close. So, the House will be in order, and the member will try not to antagonize the House. There's a really nice reception coming up. Have you ever had those, like, Beef Wellington bites they have over there? I can't even find them anywhere. They're awesome. So let's just get through this together.
Rep. Wendy Thomas (D - Hills 12)I am who I am. Ripple through global energy markets. As of March 2026, the conflict has driven major instability around the Strait of Hormuz, a choke point for roughly one-fifth of the world's oil supply, and oil and gasoline prices have surged as a result. Reuters and the Associated Press have both reported sharp spikes in fuel costs and growing fears of wider economic fallout. So what is our response here in New Hampshire? At the exact moment, the world is reminding us, in flashing red lights, of the danger of fossil fuel volatility and geopolitical dependence. This bill says, let's weaken our investments in renewable energy. Let's undercut programs that help people and communities reduce dependence on exactly the kinds of energy shocks we are now seeing play out in real time. This is not fiscal prudence. This is strategic malpractice. And let's talk about the so-called savings. The whole premise of this bill is that it would take alternative compliance payments that currently fund renewable energy programs and instead rebate them to the ratepayers on a per-kilowatt-hour basis. That may sound nice as a political slogan, but the actual effect is to strip support from programs that help low- and moderate-income families, small businesses, school districts, and towns and counties access solar and other energy improvements that lower all of our bills and our property taxes, while offering tiny short-term rebates that do nothing to transform the underlying cost burden. Even bill summaries note that this would effectively cut funding for renewable energy fund programs, including low- and moderate-income solar efforts. We should not be gutting long-term public benefit programs in exchange for a political talking point. We should be building an energy system that is more local, more affordable, more resilient, and less vulnerable to the whims of international conflict, oil cartels, and political strongmen. We should be helping families lower their bills, not just this month, but for years to come. We should be investing in the future, not kneecapping it. House Bill 1542 moves us backwards. It tells New Hampshire that when the energy world gets more dangerous and unstable, our answer is to retreat from innovation and resilience. I reject that. I believe the people of this state deserve better than symbolic rebates and short-sighted policy. They deserve leadership that can see beyond the next headline and the next election cycle. Let's not rob our future to pretend that we are helping in the present. I urge you to vote no on House Bill 1542, and, Mr. Speaker, I agree with the decision to make this a roll call vote.
Deputy Speaker Steven SmithRepresentative Ohm is recognized to speak for the committee report.
Rep. Bill Ohm (R - Hills 10)Thank you, Mr. Speaker. This bill, as amended, would gradually wind down the Renewable Energy Fund and refund the proceeds to ratepayers, lowering their electric bills. The refunds would start in the next fiscal year and are estimated to be about $6.4 million in the next fiscal year and continue until the fund is depleted. Four administrative positions would be eliminated. However, the funding for the Office of Energy Innovation is maintained. Please vote green to lower electric rates for your consumers.
Deputy Speaker Steven SmithRepresentative Oppel is recognized to speak against the committee report.
Rep. Thomas Oppel (D - Graf 9)Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, when I was first learning about speechwriting years ago, I was taught that you should start where your audience is and you should start with a couple of simple facts. So let me do that. Fact number one is New Hampshire is not a fossil fuel producing state. There are no oil rigs in any of our 10 counties. Fact number two is I think we would all agree that free markets work best when there is competition. But House Bill 1542 doesn't just ignore those two facts, it aggressively moves us in the opposite direction and it will cost the state of New Hampshire. Even as artificial intelligence is advancing, this bill is directing us to invest in the Pony Express. Rather than investing in energy sources and jobs here in New Hampshire, like solar, wind, geothermal, even nuclear, House Bill 1542 wants to steal that investment to support fossil fuels produced far, far away from our borders and that are priced globally. As previously was mentioned, we've seen those prices rise in just the past few weeks. It was 80 cents at the gas pump in just a few weeks. It's a dollar or more for heating fuel and we have no control over that. We also know that solar and wind energy will be producing right here in New Hampshire long after the last oil and gas wells run dry. Now, there's an awful lot of talk about subsidies, but the fact of the matter is the fossil fuel industry is among the most subsidized industries in the world. And by eliminating energy competition, as this bill seeks to do, House Bill 1542 is in a sense creating a new subsidy for oil and gas. It is the very definition of picking winners and losers. Renewable energy, again a fact, has and will continue to outpace fossil fuels in job creation right here in New Hampshire. Currently, two-thirds of all energy jobs here in the Granite State are involved with renewable energy and the gap continues to grow. Competition in energy markets will result in far more savings to consumers and the state, than the pennies a month this bill proposes to refund to rate payers. I urge this body to follow the laws of economics, the logic of free markets, and the fundamental understanding that while New Hampshire is not a fossil fuel producer, we can be a leader in producing renewable energy. You don't build a strong economy for the future on short-term rebates and longterm neglect. I urge this body to reject House Bill 1542 and choose real financial stewardship over political gimmicks. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Deputy Speaker Steven SmithRepresentative Wendy Thomas requests a roll call. Is that sufficiently seconded? It is. This will be a roll call vote. Members take your seats. The question is the majority committee report of Ought to Pass with Amendment. Representative Caplan is recognized for a parliamentary inquiry.
Rep. Tony Caplan (D - Merr 8)Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, if I know that this bill kills the Renewable Energy Fund, that increases self-sufficient energy and lowers bills for school districts, towns, counties, small businesses, and working families, Mr. Speaker, if I further know that killing the Renewable Energy Fund, which lowers electric prices long-term for all users in order to send back pennies on individual monthly electric bills, is not a sound financial decision by any measure, and finally, if I know that now is not the time for doubling down on our fossil fuel addiction as we are about to embark on a war in Iran that will send prices for fossil fuels through the roof for the foreseeable future, would I now press the common sense red button so that a better motion can be made? Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Deputy Speaker Steven SmithRepresentative Ulery is recognized for a parliamentary inquiry.
Rep. Jordan Ulery (R - Hills 13)Thank you, Mr. Speaker. And only one page, large type.
Rep. Jordan Ulery (R - Hills 13)Mr. Speaker, if I know this bill, as a fact, and as amended, moves New Hampshire forward, gradually winding down the underutilized Renewable Energy Fund, and refunds the proceeds to our neighbors and our ratepayers, lowering their electric bills by an estimated $6.4 million in fiscal year 2027, and if I know administrative costs would be reduced, thus reducing the cost to operate state government, again saving money for our neighbors, and if I know that the funding for the Office of Energy Innovation would still be maintained, allowing private sector innovation and research to grow, ensuring free market, broad sector, effective, exciting, new, and cutting-edge development to take place, would I then push the green button for Ought to Pass?
Deputy Speaker Steven SmithThe question is a majority committee report of Ought to Pass with Amendment. This is a roll call vote. If you're in favor, press the green button. If opposed, press the red. 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. 189 in the affirmative, 162 in the negative, the committee report is adopted.