Latest news with #EthanDeWitt
Yahoo
a day ago
- Business
- Yahoo
The New Hampshire Senate is set to vote on a budget. Here's what's in it.
The New Hampshire Senate in session on May 15. Senators will vote on the proposed budget on Thursday, June 5, 2025. (Photo by Ethan DeWitt/New Hampshire Bulletin) Nearly four months after Gov. Kelly Ayotte pitched a state budget to lawmakers with optimistic revenue projections and few cuts, the two-year spending proposal has seesawed dramatically. The House, citing more dour economic predictions, pushed through $643 million in state spending cuts to Ayotte's proposal, drawing her criticism. The Senate produced revenue projections that moved closer to Ayotte's vision, but not all the way, further frustrating Ayotte. On Thursday, the 24-member Senate will vote on its final proposal, setting up what will likely be a contentious stretch of negotiations with the House in the next two weeks before the budget bills, House Bill 1 and House Bill 2, must make their way to Ayotte's desk. The Senate's budget would spend $15.9 billion in state and federal funds over the next two years, compared to $15.5 billion in the House's budget and $16 billion in Ayotte's proposal. The Senate's budget proposal, finalized by the Senate Finance Committee on Tuesday, does not cut as deeply as the House's proposal from April 10. But there are still reductions, and Senate Democrats are likely to oppose the final measure. 'Our job as legislators is to lower the cost of living for our constituents, improve access to health care and safe communities, strengthen kids' and grandkids' educational opportunities, create our thriving Main Street communities, and so unfortunately, this budget just doesn't address those priorities,' said Sen. Rebecca Perkins Kwoka, the Senate minority leader and a Portsmouth Democrat, ahead of the Finance Committee vote Tuesday. Senate President Sharon Carson praised the final budget, stressing that it came amid a difficult economic reality for the state. 'What I think a lot of people forget was, over the last two bienniums, we had a lot of money, and most of it was an infusion of cash from the federal government,' she said at the same committee meeting. 'We spent that money, and we were very smart about how we spent that money, but it was gone.' '… I look at this budget as a readjustment from having all that federal money to now we're focused on what we have: How much money do we have? I think it keeps us on a path to prosperity.' Here's what's in the final package to be voted on by the full Senate Thursday. In general, the Senate budget overturns many of the more drastic cuts made by the House in April, according to an analysis Wednesday by the New Hampshire Fiscal Policy Institute. The Senate budget would restore a number of agencies and boards that were eliminated by the House — including the Office of the Child Advocate, the Housing Appeals Board, the Commission for Human Rights, and the State Commission on Aging — albeit with some modifications and staffing cuts for each entity. The Senate's plan would also roll back the House's deep cuts to the Department of Corrections. While the House had proposed 190 cuts to positions, the Senate winnowed that down to 60, with many of the proposed positions currently unfilled. The Senate's proposal would increase the amount allotted to the settlement fund for the Youth Development Center lawsuits. The state is currently facing multiple lawsuits from people who allege they were abused by staff members at that center. The Senate budget would include $20 million in the first year and would plan for the state to raise $80 million by selling the Sununu Youth Services Center building in Manchester, all of which would be set aside to pay out any settlements. But the Senate's budget would make some deeper cuts compared to the House budget, such as a reduction in special education funding to public schools. The Senate budget would also impose $32 million in 'back of the budget' cuts — undefined funding reductions that would require the Ayotte administration to find positions or programs to meet the cuts. In one of the biggest changes, the Senate reversed course on a controversial piece of the House's budget: the 3% across-the-board rate cuts to Medicaid providers. The Senate bill includes $52.5 million in funding that the House had taken out and restores the funding. The Senate budget also restores funding to developmental services and community mental health programs the House had cut. The Senate bill does keep in place Ayotte's proposal to include premiums for beneficiaries of the Medicaid expansion program – known as the Granite Advantage Health Care Program. But where Ayotte proposed premiums determined by a percentage of recipients' income, the Senate bill would make those premiums set amounts: $60 per month for a household of one increasing up to $100 for a household of four. Democrats have objected to those premiums, calling them an 'income tax.' And they have