Skip to content

Legislative Review

It's a wrap (sort of)

With most of the legislative work completed, this will be the final edition of Legislative Review for the 2023 session. There are a handful of bills whose fate will be decided over the next several weeks by conference committee (the method used to find compromise on bills that have different House and Senate versions). BIA lobbying staff will continue to monitor and participate in these conference committees and in work sessions on dozens of bills that were retained by various House committees. The brunt of this work will take place in the fall. BIA members are encouraged to reach out to staff with questions on specific legislation of interest.

More work ahead on data privacy bills

House Judiciary has scheduled an additional subcommittee work session on SB 255-FN, a comprehensive consumer data privacy bill retained by the committee in May. The work session will take place Wednesday, June 28 beginning at 10 a.m. in LOB 206-208. BIA supports SB 255, which would establish industry-led guidelines for consumer expectations of privacy. The subcommittee will also work on HB 314-FN, another data privacy retained this session. HB 314, which BIA opposes, would regulate the collection, retention and use of personal information and establish a cause of action for violations of an individual's expectation of privacy. Rep. Bob Lynn, chair of House Judiciary, discussed the possibility of combining the bills. BIA does not support private right of action language in either bill.

BIA requests veto on costly ratepayer-funded subsidy

Last week, BIA submitted a letter to the office of Gov. Sununu asking for his veto on HB 142, relative to the Burgess Biopower Plant. The bill would forgive $50 million of $150 million of debt the plant owes back to ratepayers. Consequently, the bill would continue to force ratepayers to further subsidize the plant via continued payments added on to ratepayers' energy bills. For some commercial and industrial ratepayers, the subsidy adds up to $260,000 annually. We believe additional, unnecessary costs on business’ energy bills threatens New Hampshire’s competitive business climate and that requiring electric ratepayers to subsidize a business is not an effective economic development strategy for New Hampshire.