Latest news with #JimKofalt
Yahoo
4 days ago
- Politics
- Yahoo
Republicans pass parental rights bills as Democrats allege children will be harmed
Rep. Jim Kofalt, a Wilton Republican, speaks in favor of Senate Bill 72, a parental rights bill passed by the House, June 5, 2025. (Photo by Ethan DeWitt/New Hampshire Bulletin) The House and Senate passed a pair of parental rights bills Thursday, sending one to Gov. Kelly Ayotte's desk, as Republicans advanced a yearslong goal to strengthen parents' control over public schools. Both bills, House Bill 10 and Senate Bill 72, would enumerate a number of powers parents have to request information from teachers about their children, including the courses they are taking, the materials being taught, and what their children are saying at school. The House passed another bill, Senate Bill 96, that would also require teachers and school employees to answer questions from parents, and could impose stiff penalties for teachers who don't provide the information. Under that bill, a teacher or administrator could be investigated by the Department of Education for violations and face disciplinary sanctions by the department. Teachers found to have 'willfully violated' the law would face a mandatory one-year suspension of their teaching license. Republicans said the legislation is meant to establish a state policy that parents direct the upbringing of their children — not their schools. 'Today, it's time that we deliver on our promises to Granite Staters by affirming that parental rights are fundamental,' said Rep. Jim Kofalt, a Wilton Republican. But Democrats have denounced the bills, noting that they could force teachers to disclose information about students to their parents that the students do not want shared, such as their sexual orientation or gender identity, and remove supportive spaces for kids. Rep. Peter Petrigno, a Milford Democrat, said SB 72 would destroy trust in schools and leave children who don't feel safe sharing things with their parents with few options. Should they confide in teachers, those teachers might be compelled to share that information to parents who inquire, Petrigno said. 'If troubled kids cannot talk with their parents for any reason, and they know they now cannot talk to their trusted adults at school, then where will they turn?' Petrigno said. But Republicans argued that in most cases, a child's parent is the best person to receive sensitive information about their children, not a teacher. 'If I know that most parents are way more trustworthy than teachers like Pamela Smart, then I will vote to pass this bill as amended,' said Rep. Debra DeSimone, an Atkinson Republican, referring to a former high school employee convicted in 1991 for killing her husband. Republicans also pointed to provisions in two of the bills, HB 10 and HB 72, that allow teachers to withhold information to parents if they have 'clear and convincing' evidence that the infringement upon parental rights is necessary to prevent the child from being abused. Democrats denounced that language, noting that 'clear and convincing' is a higher legal standard than is typically required to report a child to the Division for Children, Youth, and Families and arguing that it would effectively bar teachers from withholding information from parents even if they had suspicion that it could lead to abuse. RSA 169-C:29 currently requires any teacher, school staff member, or other professional who interacts with children to make a report to DCYF if they have 'reason to suspect' abuse or neglect. In regard to that exception, one of the bills that passed, SB 96, differs from the other two. While HB 10 and SB 72 require 'clear and convincing' evidence of abuse for a teacher to opt not to share information with parents, SB 96 allows a teacher to refrain from giving the information 'if a reasonably prudent person would believe that disclosure would result in abuse, abandonment, or neglect.' But SB 96 allows the exception only if the child has been physically harmed or has been threatened to be harmed 'of such a grave nature by the actions or inactions' of a parent that it justifies withholding information. The bill states the exception does not apply to 'potential or actual psychological or emotional injury' that a parent imposes on a child upon learning information about their child. It does not apply to 'emotions such as anger, disappointment, sadness, disapproval or other behaviors.' HB 10 passed the House and the Senate Thursday and will head to Ayotte in the coming weeks; SB 72 and SB 96 both passed the House but had not yet received a final green light from the Senate as of Thursday afternoon.