opposed the repeal of the Prescription Drug Affordability Board in the Senate's budget. Affordable housing advocates and Democrats have raised objections to the lack of funding for affordable housing efforts in the final budget. In a press release Wednesday, Housing Action New Hampshire said the Senate's budget 'falls short in addressing our state's housing shortage,' and noted that it did not include a proposal to double funding to the state's Affordable Housing Fund and the Community Development Finance Authority Tax Credit. Democrats had proposed doubling both efforts from $5 million to $10 million a year. The Senate budget also adds no new funding to the Housing Champion Program, designed to give grants to towns that update their zoning codes to encourage development, though the Senate bills would extend the expiration date of the existing Housing Champion Program funds. Senate Republicans argued deregulation, not funding, is most important to housing construction in the state. 'I think we're at a place where we recognize that the role of the state is to facilitate housing construction, maybe not to pay for it,' said Sen. Dan Innis, a Bradford Republican. And Sen. Tim Lang, a Sanbornton Republican, pointed to the $11.55 million allocation from the Drinking Water and Groundwater Trust Fund toward local water infrastructure projections as an example of the state supporting housing development needs of communities. The House's budget had fully depleted the state's Renewable Energy Fund, which is designed to provide grants to support clean energy projects in the state. The Senate's budget would keep $2 million in the fund. Democrats raised concerns that that isn't enough to make a meaningful difference. The Senate's budget rolls back a $50 million cut to the University System of New Hampshire included in the House budget. The final Senate budget would allocate $85 million per fiscal year to the university system, which is $67.5 million higher than the House's numbers over two years, according to NHFPI. But Innis, a professor of marketing and hospitality management at the University of New Hampshire, said he wished that funding was higher, even as he praised the budget overall. 'We're funding higher education in New Hampshire at half the rate we were 20 years ago. That's embarrassing,' he said Tuesday. 'It just is.' The Senate has preserved language added by the House that seeks to prevent any efforts at the state or local governmental levels to pursue 'diversity, equity, and inclusion' policies. The language reads: 'No public entity shall implement, promote, or otherwise engage in any DEI-related initiatives, programs, training, or policies. No state funds shall be expended for DEI-related activities, including but not limited to implicit bias training, DEI assessments, critical race theory, or race-based hiring, promotion, or contracting preferences.' The move aligns with efforts by the Trump administration to withhold federal funding to public school districts that maintain such programs. Perkins Kwoka denounced the language, and predicted it would invite a lawsuit should it be passed in the budget. Last year, a federal court struck down a 2021 state law that prohibited advocacy on certain topics related to race and gender, after teachers unions sued arguing it was unconstitutionally vague; the state has appealed that ruling to the First Circuit Court of Appeals. 'It certainly harms our business environment to sort of be behind the curve on embracing an America that is truly inclusive,' Perkins Kwoka said.
Yahoo
19-05-2025
- Automotive
- Yahoo
Senate taps the brakes on effort to end mandatory state vehicle inspections
During a Senate debate on whether to move forward with legislation to eliminate mandatory state vehicle inspections, Sen. Howard Pearl said, "We have to sometimes make that tough decision to slow things down just a little bit." (Photo by Ethan DeWitt/New Hampshire Bulletin) It's boxy, angular, and typically yellow. And when it lights up on a car dashboard, the next step is often hundreds of dollars in repairs. But some in New Hampshire believe the 'check engine' light is not always reliable, and that its presence can cause vehicles to fail their state inspection even when everything is working fine. 'That has been weaponized by this (inspection) program,' said Paul Wolf, one of dozens who spoke at a Senate hearing recently. 'A hood latch out, or AC refrigerant low would set that light off.' That sentiment is part of what's driving an effort to end mandatory annual state vehicle inspections altogether. A bill to do so passed the House in March. But on Thursday, the Senate applied the brakes and retained the bill, arguing it needed a little more work. That action would delay passage of the bill until early 2026 at the earliest. But the issue could return in the June negotiations between the House and Senate over passage of the two-year budget. Some senators were frustrated, citing constituents who feel burdened by the inspection costs. 