[{"_1":2,"_111":-5,"_112":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,76,88,100],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},"mediaId",6357277,"mediaKeyId","2215306-6ffbba63139e972d462fd3d2cb3f4f36","parentId",2215306,"title","Committee retains \"Defend the Guard\" bill after months of testimony; lawmakers seek more time","audioSeconds",946,"startMs",23475000,"endMs",24421000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2215306-6ffbba63139e972d462fd3d2cb3f4f36&start=23475&end=24421","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2215306-6ffbba63139e972d462fd3d2cb3f4f36/thumbnail_23475000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6357277/New-Hampshire/Committee-retains-Defend-the-Guard-bill-after-months-of-testimony-lawmakers-seek-more-time","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6357277-e6cce30c4e5d555625a92a4bdae8b2d0/orig.mp4?Expires=1770437013&Signature=mAwGPhop-bNVPa~p7sh5tvCa~NVP3rc0xEguAPtw9~vOLZwARpjbsFconLP8~BMkz0Mqktn4jtimmzwCSqPw60~gqO90rk9lLhR0PMimisW2dYxr8aq-avaYP8Cj1SCxxD02MHQnvoCYDOyT4mw3cGosa0O66alDNMTrQem-zjOFCC7Wz3RyuYBNyJhfeyFRWOt7QXsQygBEMebvKyi0y89hp2K3n5gUR~qa-ykBAcxoKOw5anI9vqp14B7zocWwVmD2gJVUf4V3kEw9n5kjVSgD9WxOTFXcXBcWdkjZ7lTynVYaeQ1uJ~WaIfZ1oUcJYHcL-kdU4ZcsWbKMD~7MQA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","NH House of Representatives Committee","date","2025-01-31T00:00:00Z","article","The House committee retained HB 104, known in testimony as the \"Defend the Guard\" measure, after extended debate and emotional testimony from veterans, active-duty and National Guard members, and family members.

Lede: supporters described the bill as a check on federal use of National Guard forces for long overseas missions; they argued the state should limit guard deployments that mirror active-duty combat missions. Opponents said action could harm readiness, funding and the state’s Guard-dependent economy.

Supporters argued the National Guard should be protected from being treated as an expendable overseas force-generation pool. Representative Rollins described testimony from survivors and families and urged long-term action to give the men and women who serve greater predictability. Representative Mannion, a sponsor, framed the bill as a way to force Congress to take responsibility for authorizing and funding extended overseas operations.

Opponents and cautions: military witnesses and several lawmakers warned that federal funding and basing decisions could be complicated if states unilaterally restrict usage of Guard assets. Several committee members asked for details on how federal National Guard Bureau (NGB) allocations and active-duty force relationships would react if many states adopted similar restrictions. Representatives raised potential economic effects in communities with Guard-related employment (airfields, maintenance contractors and civilian employees).

Committee action: the committee voted to retain HB 104 rather than advance or reject it. Sponsors said retention allows time for further information and for other states’ actions to be observed: the sponsor reported companion activity in other states during the same legislative year. Several lawmakers said retention creates an opportunity to craft trigger clauses or multi-state coordination language that could reduce the risk of unintended funding shifts.

Ending: lawmakers noted they would revisit the measure in fall/next session and flagged the possibility of different paths forward — a committee study, a resolution urging Congress to clarify authorization/funding, or a narrower draft that limits specific activities rather than a broad prohibition.