Boston Globe
4 days ago
- Politics
- Boston Globe
N.H. House approves ‘parental bill of rights'
Conservatives around the country have been pushing for parental rights legislation and demanding greater parental control in the wake of pandemic-era policies around masking, school closures, and vaccines. Meanwhile, schools have become a battleground for culture war issues about how they handle gender identity and race and the books available on these topics. Get N.H. Morning Report A weekday newsletter delivering the N.H. news you need to know right to your inbox. Enter Email Sign Up Passing a parental bill of rights this year has been a priority for New Hampshire Republicans who say parents shouldn't be kept in the dark. Advertisement 'Growing up is hard. Every family has its challenges, and every family has some difficult conversations. Keeping parents in the dark is not an answer to that problem,' said Representative Jim Kofalt, a Wilton Republican, Thursday. 'Governments do not raise children. Parents do,' he said. SB 72 would allow parents to sue schools over a violation for monetary damages and relief. Democrats argued the bill would put children in harm's way and make it harder for them to confide in trusted adults at school. Advertisement The If an immediate answer cannot be provided, it instructs that an answer be provided no later than 10 business days after the request. 'We all agree that parents have rights and schools should be working with parents, not against them,' said Representative Heather Raymond, a Nashua Democrat. 'But we also know that some parents hurt their children, and those children need help from trusted adults.' Raymond said the bill creates too high of a standard of evidence that would stop many schools from reporting suspected child abuse to the state's child protective services, inadvertently providing cover for child abusers. She said the 'clear and convincing' standard for evidence means the school would need to present video evidence to report abuse, and a child informing them of parental abuse wouldn't be sufficient. Republicans disagreed with her assessment, and said schools could still report child abuse. Both of the bills enshrine many rights parents already have, such as choosing where to enroll their child in school, receiving vaccine exemptions, and the ability to opt out of sex education. Some of the measures would be new: The bills instruct school boards to develop policies promoting parental involvement in school attendance, homework, and discipline, and to lay out procedures for parents to object to instructional material based on 'morality, sex, and religion or the belief that such materials are harmful.' Advertisement The House removed language that would've created new restrictions on health care for minors, which drew opposition. Over 200 health care providers from around the state signed a petition opposing part of the bill they say would restrict access to confidential 'The best-case scenario is that young people discuss their contraceptive and sexual health decisions openly with their families. But the reality is that not all young people are in situations where it's easy or they're able or safe to do those things,' said Dr. Amy E. Paris, an OB/GYN and director of family planning at Dartmouth Health. 'Those people shouldn't be cast aside and left without birth control and sexual and reproductive healthcare,' she said. Paris said requiring parental consent would cause fewer young people to access contraception, driving up rates of unintended pregnancies and sexually transmitted infections. Nationally, teen pregnancy rates have been going The bill would have required parental consent for health care and prescriptions, unless they were explicitly permitted in another law. While New Hampshire law is silent on contraception for minors, a federal Title X program requires confidential contraception, which could proceed, even if New Hampshire's parental bill of rights becomes law. Paris said her young patients are aware of the current political environment and worried about potential impacts to their health care. 'I think people are very worried about the potential loss of access to contraception and abortion,' she said. 'If anything I think young people have become more proactive over time about taking responsibility for their contraceptive needs.' Advertisement Amanda Gokee can be reached at
Yahoo
03-03-2025
- Health
- Yahoo
House committee advances bill rolling back trans protections
Supporters of transgender rights gather at the Legislative Office Building in Concord on Feb. 19, 2025. (Photo by William Skipworth/New Hampshire Bulletin) A bill seeking to roll back protections for trans people in New Hampshire got the go-ahead from the state House Judiciary Committee Monday. The committee voted, 10-8, along party lines on Monday to recommend the entire New Hampshire House of Representatives pass House Bill 148. If signed into law, HB 148, which was sponsored by Wilton Republican Rep. Jim Kofalt, would allow transgender people in New Hampshire to be banned from using locker rooms or restrooms matching their gender identity. The bill would also allow schools and organized sports in the state to keep transgender athletes off sports teams consistent with their gender identity. It would also allow people to be forcibly placed in prisons, mental health facilities, or juvenile detention centers with members of their at-birth sex. The bill doesn't go so far as to require transgender people be banned from or forced into these places. Rather, it allows whoever owns the restrooms, administers the sports teams, or runs the prison to do so without facing discrimination charges. In previous debates over the bill, a point of contention has been that the bill does not define biological sex. At a meeting over the bill in Concord ahead of the vote, Rep. Eric Turer, a Brentwood Democrat, called it 'legislative malpractice' to introduce a bill that doesn't actually define the key terminology at question. He provided examples for how this bill might cause issues. 'The thing this bill intends to solve seems like it will almost be caused by this bill,' he said, explaining that it could allow a trans boy, who has transitioned and now has male hormones, to be playing on a girls team against their will. Rep. Katy Peternel, a Wolfeboro Republican, attempted to combat this notion by pointing to a recent release from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. In the release, the department, under President Donald Trump and Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., defined female as 'a person of the sex characterized by a reproductive system with the biological function of producing eggs' and male as 'a person of the sex characterized by a reproductive system with the biological function of producing sperm.' If passed, HB 148 would cut back on some of the legal protections put in place years ago. The 2018 Law Against Discrimination prohibited discrimination on the basis of age, sex, gender identity, race, creed, color, marital status, familial status, physical or mental disability, or national origin. And it created a Commission on Human Rights to ensure this discrimination doesn't occur. If the bill is passed by the House, it will still need approval from the Senate and Gov. Kelly Ayotte to become law.