'We owe it to them to fix this problem,' said Sen. Tim McGough, a Merrimack Republican. 'We've inspected it and inspected it. It's time to fix it. The time is now to get it fixed.' As passed by the House, the bill would end New Hampshire's mandatory state inspection system, in which vehicles must pass inspections in the owner's birth month and a windshield sticker displays that compliance. Supporters of the repeal say inspections are costly and unnecessary, and that drivers can safely maintain their cars without them. They have cited reviews and studies that suggest there is no correlation between mandatory inspection laws and lower traffic accidents and fatalities. And they argue the inspection law largely benefits car dealerships and mechanic shops. Opponents of the law, who include the New Hampshire State Police and many industry groups, say the inspections help identify vehicle safety issues that could lead to crashes, and that they help the environment by reducing harmful emissions. But while the House had pushed for an all-out repeal of the inspections, some Republicans on the Senate Commerce Committee had favored a shift toward requiring the inspections every other year, instead. That disagreement — which included a last-ditch attempt at an amendment — in addition to opposition to the entire idea from Democrats, doomed the bill on Thursday. 'It's a challenge for us, but when a bill isn't ready, a bill isn't ready, and that's the hard part,' said Sen. Howard Pearl, a Loudon Republican who said he supported the main objectives of the bill. 'And … we have to sometimes make that tough decision to slow things down just a little bit.' In 2023, 1,048,001 million vehicles were registered in New Hampshire, according to the Department of Safety. New Hampshire is one of 14 states that require car inspections either every year or every other year. Most of those states are in the Northeast; the list includes Maine, Vermont, and Massachusetts. Those in support of repealing the car inspection requirement have pointed to states that had mandatory inspections and then eliminated them. They argue the inspection creates the potential for conflicts of interest, since vehicle repair shops carry out both the inspections and the necessary repairs. Some advocated for state employees to conduct the inspections, so that the diagnoses are more impartial. 'Other states do this,' said Wolf. 'They hire their own technicians, and all they do is inspect. They don't do the work. There's no conflict of interest.' Supporters of the law have also raised issues with certain diagnostic lights that must be addressed before a car can pass inspection — in particular, the check engine light. Advocates for repealing the inspections say that indicator can often be a false alarm. Repealing the inspection would cost the state about $3.4 million of revenue a year, according to the Department of Safety. About 85% of that revenue goes into the Highway Fund, while the rest is split between the motor vehicle air pollution abatement fund and the general fund. Of the amount that goes to the highway fund, 12% — or about $346,500 a year — is distributed to cities and towns, according to the department. But the bill has also created a backlash, with 489 people registering their opposition to the bill over two Senate committee hearings, compared to 129 people supporting it. Those opposed include the New Hampshire Division of Motor Vehicles, the Department of Environmental Services, the New Hampshire Motorcyclists' Rights Organization, the New Hampshire Automobile Dealers Association, and a number of individual vehicle repair businesses. 'House Bill 649 seeks to shift the responsibility of identifying unsafe vehicles entirely onto law enforcement, placing an undue burden on troopers who are already stretched thin, expecting them to spot mechanical issues during routine patrols without the tools, time, or training of a licensed inspector,' said New Hampshire State Police Captain Matthew Amatucci, speaking in a Senate hearing last month. Relying on police to catch problems, Amatucci said, 'means that the danger has already reached the road.' David Dupont, who founded Dupont's Service Center in Dover but has since retired, said the inspections catch a number of flaws or broken parts, especially with older vehicles and motorcycles. And he said the indicator lights do serve a purpose. 'The check engine light is more than just a light,' he said. 'It's telling you that the vehicle is polluting more. It's telling you that the consumer is not getting optimal fuel economy, and the vehicle emissions most likely are out of compliance. How is that good for New Hampshire?' Dupont also pushed back against the idea that repair shops are engaging in fraud, noting that there is a legal penalty for fraudulent inspections that can lead to misdemeanor charges. 'We're held to a standard, and no one wants to end up in court because they pass a car that didn't pass inspection,' Dupont said.