","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","House State-Federal Relations and Veterans Affairs (01/31/2025)","oneSentenceSummary","After lengthy hearings and emotional testimony from veterans and Guard members, the Committee retained HB 104 (the \"Defend the Guard\" proposal) to allow more time for analysis of funding and readiness implications.","taxTitle","State-Federal Relations and Veterans Affairs, House of Representatives, Committees\t, Legislative, New Hampshire","taxId",17767,"location","New Hampshire","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":77,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":78,"_41":79,"_43":80,"_45":81,"_47":82,"_49":83,"_51":84,"_53":85,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":86,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":87,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6357287,"New Hampshire committee hears hours of testimony on Article V measures, including HB 264 and HCR 3",3687,140000,3827000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2215306-6ffbba63139e972d462fd3d2cb3f4f36&start=140&end=3827","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2215306-6ffbba63139e972d462fd3d2cb3f4f36/thumbnail_140000.jpg","/articles/6357287/New-Hampshire/New-Hampshire-committee-hears-hours-of-testimony-on-Article-V-measures-including-HB-264-and-HCR-3","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6357287-156b6dfc535762198188af855d2770ad/orig.mp4?Expires=1770437013&Signature=QDwj6qbFDtBgkErdQi~8PuM6c3RpTdu8OMdgMuIbqv2mhIQewzgnjn5zeDZd-DmwOPoPGIQneXTrdbXaCiOBRSeuTYok1vucEOrD2jXGjR1qyP8rSMCJILQoglJ8yGvHrY1aDrwpVZ3HvqaqN8TKD2lpOtuwmH2GaUQiAVTM4i05pftNpr1Gy9gZ1ecg2tpjoMg4-nD3yWQi3LGesrt8CaS1l-NdkCeSsQ~SIFrif9cGR2GNS7H7CsztZwP2X-CwP~IKeU~qfKgXhAZermkX7emCrXJTWaiKI1tnZgZ3OKlTDsw~NZoM3B0NrBgfMJ4bIdYfMPowNbk9SOg1-eewnA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Representative Jordan Uhlery, prime sponsor of HB 264 FN, told the House Committee on State-Federal Relations and Veterans Affairs that frequent constituent requests and a belief in states’ authority motivated his bill to regulate delegates to an Article V convention.

Why it matters: the measures touch the rarely-used Article V route for proposing constitutional amendments and raise practical and legal questions about how states may control delegates and about whether states should press Congress by applying for a convention.

Uhlery opened discussion by describing constituent pressure and a decade-long interest in using Article V to limit federal overreach. He framed HB 264 as a vehicle to allow states to instruct delegates and to penalize delegates who vote on amendments “not authorized by our legislature,” while pointing to the Supreme Court’s 2020 Chiafalo decision on faithless electors as precedent for state authority to bind delegates. “States have the absolute right to appoint whomsoever the state wishes,” he said.

Supporters including Samuel Fieldman, veteran Article V policy advocates and multiple members of the public urged the committee to advance measures that would require delegates to follow state instructions and/or protect the state’s application language. Fieldman told the committee he helped draft similar bills elsewhere and said the 2020 court rulings strengthen the case that states may regulate delegates. Dozens of private citizens, veterans and activists testified in favor of either HB 264 or HCR 3, saying the measures increase transparency and guardrails for any convention.

Opponents and questions: other lawmakers and several committee members pressed sponsors on details. Some asked how “legislative instructions” would be defined (speaker instruction vs. full-house vote), how rescissions of past state convention calls should be treated, and what penalty provisions would do in practice. Representatives asked whether similar bills had been vetoed previously and whether a criminal penalty — HB 264 proposes a class B felony in some forms — is appropriate.

Concurrent resolution HCR 3, introduced by Representative JD Bernardi, would send New Hampshire’s application to an Article V convention limited to three topic areas: fiscal restraints on the federal government, limits on federal power and jurisdiction, and term limits for federal officials and members of Congress. Bernardi and several outside speakers argued the Article V route has a long history and can spur Congress into action even if a convention itself does not produce ratified amendments. Former U.S. Senator Rick Santorum addressed the committee and urged use of the Article V process to rein in federal spending and restore state authority.

Some members of the committee and several witnesses urged caution. Questions ranged from assurances about delegate-selection processes to whether a convention called by 34 states could be constrained in practice. Some witnesses and lawmakers urged the committee to pass companion measures that would specify delegate selection standards and faithful-delegate enforcement to reduce the risk of delegates exceeding state instructions.

What’s next: The committee ran a long public hearing with dozens of witnesses and did not take a final committee vote on HB 264 during the session excerpted in the transcript. Sponsors and multiple speakers urged the committee to move measures or refer them for further consideration so that the state’s options are clear should other states reach the 34-state threshold.

Ending: The Article V debate in Concord was prolonged, technical and bipartisan in tone at times: supporters arguing states must reclaim authority, and skeptics pressing for binding details and procedural safeguards. The committee has the option to advance either measure, amend them to add delegate-selection mechanics, or revisit the issues in an interim or fall package.

