A pack of smokes with that bottle of booze? One NH bill up for public hearing next week proposes selling tobacco at certain state liquor stores. Meanwhile, a cluster of insurance laws are lined up together: If you can be charged more for bad credit, can a good education earn you a discount? Also, reinstating the stack, who pays for medical bills, and a would-be change in a law on public hearings gets changed in its own public hearing.
And there’s no shortage of public hearings these days in Concord, as state committees plunge into their legislative season. A total of 66 are scheduled for next week—61 in the House and 5 in the Senate.
Following is a short selection of them, with bill titles, prime sponsors, status or hearing dates, assigned committees and analysis. A comprehensive database of legislation is available on the 2009 Bills page.
HB 71 “relative to increasing the dollar limit for requiring public hearings on issuance of local bonds.” Betsey Patten (R-Moultonborough)
In Committee, House Municipal & County Government Committee
As previously reported, HB 71 would change the dollar amount that triggers a required public hearing on local bonds. But, its own public hearing last week may have changed the bill, itself.
Current law requires a public hearing on proposed local bonds over $100,000, and Rep. Patten proposed hoisting that up to $1 million. But, she can understand that some people are uneasy with such a big jump, so she plans to bring an amendment to the committee’s executive session set for Jan. 20. The revised bill would increase the dollar amount to somewhere between $200,000 and $300,000, instead.
Patten is also looking at allowing towns to set their own trigger points for the public hearings, within parameters set by the state, because what makes sense for a small town doesn’t necessarily fit a bigger city.
The $100,000 limit has been in effect since 1885, Patten says. Adjusting for inflation, that amount would equal well over $2 million in today’s currency.
HB 184 “authorizing the liquor commission to sell tobacco products at state liquor stores located on interstate highways.” Ken Hawkins (R-Bedford)
Tuesday, Jan. 20, Local & Regulated Revenues Committee
The state may add tobacco to its liquor business, if Rep. Ken Hawkins has anything to say about it. He has sponsored HB 184, which would allow certain state liquor stores to sell smokes, too.
Only the stores “located on interstate highways” would be allowed to sell tobacco—an important caviat for Hawkins. He made the provision out of concern for private enterprises, like convenience stores, whose revenue Hawkins says he’s not out to steal. Money the state would make from tobacco sales, as with profits from liquor, would go into the general fund.
But, one group’s convenience could weigh on an agency’s workload. The Liquor Commission points out that space would have to be made for the new products, and extra help would be needed to maintain the new stock.
Would it be worth it? The bill’s impact on the state budget cannot yet be determined, according to the Liquor Commission.
Hawkins, who’s been a smoker since the 8th grade, said that he’s not heard from the anti-smoking crowd … yet. He may be hearing from Ed Miller of the American Lung Association. “We need to have fewer places where cigarettes are available, not more,” Miller said about the bill.
The Association’s annual report, released last Tuesday, gave New Hampshire a grade of “C” for its tobacco control policies.
The law would take effect 60 days after its passage.
“There’s been a definite trend whereby the scales of justice have tipped against the individual” in consumer-insurance legislation in recent years, says Rep. David Nixon. Four of his bills relating to car insurance are up for hearing next week. “These bills are an attempt … to balance the playing field a little bit.”
However, the insurance industry had their own reasons to lobby for some of the rules that Nixon is now hoping to change. The industry argues that its rates are set according to current law, so changing the rules would force them to charge more.
HB 200 “permitting the stacking of medical payments coverage under motor vehicle liability policies purchased by members of the same household.” David Nixon (D-Manchester)
Wednesday, Jan. 21, House Commerce & Consumer Affairs Committee
Current law does not permit many cases of “stacking” insurance coverage. Take for example a family of four insured drivers. If one driver were in an accident, that person’s policy may cover a certain dollar amount for medical payments—let’s say $10,000.
Until the late 1980s, according to Nixon, the family would have been able to “stack” each person’s medical payments for the sake of the one person injured for a combined $40,000. Such stacking is no longer allowed, but HB 200 would reinstate it.
If passed, the law would take effect Jan. 1, 2010.
HB 202 “relative to provisions in insurance policies limiting payment of full benefits.” David Nixon (D-Manchester)
Wednesday, Jan. 21, House Commerce & Consumer Affairs Committee
Automobile insurance includes medical payments in case of physical injury. Health insurance policies, of course, pay for medical care. But, when a person who pays for both car and health insurance is in a car accident, that person can only redeem coverage from one of those policies. To redeem both, the insurance industry says, would be “double recovery.”
Whether car insurance or health insurance pays the medical bills is something the companies work out on their own. However, coming to an agreement is not quick, Nixon says, and in the meantime the victim’s charge is left unpaid. Under HB 202, insurance companies would not be allowed to sell policies that only let the customer recover one of the two claims.
If passed, the law would take effect Jan. 1, 2010.
HB 101 “prohibiting the use of credit reports for certain insurance purposes.” Karen Hutchinson (R-Londonderry)
Wednesday, Jan. 21, House Commerce and Consumer Affairs Committee
Currently, a customer’s bad credit rating may be used by insurance companies as a reason to charge higher prices for car or home insurance—as long as the bad credit isn’t the only reason for the high rates. This bill would make it illegal for the companies to charge more based on credit scores—period.
If passed, the act would take effect Jan. 1, 2010.
HB 75 “prohibiting the use of information concerning education level to underwrite insurance coverage.” William A Hatch (D-Gorham)
Wednesday, Jan. 21, House Commerce and Consumer Affairs Committee
State law already spells out a number of unfair insurance practices. HB 75 would add to the list requesting information about education level and using it to set prices.
Got you thinking? Share your comments or questions below to get a conversation started.
And remember, our online learning center and a complete list of proposed laws for 2009 is available here at Front Door Politics: from the State House to your house.
© 2009 Niles Media “Front Door Politics” all rights reserved