Yahoo
16-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Senate advances anti-sanctuary city bills, but stops short on other House priorities
Sen. Tara Reardon, a Concord Democrat, speaks during a Senate session, Thursday, May 15, 2025. (Photo by Ethan DeWitt/New Hampshire Bulletin) The New Hampshire Senate advanced two anti-sanctuary city bills to Gov. Kelly Ayotte's desk Thursday, bringing key Republican efforts closer to completion. But in other areas — including other immigration bills — the Republican-led Senate put the brakes on some conservative proposals advanced by the House. The chamber killed a bill that would have required all training and testing materials to be produced in English. It held back a bill that would require applicants for driver's licenses who do not have U.S. citizenship to prove they were certified to drive in their home country. And it blocked a number of House bills designed to increase verification measures to vote. Here's a look at where Senate Republicans broke from their House counterparts this week — and where they found agreement. The House and Senate are aligned on a pair of anti-sanctuary bills. On Thursday, the Senate passed House Bill 511, which would require all municipalities to comply with immigration detainers by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) 'if safe to do so.' The bill, known as an anti-sanctuary city bill, would also prohibit municipalities from adopting policies to ignore federal directives or not cooperate with federal authorities. But it also includes a few exceptions. It does not require local law enforcement to pass along an undocumented person's information when they have been a 'necessary witness or victim' of a serious crime, which would include murder, rape, domestic violence, assault, kidnapping, blackmail, and other offenses. And it prohibits local law enforcement from investigating the citizenship status of someone in their custody, unless they are investigating whether that person broke New Hampshire law. Sen. Regina Birdsell said the bill is about forcing communities to follow federal law. 'When federal authorities present an immigration detainer, New Hampshire police departments should honor that and not help illegal immigrants evade the law,' she said. 'I never thought this would be controversial.' But Sen. Tara Reardon, a Concord Democrat, countered that communities might not support ICE detainers and shouldn't be forced by the Legislature to comply with them. 'As a state, we should not be asked to take the responsibilities or bear the costs that … lead to such outcomes,' said Reardon. 'Communities like ours should not be put in the position of enabling mass deportations or detentions that go against our values and ignore our legal and social systems.' HB 511 will go directly to the governor's desk in the coming weeks. Ayotte has supported it. On Thursday, the Senate approved House changes to a second anti-sanctuary city bill, Senate Bill 62, which would block state or local governments from prohibiting law enforcement entities from entering into voluntary agreements with ICE. That bill will also head directly to Ayotte's desk. Sen. Bill Gannon, a Sandown Republican, noted that he has been pushing for legislation to end sanctuary cities for years, and said with the passage of SB 62, 'we'll finally complete this journey.' Yet in some areas of immigration policy, the Senate has pulled back from what the House had pushed for. House Bill 452 created a number of new hurdles for undocumented people and those without U.S. citizenship to obtain driver's licenses. The bill would stop the Division of Motor Vehicles from renewing a driver's license for anyone who is not a U.S. citizen and 'cannot prove that they are a lawful permanent resident of the United States.' Currently, there is no such prohibition. State statute says the DMV 'may' require nonresidents who are living in the state on a temporary basis to provide a certification from the government of their country of origin that indicates they are licensed to drive. HB 452 would change 'may' to 'shall,' making it a requirement, and would allow the DMV to also accept proof of previous vehicle operation in the person's foreign country. But without debate, the Senate re-referred the bill to the Transportation Committee, which means there will be no vote by the full Senate until early 2026. The Senate also killed House Bill 461, which would require that all driver's license examinations and related materials be 'distributed in the English language only,' with an exception for American Sign Language. But it passed House Bill 71, which would prohibit public schools from offering their facilities as emergency shelter or housing exclusively to undocumented people, even if ordered to do so by the federal government or the state. The bill would allow schools to be used as shelters in other emergencies for specified disasters — including fires, floods, hurricanes, tornadoes, storms, high water events, tidal waves, earthquakes, or snowstorms — as long as those emergencies do not exceed 72 hours. The Senate has not given House Republicans everything they have asked with voting legislation, either. The two chambers are aligned on one particular issue. In March, the Senate passed Senate Bill 213, requiring people seeking to obtain absentee ballots to produce documentary proof of U.S. citizenship through a birth certificate, passport, or other document. The bill would bring the absentee ballot process under the same requirements as the in-person voting requirements. Last year, then-Gov. Chris Sununu signed a law imposing a hard documentary proof of citizenship requirement for new voter registrations in the state. That bill — the furthest-reaching in the country — is currently facing two lawsuits in federal court. The Senate's bill mirrors House Bill 217, which passed the House in March, indicating support in both chambers. On Thursday, the Senate killed that bill, arguing it was duplicative. But the Senate rejected a different bill, House Bill 274. That bill would have required supervisors of the checklists to comb through their municipality's voter rolls once a year and purge any voter who has not voted within the previous five years. Currently, those reviews are done once every 10 years. 'The committee believes that requiring a yearly check, when there are already periodic checks in statute, would increase administrative costs and unduly overburden local election officials,' wrote Sen. James Gray in an explanation in the Senate calendar. The Senate killed the bill unanimously.