","Representative Jordan Uhlery, prime sponsor of HB 264, told the committee clients and constituents repeatedly asked the legislature to assert state control over delegates to a potential Article V convention.",{"_33":89,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":90,"_41":91,"_43":92,"_45":93,"_47":94,"_49":95,"_51":96,"_53":97,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":98,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":99,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6357273,"Votes at a glance: committee actions from State-Federal Relations and Veterans Affairs meeting",6945,17682000,24627000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2215306-6ffbba63139e972d462fd3d2cb3f4f36&start=17682&end=24627","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2215306-6ffbba63139e972d462fd3d2cb3f4f36/thumbnail_17682000.jpg","/articles/6357273/New-Hampshire/Votes-at-a-glance-committee-actions-from-State-Federal-Relations-and-Veterans-Affairs-meeting","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6357273-15c3950f1c3774b20519eda3200155cb/orig.mp4?Expires=1770437013&Signature=kXXUIRDDQGDRenC8jKXg7d2tjlY6UI0g8ov2WjzoxId1O3mHjQdDMWIpZ86xbJKZAkwDIZwWgoxTb5sUKeu3JjHvcgyAmM43itzedlc2sLbccXpqvC5IlLORXrl0mo0yP39kYd5hipgB--Z9YxAPQBMoBnHP8tH3fbtVYtvfFlC9qlBe4vDBUsIT6KW8cP-1sFxuby-xiHGxr7xIeakzQsPMGW-2lMPZBiyHcZZ3aV6LMJkTKOsTVE4OM7DT3Mi72K~wpVQHRNa9DqmQIHSzZiC6R6w2iLjxA-UCYxpxJeqaxNk4ILc~DJkV4XZ7luPzIygRDw24AZfU4R4KK8tZLw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The House Committee on State-Federal Relations and Veterans Affairs recorded the following formal outcomes during executive session.

HB 120 — transfer of statutory authority to Department of Military and Veterans Affairs
Motion: Ought to Pass (OTP)
Outcome: OTP (committee recommended) — placed on consent calendar.
Notes: Committee recorded unanimous support in roll call; presiding members indicated consent placement.

HB 122 — claims against New Hampshire Army National Guard (increase claim threshold)
Motion: Ought to Pass (OTP)
Outcome: OTP (committee recommended) — placed on consent calendar.
Notes: Committee raised the threshold from $500 to $1,000 in the proposal; fiscal impact described as minimal.

HCR 8 — review of the state boundary in the Piscataqua River (Portsmouth/shipyard boundary)
Motion: Ought to Pass (OTP)
Outcome: OTP, recorded vote 14–4; majority report to be prepared; minority report expected.
Notes: City of Portsmouth neutral; town of Newington in support.

HB 64 — hiring preference for active duty military, veterans and spouses (Department of Labor clarification)
Motion: Ought to Pass (OTP)
Outcome: OTP unanimously (18–0) but not placed on consent calendar; committee requested clarification language from DOL to ensure practical implementation.

HB 55 — Selective Service compliance and post-secondary eligibility (as amended)
Motion: Ought to Pass As Amended (OTPA)
Outcome: OTPA (18–0); members agreed to an amendment that removed some contested subsections while preserving post-secondary-related provisions; committee did not place item on consent calendar because the bill was amended after the public hearing.

HB 256 — proposed study / USS Liberty matters
Motion: Retain
Outcome: Retained (committee will revisit) — recorded roll call 18–0; chairman and sponsors indicated intent to pursue additional work and possible resolution or study options for the fall.

HCR 11 — raising congressional awareness about reported brutality in Bangladesh
Motion: Ought to Pass (OTP)
Outcome: OTP (18–0); unanimous committee support; committee indicated it did not intend to place this item on consent calendar and wanted a floor sponsor ready to address the resolution.

HCR 9 — rejecting compliance with the European Union corporate sustainability due diligence directive (CSDDD)
Motion: Ought to Pass (OTP)
Outcome: OTP (12–6) — majority report approved; a minority report expected. Discussion covered trade impacts, human-rights monitoring, and the scope of extraterritorial regulation.

HB 104 — \"Defend the Guard\" (state limits on certain federal Guard missions)
Motion: Retain
Outcome: Retained (17–1); sponsors and members asked for further study, potential trigger-clause options and multi-state coordination; retention allows fall drafting before next session.

