What are state lawmakers doing that actually affects your daily life? Lots! Find out with Front Door Politics: jargon-free, non-advocacy state house news at www.frontdoorpolitics.com.

tax cut vertigo: A temporary five-cent gas tax cut passed the House recently. Is it political posturing or an altruistic measure for cash-strapped New Hampshire consumers?

Gov. John Lynch dismissed the last-minute tax cut proposal that was trumpeted by House leadership. Lynch said he wouldn’t have to veto Senate Bill 78 because the Senate won’t pass this “political gimmick” that could chop an estimated $6.5 million out of the state’s Highway Fund, which is used for road and bridge construction and maintenance.

House majority leader Rep. D. J. Bettencourt (R-Salem) countered with enthusiasm, suggesting an economic development chain reaction would unfold if the measure passes. While New Hampshire already has the lowest gas tax and prices in the region, Bettencourt said, “Expanding this margin by another five cents would result in more out-of-state residents coming to New Hampshire to fill their gas tanks. While they are here, visitors will also take advantage of our low tax environment and purchase other goods, including cigarettes, liquor and lottery tickets. This will help to drive up state revenues, as will the business profits taxes of the local gas stations benefiting from the additional business.”

On the other hand, Senate Finance chair Chuck Morse (R-Salem) told the Concord Monitor he wondered whether oil producers would benefit most from the gas tax reduction. The Senate also wasn’t ready to embrace the math attached to the House cigarette tax reduction bill (the theory is that lower taxes equate to greater revenues) when it tabled House Bill 156 recently.

While it may appear that the Senate is playing bad cop to the House’s good cop when it comes to tax cuts, this is a traditional legislative dance of differing assumptions and priorities. It can and does work both ways, as Sen. Lou D’Allensandro (D-Manchester) found out in 2010 when he managed to get an expanded gambling bill through the Senate—only to run into a wall of opposition and skepticism in the House.

The reality is that this stage of the game is nearly all political posturing. The tax cuts that have been passed by the House or tabled in both the House and Senate remain very much in play. It’s the final House-Senate conference committees, where the two chambers’ differences are worked out, that will reveal the Legislature’s final revenue priorities come June.

liberty and (fire) protection: There’s been a lot of debate about liberty this legislative session. But one never knows how the ideal will emerge—or in what legislation.

Case in point: A proposed law about residential fire sprinklers has provided an intriguing confluence between personal liberty, public safety and local control. The N.H. House recently voted to adopt Senate Bill 91, offering one perspective on the cost of liberty.

The Senate passed SB 91, sponsored by Sen. Boutin (R-Hooksett), back in February, and the House followed suit on April 27. The bill disallows any town or city in New Hampshire from introducing requirements for “automatic fire suppression sprinklers” in one- or two-family homes (a House amendment stipulates that towns that already have such rules on the books can continue enforcing them). 

New Hampshire is one of many states having this debate. In Pennsylvania and Georgia, for example, lawmakers are either enacting similar bans or delaying enforcement of existing laws. Meanwhile, fire protection and home building organizations are fighting it out to influence public and political opinion on the economic costs and benefits of such fire protection systems.

And the subject isn’t new in New Hampshire, either. Another bill this session would prevent planning boards from requiring fire sprinklers in one- or two-family homes. House Bill 109, having passed the House without debate, now awaits Senate committee recommendation. And, in 2010, the Legislature removed the requirement for fire sprinklers at such dwellings from the state fire code with House Bill 1486.

In the majority committee report supporting the bill, Rep. John Burt (R-Goffstown) writes that the measure is “consumer friendly” to homebuyers in the state and “is a safeguard to personal liberty by preserving an individual’s choice whether or not to purchase such a system for their home.”

But, in the minority report, Rep. Kris Roberts (D-Keene) says SB 91 strips away a local government’s ability to achieve public safety ends. Roberts also says that a “one size fits all” approach doesn’t work for all communities and can ultimately increase costs through higher insurance rates and more municipal public safety spending. “We shouldn’t be using the power of the government to require the majority to assume the cost of the moral hazard,” Roberts said.