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.

criminal record: gone but not forgotten: How do you annul a criminal record in the digital age? A House proposal to update the state’s criminal record annulment law attempts to provide a 21st century update to a pre-digital age New Hampshire statute.

House Bill 82 had its first Senate hearing on May 12. Sponsored by Rep. Laura Pantelakos (D-Portsmouth), HB 82 passed the House by a voice vote in February. The measure is the fruit of a legislative study committee formed last year to provide recommendations to update the annulment law for the first time in almost four decades.

The main issue with the current statute is this: While a conviction may be removed from official records, that annulled conviction isn’t necessarily removed from public databases with seemingly infinite storage capacity outside the courts (like online search engines or media archives).

The first criminal record annulment statute was passed by the New Hampshire Legislature in 1971 and allows for a process to remove a conviction from the public record. The process works like this: Depending on the type of conviction, and after a period ranging from one to 10 years following conviction, a person can request an annulment. A judge decides whether to grant the annulment after considering input from state and local police, the local prosecutor and correction officials. Conviction records for murder, felonious sexual assaults and other violent crimes cannot be annulled. The number of granted annulments has increased from about 800 criminal cases in 1997 to more than 4,000 in 2009.

With narrow law enforcement exceptions under current law, any person who discloses information about an annulled conviction can be charged with a misdemeanor. The leaking of an annulled record to a Portsmouth Herald reporter during the Rockingham County Sheriff election in 2008 was one of the main factors that led to the study committee and to HB 82.

The most significant change in law the bill would bring is to eliminate legal ramifications for journalists reporting both a previous criminal record and a subsequent annulment. Annulments also would become public records that courts would be required to release upon request—and media organizations would not be required to revise details of a conviction or deny public access to that content.
One fundamental pillar from the old statute will remain in effect: Those with annulled criminal records will still be able to truthfully say that they have no criminal record. —Michael McCord

They said it: Last week, we heard a lot of talk about Gov. John Lynch’s veto of the so-called right-to-work legislation (House Bill 474), as well as pleasure over the first tax cut of the session signed into law. Here are a few of the more memorable quotes.

Gov. John Lynch’s HB 474 veto message: “In the last seven years of recruiting businesses to move to New Hampshire, not one business leader has ever even asked me if New Hampshire had a right-to-work law, let alone suggested it was a factor in the company’s location decision. No New Hampshire business leaders have ever told me that the lack of a so-called right-to-work law prevented them from expanding or hiring new workers here in New Hampshire. And no New Hampshire workers have ever told me they couldn’t get a job because New Hampshire doesn’t have a so-called right-to-work law. The debate over the so-called right-to-work bill in New Hampshire appears to be largely driven by national outside interest groups, and is not a result of problems facing New Hampshire businesses or workers.”

Jack Kimball, New Hampshire Republican Party chair, on Lynch’s veto of “Right to Work,” House Bill 474: “It is clear by his veto on HB 474, John Lynch is against free market principles, job creation and individual liberty. It also confirms that he is out of touch with the plight of New Hampshire families and business owners. Right to Work would create a more appealing business climate that would attract new businesses, create sustainable jobs for our citizens and allow current businesses to grow while putting us back on track for a prosperous future.”

House Speaker William O’Brien speaking to New Hampshire Public Radio before Lynch vetoed HB 474: “My caucus members are concerned (about) not allowing the governor to believe that he can function as a third branch of the legislature. The Senate and the House have spoken with very strong majorities that right to work is what the people of New Hampshire want.”
Ray Buckley, New Hampshire Democratic Party chair, responding to Republican criticism of Lynch’s HB 474 veto: “Why do Republicans want to turn New Hampshire into Mississippi? New Hampshire is routinely recognized as having one of the most business-friendly business climates in the nation and ranks highest in public safety and our schools outperform most other states.”

House Majority Leader D.J. Bettencourt of Salem on Lynch signing House Bill 229, which repealed the 10 percent gambling tax: “This tax cut is merely a first installment in our plans for tax relief for New Hampshire citizens. Help is on the way and we are going to get back to being a low tax, business friendly state. We want people from across New England and the country to come here to visit, to shop and to bring their businesses… I encourage Governor Lynch to travel around the border communities and get the word out about this pro-business tax cut. I’d be happy to work with local merchants in my hometown to set up an event with the governor to let people know about this tax cut that the Republican legislature has delivered to the people.” —Michael McCord