Next steps: for each item the committee will prepare its formal report and, where required, draft amendments or companion language. Several unanimouly recommended bills were proposed for the committee consent calendar; others (especially amended or politically sensitive bills) will go to the full House with a named sponsor and a committee report.","Committee executive-session actions and roll-call results: several bills were advanced, amended or retained. This roundup lists outcomes and next steps for each formal action taken in the meeting.",{"_33":101,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":102,"_41":103,"_43":104,"_45":104,"_47":105,"_49":106,"_51":107,"_53":108,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":109,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":110,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6357283,"Easterseals outlines veterans campus in Franklin — housing, therapy, recreation planned",0,4176000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2215306-6ffbba63139e972d462fd3d2cb3f4f36&start=4176&end=4176","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2215306-6ffbba63139e972d462fd3d2cb3f4f36/thumbnail_4176000.jpg","/articles/6357283/New-Hampshire/Easterseals-outlines-veterans-campus-in-Franklin-housing-therapy-recreation-planned","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6357283-a42f2c501ffc5bc86b8c1dc00a967fa3/orig.mp4?Expires=1770437013&Signature=MxB-uoYhaVPywohBx0C~Gu~L~4E1yqF4PjQV1zs0DY0wxvB3NbLn0GAP~SDz-wwmTb5YiGDzAbOVYSrF3T81LoRTbPUay6OvLoa3L55oj0yzV6lRTI3u6MzPPOB2~cpiaZqBk2mbiEswUN99rK9IEZAV~oaZMiLYEFD4m8LXnvuvcCidR~AUltLo99yORe2roGbENQsE9EuShJGmMm1c1zFtT~4aqqtdVtcZjqinFeSd3s5DIDDnEleLX7WbW-a6d6aQreEK9EjBv2rYBvyNWNjPR8w6yz5~VZTVbSxeYZGgbZl55~-Ot18If9t2J2Azk47knt206MkcebHmcCD~EA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Easterseals of New Hampshire presented the committee with a progress update on a planned military and veterans campus in Franklin that aims to centralize housing, behavioral health, workforce development and recreational therapy for veterans, service members and their families.

Why it matters: the project is intended as a statewide hub for veteran supports, with an initial focus on affordable permanent housing and a service hub that will host veteran service organizations, outpatient substance-use treatment and meeting space.

Alan Aldenberger, Easterseals’ chief of military and veteran services, said the organization received $23 million in state OpERA funding for an initial redevelopment and that Phase 1 — two rehabilitated buildings with 29 units of permanent affordable housing, including 15 units eligible for VA VASH vouchers — is due to be completed in June of next year.

A service hub across the street will include meeting and event space, 22 hotel-style guest rooms for groups using the retreat center, and a roster of veteran-service organizations on-site for in-person assistance. Aldenberger said the goal is to create “no wrong door” access to services.

Phase 2 fundraising is underway, with plans for a four-lane indoor pool built for therapy and adaptive swim programs (in partnership with Swim With A Mission), an indoor recreation and climbing wall, an equine therapy facility, a canine program and an outdoor challenge course. Easterseals emphasized partnerships with community groups and the City of Franklin; the campus also includes historic Burley Cottage, slated for rehabilitation and programming.

Committee members asked about community engagement and operational details, and Easterseals said they are accepting housing applications now; staff reported about two dozen applicants already and said waitlists and intake processes are being developed. Aldenberger and project staff said they expect construction for the larger Phase 2 build to begin in late 2025 if fundraising targets are reached.

Ending: The committee received handouts and a map of the campus footprint; members and visitors were invited to tour the site once construction advances. Easterseals said the project aims to become a replicable model for veteran-centered integrated services in other states.

","Easterseals described a multi-phase military and veterans campus in Franklin that will include permanent affordable housing, a hub of on-site veteran services, a retreat center, an indoor aquatics and fitness facility and therapeutic recreation; phase 1 (29 housing units) expected in mid-2025 and fundraising is underway for phase 2.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Committee retains "Defend the Guard" bill after months of testimony; lawmakers seek more time

New Hampshire committee hears hours of testimony on Article V measures, including HB 264 and HCR 3

Votes at a glance: committee actions from State-Federal Relations and Veterans Affairs meeting

Easterseals outlines veterans campus in Franklin — housing, therapy, recreation planned