Yahoo
15-05-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
New Hampshire Senate halts cryptocurrency deregulation bill, hoping to return to it next year
The New Hampshire Senate in session, Thursday, May 15, 2025. (Photo by Ethan DeWitt/New Hampshire Bulletin) A bill aiming to deregulate cryptocurrency mining in New Hampshire and forbid local officials and state agencies from placing limits on the practice was set for a final vote Thursday before state senators sent it back to committee to give supporters time to work on it and whip up more votes. 'I think the bill's ready to go, but I understand we need more time to convince all of my colleagues,' Sen. Tim McGough, a Merrimack Republican and supporter of the bill, said on the Senate floor Thursday. 'And we'll take that time over the summer.' If enacted, House Bill 639 would forbid New Hampshire state agencies and local officials from banning cryptocurrency mining in their city, town, or elsewhere in the state. Under this bill, they also couldn't regulate cryptocurrency mining based on sound, electric use, or as an investment vehicle. They'd also be unable to prevent or impair people from using cryptocurrency to buy or sell goods and services. McGough likened the current moment with cryptocurrency to the 1990s, when the internet was in its infancy and people were trying to understand it. He said he was 'a little bit afraid' of some aspects of the internet, such as 'putting all your personal information online.' However, he's glad he listened to a friend who told him to adopt the internet. 'Can you imagine if we prohibited internet servers and data centers as we know them today,' he said. 'Running powerful computers to solve equations that end in blockchain currency wealth will not end the world, will not be bad for our economy.' Cryptocurrency mining is how people generate digital assets like Bitcoin, Ethereum, or Dogecoin. Miners use high-energy supercomputers to attempt to solve a puzzle through trial and error and unlock the cryptocurrency from what is known as a blockchain. These virtual assets can be bought and sold for U.S. dollars or other currencies, making them lucrative. Proponents of crypto argue it could one day be used as a regular currency and some buyers and sellers have already adopted it in this way. The bill was written using model legislation created by a crypto industry group called Satoshi Action Fund. Satoshi Action Fund also consulted with the Commission on Cryptocurrencies and Digital Assets, which provided lawmakers with policy recommendations. The group works to promote cryptocurrency nationwide and boasts on its website that its model legislation has been implemented in four states: Arkansas, Louisiana, Montana, and Oklahoma. The bill's sponsor, Rep. Keith Ammon, a Goffstown Republican, has portrayed the bill as antidiscriminatory legislation, arguing cryptocurrency mining needed to be protected from moratoriums similar to those that have happened in other states. He's also dismissed environmental concerns about the practice as misinformation. Environmentalists opposed to this bill, including the New Hampshire Sierra Club and the National Coalition Against Cryptomining, are concerned about the carbon emissions these supercomputers are responsible for producing and their impact on the state's electric grid. (The electrical energy consumption of one Bitcoin transaction is equivalent to what an average U.S. household over 45.60 days consumes, as of May 2025, according to one analysis done by a Dutch doctoral student.) They're also concerned about the noise for neighbors of the facilities. Cryptocurrency mines in New York, Arkansas, and other states have generated uproar and noise complaints among their neighbors. Arkansas went so far as to repeal deregulatory legislation it passed that was very similar to this bill over these complaints, though that is now tied up in the courts. At least one New York community has put a moratorium on cryptocurrency mining. Regulators, including with the state Bureau of Securities Regulation, are concerned that provisions in the bill to preclude cryptocurrency mining from being considered a security or investment contract are concerned it could hamper their ability to protect New Hampshire investors from bad actors falsely offering services. If the Senate eventually passes the bill, Gov. Kelly Ayotte will decide whether to sign or veto the bill. She recently signed pro-cryptocurrency legislation into law when she approved House Bill 302, which allows the state treasurer to invest state funds in cryptocurrency and precious metals as an investment vehicle. She subsequently boasted on social media that New Hampshire was 'First in the Nation' to do so. Still, in this law, the state treasurer is limited to placing 5% of state assets in Bitcoin and gold, and she is not required to do so but simply allowed to. However, speaking to reporters last week, Ayotte said she was in favor of the cryptocurrency industry operating in New Hampshire, but she didn't signal support for a completely self-regulated industry. 'Having opportunities for economic development with crypto, certainly we would welcome that,' she said. 'But you have to have, obviously, guardrails in place, because we have had examples. Because it's not regulated federally, there would have to be regulatory measures put in place to make sure that's done responsibly, like we would with any kind of issue like this.'
Yahoo
29-04-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Report: New Hampshire's public school state spending levels lowest in U.S.