Boston Globe
21-02-2025
- Politics
- Boston Globe
N.H. lawmakers consider rolling back protection for trans people in anti-discrimination law
The bill's prime sponsor, Republican Representative Jim Kofalt, said the measure is a way to protect people's privacy rights and physical safety, rejecting criticism of the bill as transphobic. He pointed to conflict in Get N.H. Morning Report A weekday newsletter delivering the N.H. news you need to know right to your inbox. Enter Email Sign Up And, he said, 'I have also heard from legislators in the State House that they have felt uncomfortable using bathrooms in the State House because there was a person of the opposite sex in the bathroom with them.' Advertisement That claim was met with pushback from Democratic Representative Alice Wade of Dover, who is transgender. 'I myself am a trans woman, and I'm going to bet that most of you would not have known that unless I had told you,' she said. 'Just this morning, I used the women's restroom down that hall. No issues.' And Wade raised questions about how the law could be enforced. 'Put yourself in my shoes. Imagine there's a padlock on every public restroom,' she said. Both the House and the Senate passed a version of the same proposal last year, which was vetoed by then-Governor Chris Sununu, a Republican. At the time, Sununu said the proposal 'seeks to solve problems that have not presented themselves in New Hampshire, and in doing so invites unnecessary discord.' The introduction of this year's bill comes as two transgender teenagers are fighting a state law barring them from playing girls' sports, a Advertisement The New Hampshire Interscholastic Athletic Association previously stated that 'it would be fundamentally unjust and contrary to applicable State and Federal Law to preclude a student from participation on a gender specific sports team that is consistent with the public gender identity of that student for all other purposes.' The organization recently suspended its rule on the inclusion of trans athletes, pointing to the state law and Trump's executive order. Steven Porter of the Globe staff contributed to this report. This story first appeared in Globe NH | Morning Report, our free newsletter focused on the news you need to know about New Hampshire, including great coverage from the Boston Globe and links to interesting articles from other places. If you'd like to receive it via e-mail Monday through Friday, Amanda Gokee can be reached at
Yahoo
21-02-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
NH Republicans' bill would allow trans people to be banned from bathrooms, locker rooms
A group of Republicans are again trying to pass a bill in New Hampshire to keep transgender people out of bathrooms and sports teams that align with their gender identity. If passed, House Bill 148 would allow transgender people to be banned from using restrooms or locker rooms consistent with their gender identity. It would also allow schools and organized sports to keep transgender athletes off sports teams matching their gender identity. Lastly, it would allow them to be placed in prisons, mental health facilities, or juvenile detention centers with members of their at-birth sex against their will. The bill, however, does not require that transgender people be banned from these spaces, but it allows whoever owns the restrooms, administers the sports teams, or runs the prison to do so without facing discrimination charges. In a room packed with trans rights advocates, Rep. Jim Kofalt, a Wilton Republican and the bill's sponsor, introduced the legislation with a story. He said he'd heard from a mother from Milford whose daughter was being harassed by 'a biological male' who 'claimed that he was transgender' and was entering the girls' locker room to watch other girls change and make fun of them. The bill is a word-for-word repeat of 2024's House Bill 396, which was approved by the House and Senate but vetoed by then-Gov. Chris Sununu, a Republican, who called it 'unacceptable,' said it 'runs contrary to New Hampshire's Live Free or Die spirit,' and 'seeks to solve problems that have not presented themselves.' Sununu has since been replaced by Gov. Kelly Ayotte, a Republican who won election in November. Kofalt denied accusations that the bill was transphobic or that it supports an underlying belief that transgender people are inherently predatory, saying: 'I absolutely do not believe that. I have never said that, and I have never implied that.' 'What I will say,' he said, 'is that this provides a loophole for people who may not actually present themselves as transgender at all to gain access to spaces that, practically speaking, they should not have access to.' Asked by fellow lawmakers to define what biological sex is for the purposes of the bill, Kofalt said: 'Practically speaking, we know what males and females are. We have known that for thousands of years. I don't see a need to define it so I have chosen not to include that in the bill.' Pushing back, Rep. Eric Turer, a Brentwood Democrat, pointed to four different ways to define it: by chromosomes, gonads, hormones, and secondary sexual characteristics. 'Those are four possible ways, I can imagine and I'm wondering without a definition, how might anyone use this bill to make policy?' Turer asked. Kofalt maintained he doesn't think there is any confusion on the matter. Rep. Catherine Rombeau, a Bedford Democrat, said she hadn't heard of any concerns or incidents about transgender people in the spaces identified by this bill from her constituents. Kofalt said he'd heard about issues at Milford, Kearsarge, and Mascenic school districts. He also said he'd heard from fellow legislators that were uncomfortable using the same restroom with transgender people in the State House and legislative offices. Rep. Alice Wade is one of those transgender people using the State House bathrooms and was among those who testified. 'Just this morning, I used the women's restroom down that hall,' she said, pointing toward the restroom in the Legislative Office Building where they were meeting. 'No issues. I have used the women's restroom for six years in public. No disruptions. No one has ever called me out for it.' Wade, a Democrat representing Dover, argued no issues were actually happening in this matter and questioned how enforcement would work should a community decide to enact some sort of transgender bathroom restriction, asking if people would be forced to bring their birth certificate around or submit to genital inspections. 'I myself am a trans woman, and I am going to bet that most of you would not have known that unless I had told you,' she said. 'All of my documents say female. I have had bottom surgery. I have had voice therapy. I have been transitioning for over six years now.' This story was originally published by the New Hampshire Bulletin. This article originally appeared on Portsmouth Herald: NH GOP bill would allow trans people to be banned from bathrooms
