Heading into the Fourth of July weekend, there was still a flurry of legislative activity involving bills that Gov. John Lynch either signed, vetoed, or allowed to become law without his signature. 

Among the most controversial law to cross the governor’s desk in recent days was Senate Bill 129, which requires New Hampshire voters to present photo identification in order to cast a ballot in any municipal, state or federal election. The bill passed the House and Senate, but Lynch vetoed it on June 27.

Lynch argues that voter fraud has never been a problem in the state and that the new restrictions will make it difficult for many citizens to vote. He pointed specifically to seniors, students, disabled individuals and others who may not have a valid driver’s license or state-issued ID.

“SB 129 creates a real risk that New Hampshire voters will be denied their right to vote,” Lynch said in his veto statement. “These circumstances will present real hardships, especially for our seniors and disabled voters.”

The bill allows voters who do not have a valid ID on election day to cast a “provisional” ballot on the condition that they return to their town or city clerk’s office within two and a half days with a valid photo ID, a waiver from the secretary of state, or an affidavit of religious exemption. But Lynch does not believe two and a half days is a reasonable amount of time for someone to acquire an ID. 

Republican leaders defended the bill and said they would work hard to override Lynch’s veto. House majority leader D.J. Bettencourt (R-Salem) said he found it “mystifying” that Lynch would oppose legislation aimed at reducing voter fraud.

“It’s apparent from his veto that Gov. Lynch places little or no value on the integrity of New Hampshire elections,” Bettencourt said in a press release. “SB 129 is an important common sense reform aimed at protecting our electoral process.” 

But many voting rights groups applauded Lynch’s veto, including New Hampshire branches of the League of Women Voters, the Civil Liberties Union, America Votes, the City & Town Clerks Association, and the American Association of Retired Persons. 

“The only result of this legislation will be to discourage many elderly, disabled, poor and young citizens from exercising their Constitutional right to vote,” said Joan Flood Ashwell, election law specialist for the League of Women Voters. 

Lynch did, however, sign House Bill 147, which makes people convicted of committing a murder during a home invasion eligible for the death penalty. The legislation came largely in response to the horrific murder of a woman and attempted murder of her daughter during a Mont Vernon home invasion in 2009.  

“I believe strongly that there are some crimes so heinous that the death penalty is warranted,” Lynch said in a statement after signing the bill on June 28. He vowed to continue using the state’s death penalty statute “judiciously and cautiously.”

A couple of other bills will become law without Lynch’s signature, including House Bill 623, which prohibits state agencies and schools from recruiting, hiring or promoting individuals based on preferences of race, sex, national origin, religion or sexual orientation—essentially outlawing the practice of “affirmative action.”

“New Hampshire should hire and pick the best applicants for jobs and for our schools, regardless of the color of their skin, their gender or other characteristics,” House speaker William O’Brien (R-Mont Vernon) said in a press release. “HB 623 makes sure that we focus on the qualities that are truly important in individuals and not give advantages to one group over another.”

Senate Bill 146 will also become law without Lynch’s signature. The bill requires the Legislature to submit a reduced spending alternative as part of each biennial budget. O’Brien said the bill gives legislators the “tools to shrink government” and will make the state more fiscally responsible and sustainable. 

Bettencourt criticized Lynch for not signing the bills, saying in a press release that it reflects a “troubling pattern of inaction.”

Lynch previously allowed the $10.2 billion state budget to become law without his signature, saying it will make college tuition prices too high, jeopardize the state’s economic strategy, and drive up the cost of health care.