The report was released Tuesday by the National Education Association. (Photo by Ethan DeWitt/New Hampshire Bulletin) New Hampshire spends more per public school student than all but five other states, according to a new report. At $22,252 spent per pupil on average in the 2023-2024 school year, it was surpassed by only New York, Vermont, Massachusetts, New Jersey, and Connecticut. It's a statistic that has been true for years, and one that Gov. Kelly Ayotte has frequently touted. 'If you put together the total education funding from state and local and other sources, we're in the top 10 in the nation in terms of funding public education,' she said during a Jan. 15 press conference, responding to a pair of lawsuits alleging the state does not spend enough. '… That's the reality. Shouldn't we look at the reality of the situation versus an artificial discussion on one piece of the funding?' But the way New Hampshire raises that money sets it apart. Despite its high overall spending, the Granite State contributed the smallest proportion of state dollars and the largest proportion of local dollars per student of all 50 states in the same school year, the report, released by the National Education Association Tuesday, states. New Hampshire spent proportionally less state money per student than Missouri, Nebraska, South Dakota, Louisiana New York, Florida, Connecticut, Illinois, Ohio, and Pennsylvania, the next nine lowest-ranked states. The report confirms what residents of all political stripes have long known to be true: New Hampshire's schools are driven by local property tax collections, not state spending. And it comes against the backdrop of an ongoing fight in the state budget process over how much public school students should receive each year for education — and who should pay for it. Democrats and progressives cite the low level of state support as evidence that the state is abandoning its financial responsibilities and downshifting costs to local taxpayers, and say the state should spend more. School districts and taxpayers have filed two separate lawsuits seeking to force the state to do so. But conservatives point to the state's aging population and steadily declining enrollment to question why the school districts should receive more funding at all. And this year, House Republicans have pushed forward proposals to reduce the amount of state tax revenue that is sent to the Education Trust Fund and impose spending caps on school districts to require supermajorities to raise local spending. Overall, New Hampshire schools spent 6.64% more per student at the start of the 2023-2024 school year than at the start of the 2022-2023 school year, the report shows. Each side has drawn different conclusions from the same reality. Those conclusions have inspired competing legislation. House Republicans have proposed a slight increase in state spending to schools in the state budget. But they have also included a measure in the budget to reduce the amount of revenue that goes to the Education Trust Fund, from the $1.3 billion a year proposed by Ayotte to $937 million per year. That account, which funds public schools and other programs such as education freedom accounts, is currently running a surplus. House Republicans have also added legislation into the budget that would limit school district budget increases to inflation, except in the case of a certain level of enrollment growth or a supermajority vote by residents at the district's annual meeting. Democrats, meanwhile, have opposed that legislation and pushed for various bills to increase the amount the state would spend per pupil overall, add targeted funding to needier school districts, and require wealthier school districts to redistribute excess statewide property tax revenue to those with lower property values. The NEA report shows a number of other comparison points between New Hampshire and other states. Across the U.S., New Hampshire saw one of the highest year-to-year drops in enrollment from the start of the 2022-2023 school year to the start of the 2023-2024 school year: a 1.47% decline. In contrast, neighboring Maine experienced a 0.9 percent enrollment decline, Vermont saw enrollment stay steady, and Massachusetts measured a 0.1 percent increase. But New Hampshire has the second-lowest student-to-teacher ratio in the country, after Vermont, the report states. There are on average 10.5 students per teacher in New Hampshire schools; Wyoming, in contrast, was last with 12.6 students per teacher. In the 2022-2023 school year, there were 10.7 students per teacher. New Hampshire's 2.19% drop in student-to-teacher ratio is one of the largest in the country. Public school teacher pay in the Granite State is nearly at the national median. New Hampshire teachers made an average of $67,170 per year in 2023-2024, which ranked 24th nationally, according to the report. That amount is up by 4.7% from the year before. And the report indicates a wide spread of how much per year states spend on public school students. New Hampshire's $22,252 in the 2023-2024 school year was dwarfed by New York's $31,514, but came in well ahead of 50th-ranked Utah, which spent $11,289 per student. Since taking office, President Donald Trump has vowed to dismantle the Department of Education and send the federal grant money back to states in the form of block grants, which has led to mixed reactions in the Granite State. But in New Hampshire, federal spending makes up just 8.4% of per pupil spending, the 45th lowest proportion in the country. It's another signifier of how much the state draws from property taxes.
