Week Three - January 25, 2008

The Advocate is a new electronic tool provided to our business members and regional state legislators.  This publication, sponsored by Devine Millimet & Branch and designed by ActiveEdge, is intended to keep you up to date with all the latest happenings in Concord concerning legislation impacting businesses.  We hope you enjoy this weekly electronic publication!

Here it is, the last week of January, and while the thoughts of most New Hampshire citizens turn to warmer climes (and particularly Glendale, Arizona), the legislature is in full action mode, striving to meet the first deadlines of this year’s session. Here are the highlights of this past week:

No More Rebates?

This week saw an attempt to have all rebates given at the retail level be honored instantly, as opposed to the current practice of mailing in rebates. As much as this is an admirable idea, particularly for the busy consumer, it is fraught with issues for business. SB 397 would, in effect, have all retailers who offer a rebate - whether it be a $100 rebate on a brand-name cell phone, or a $25 rebate on four bottles of Absolute vodka at the state liquor store, or a $500 rebate on pool equipment - it would all have to be given immediately. The effect of this legislation will be that many national companies will delete all rebates in NH. Retailers who represent multiple manufacturers would either have to require each manufacturer to give the rebate discount upon delivery of items to the retailers, or the retailer would have to give the rebate and then try to collect from the manufacturers. Can you imagine the paper work for the small retailer in either scenario? In addition, what if the item is returned or never sells? We must not penalize those who are diligent about mail-in-rebates because some do not read the rebate requirements and act appropriately. The Chamber opposed this attempt to regulate competitive commerce.

Tax Those Drinks

Two weeks ago, we provided an update on the progress of HB 503, a bill retained from the 2007 session by the House Environment and Agriculture Committee. We reported that the bill had been “quietly” amended to provide for a 1-cent beverage tax to fund a solid waste management account in the New Hampshire State Treasurer’s Office. The bill, which was scheduled for floor action on January 16th, was recommitted to the Committee to allow for a full hearing on the amendment which had caught many affected parties by surprise.

The hearing was held on Tuesday and drew a capacity crowd of opponents, including representatives of the NH Wholesale Beverage Association, Smuttynose Brewing Company / Portsmouth Brewery, NH Soft Drink Association, Anheuser Bush, and the New England Bottled Water Association. The only positive testimony came from representatives of the NH Department of Environmental Services, but even their enthusiasm for the tax seemed somewhat muted. The full committee is expected to take up the measure in executive session, for a second time, in the next week or two.

Divorced Spouses and Dependents - Year Two

Undaunted by the governor’s signature (still wet) on last session’s HB 197, which provided for the continuation of a divorced spouse on the health coverage of a former spouse for up to three years as if no divorce or legal separation had occurred, Rep. John Hunt, in solo capacity, sponsored a bill to repeal the measure this session. It was heard this week in the House Commerce Committee, where, other than Rep. Hunt and a representative from the BIA, the bill was widely panned by sponsors of last year’s measure, as well as a number of individuals who came forward to explain why the measure provided needed, short-term security to families going through the trauma of divorce.

There is no doubt that the extension of coverage provided by HB 197 has caused some unexpected problems. Along with its companion from last session, HB 790 (providing dependent coverage to children up to age 26), HB 197 has required that employees and employers alike work through the uncertainty around the federal tax implications resulting from these bills. Interestingly, these issues somehow never came to the fore during last session’s legislative discussion of either HB 790 or HB 197. Nonetheless, it is likely that Rep. Hunt’s bill will be killed by the House Commerce Committee and, even if a floor fight is mounted, the bill is likely to be killed on the House floor. In orderly fashion, nonetheless, Rep. Hunt will also move forward with his bill to repeal the aforementioned HB 790, extending the dependent coverage. More about that next week!

Restricted Mail Registry (Continued)

The hearing on HB 1506 took up right where it left off two weeks ago, which we wrote about in this section. Much like the first hearing then, this week’s hearing continued with a constant stream of witnesses testifying in opposition. With diverse groups such as the business community, labor unions and US Post Office employees speaking out strongly against the bill, it is not surprising that this initiative does not seem to be gaining any traction in the committee. A subcommittee will meet on January 29, and hopefully the full committee will vote to kill the bill soon thereafter.

Chamber Spotlight Issue of the Week

As we have for the past several years, your Chamber of Commerce once again is playing a leading role in attempting to bring commuter rail to Nashua. This issue has received its fair share of critics over the years, mostly by people who believe it is little more than a pipe dream.

However, significant and substantial progress has been made over the past couple of years. Thanks largely to the support of Governor Lynch, and the perseverance of Greater Nashua legislators like Senator David Gottesman and Representative Betty Lasky, the state created a Rail Authority last year. This Rail Authority has the responsibility of governing all the operations of a commuter rail line, should one successfully launch in the coming years.

This year, we are now tackling another major hurdle: the question of whether or not the state should set a liability cap for any potential rail incidents involving claims. Why do we need a liability cap? A liability cap will allow the state to keep its operating costs at a very low cost, versus the alternative of paying for enough insurance capable of covering catastrophic cases. A liability cap would keep the state’s costs for insurance around $300K, while the lack of a liability cap would increase the state’s costs to over $1.5 million.

Despite the fact that a liability cap makes financial sense for the state, and despite the fact that every other state in the country has a liability cap for their commuter rail operations, we are facing opposition to this idea here in New Hampshire by the Trial Lawyers’ Association (they recently renamed themselves the New Hampshire Society for Justice). The Trial Lawyers’ Association has, for the past 8 years, argued that a liability cap would be unconstitutional and therefore should be opposed. This has been, and continues to be, the central argument standing in the way of commuter rail.

Supporters of rail have decided therefore to address this question, by using HB 1404 as a vehicle to ask our state’s Supreme Court for an advisory opinion on the matter. Since it these judges who would rule on this issue, it only makes sense to take the issue directly to them and ask them to resolve this question for all of us. Representative Lasky and another of our region’s legislators, Peter Leishman, are behind this effort.

The hearing for this bill took place yesterday, and your Chamber stood with others to support this measure. There was no opposition voiced at the hearing, although the Trial Lawyers’ Association decided not to support or oppose the idea of asking the Supreme Court for its opinion. The bill will need to be amended in order for it to accurately state the question to the Supreme Court, but your Chamber feels that this bill is off to a good start. It will likely make its way out of the committee with a positive recommendation within the next few weeks, at which time the full House will need to vote on it and hopefully send it to the Senate for their consideration and approval. We look forward to providing further updates as this bill makes its way through the legislature.

J. Christopher Williams
President & CEO
Greater Nashua Chamber of Commerce
151 Main St.
Nashua, NH 03060
Phone: 603.881.8333
Fax: 603.881.7323