Sen. Maggie Wood Hassan, D - District 23
Committees: Capitol Budget; Finance; Commerce, Labor and Consumer Protection

The LFDA sent the following questions to all candidates running for state Senate, House of Representatives and Governor. These results are for the 2010 survey; the LFDA is soliciting Hassan's responses to its more recent survey.

Which of the following sources of revenue should be pursued by the state?

• Expansion of gambling: YES
• Income tax: NO
• General sales tax: NO
• Increase in I & D tax: NO
• LLC tax: NO
• Local meals & rooms tax: NO
• Adding tolls on I-93 (Mass. Border): NO

Well- regulated, limited expansion of gambling will, according to the Governor's Commission on Gambling, bring jobs and revenues to the state, even after accounting for the social costs that will come with it. Since sixty percent of NH residents say that they gamble, and since we already absorb those social costs, it seems reasonable to me to acknowledge that gambling occurs in the state and get the revenues that are available from it. Moreover, recent research shows that the majority of people who gamble are upper and middle income, which alleviates some of the concerns I have had about gambling. I do not think gambling will solve all of our revenue issues -- no single source of revenue will. We need to do our best to make government more efficient and use innovative ways of reducing costs, but I also think we should do our best to avoid raising taxes where we can, especially in the current economy.

Adopt a cap on property taxes? NO

A recent study by a conservative economist found that tax caps create a "race to the bottom" , causing businesses to leave communities where caps have been enacted because municipal revenues aren't able to fund basic educational and other infrastructure needs that are essential to economic development and growth. Caps are tempting as a short term solution to property tax increases, but in the long run, they can really hurt a community and the taxpayers who live there. Taxpayers need to be vigilant to control tax increases, but one-size-fits-all solutions aren't the answer.

Reform retirement benefits for municipal & state employees? YES

Yes, I think there's a consensus that we need to reform the pension system and we've already taken steps to begin reform. But it's also important to recognize that this solution will take some time and that we need to achieve reform in a way that allows us to keep our promise to public employees -- who took public jobs and continued in them-- relying on a promise that they would have a defined benefit pension. This concern has to be balanced with the reality that taxpayers can't make up all of the gap, even though it appears that municipalities were undercharged for their share during the 1990's (they paid less than they would have for social security if the employees were enrolled in social security.) So this is a considerable challenge, but we've begun to make progress on it and we will continue to.

Repeal the gay marriage law? NO

Gay and lesbian citizens should have the same responsibilities and rights as heterosexual citizens do. Making gay marriage legal is consistent with our long tradition in NH of supporting civil rights for all.

Have mandatory automobile insurance? NO

I answered "no" because I'm not sure whether there is evidence that making it mandatory would increase the number of folks who carry auto insurance in our state -- other states that have mandatory coverage have lower percentages of coverage than we do, and I am concerned about whether people who are unemployed right now can afford it. That being said, those who don't have coverage and who harm others and can't pay for their share of the damage are, in essence, taking advantage of the majority of residents who do carry insurance -- and that is unfair.

Have a mandatory seat belt law for adults? YES

I realize that Granite Staters are proud of our libertarian tradition, and to many, making the use of seat belts mandatory seems at odds with this tradition. On a personal level, I don't like the idea that we need a law to tell people to exercise common sense. So, I used to think that mandating the use of seat belts wasn't necessary. I have since learned though that today's cars are designed to be better controlled by those using seat belts, and I have also become aware of how expensive it is to treat the severe injuries that occur when people don't use seat belts; few insurance policies cover the cost of head injuries in full, for example, so the rest of us end up paying for the care of people who don't use seat belts and get in an accident. So, both because drivers who don't use their belts aren't as able to control their cars during a skid or accident, and because the rest of us end up shouldering the cost of caring for the severely injured whose injuries would have been avoided by using seat belt, I think a law makes sense. I am also the mother of a son with a brain injury, and have seen the impact of severe injuries on my own families and others -- I think a mandatory law could really help families and individuals avoid great pain and difficulty and that, on balance, avoiding serious injury is worth the modest limitation of being required to wear a seat belt.

Adopt a mandatory helmet law for motorcycle riders? NO

I am not convinced that motorcycle riders without helmets are a threat to other drivers on the road, and I also think riders are more aware of the dangers that they risk when they don't wear a helmet. I would like to better educated about this though -- it hasn't come up in the senate since I've been in office.

Decriminalize small amounts of marijuana for adults? NO

I think this is very difficult to do without harming adults and children, especially where we don't have a lot of resources for those with addictions. I also think that this would be difficult to enforce, so I would want to hear more from our law enforcement community before considering this further.

Legalize medicinal marijuana? YES

With the proviso that we have to regulate the way in which the prescribed marijuana is distributed. Other states have done this with mixed results -- California's model is terrible, but other states have done this without significantly negative consequences. For some people with chronic or terminal illness, marijuana is the only drug that helps them deal with their symptoms AND function with anything near normalcy.

Restrict the use of windmills and windfarms for power generation, based on:

• Amount of subsidies: DID NOT ANSWER
• Aesthetics: DID NOT ANSWER
• Environmental impact: DID NOT ANSWER

I'm not sure why you would restrict wind power based on the "amount of subsidies" and I need to understand what kind of environmental impact or aesthetic objections exist before answering the question with "yes" or "no" answers. We passed a bill in the 2007-08 session that requires that municipalities allow residential windmills that meet certain aesthetic and environmental criteria. I believe there are ways to balance all of the concerns suggested by your question while encouraging the use of wind power as an alternative energy source.

Repeal the death penalty? YES

As a matter of conscience, I oppose the death penalty. I know that there are strong feelings about this issue but I also think it's important that people understand what my position is.

Adopt constitutional amendment that reduces the role of the courts in the school funding challenge? DID NOT ANSWER

It seems to me that there's an assumption behind your question that I don't agree with, so I haven't answered "yes" or "no". I support a constitutional amendment that allows the state to target aid to communities that needed the money the most; thus reducing the amount of school aid that the state needs to raise from state taxpayers for education. But I don't think this is the same thing as "reducing the role" of courts in the school funding challenge Courts should still have their constitutional role in determining whether the legislative and executive branches are meeting their constitutional obligations according to the standards set in the constitution. The legislature, Governor, and public have the right to amend the constitution, but we still need the court to play its role as referee.

Amend NH constitution to permit citizens to vote on statewide issues in a referendum? NO

We have the most vigorous and representative democracy in the world and the one of the world's largest legislative bodies. Under our system of government, elected officials have the responsibility and authority to solve our challenges through open debate, with lots of public input, and a vote. Referendum means that the legislature will still have the responsibility of solving problems without the authority to do so -- that's unworkable. States that have a referendum -- like California -- have proved how poorly the use of a referendum works.

Adopt a top 2 primary system? DID NOT ANSWER

Don't know, need to learn more about it and consider whether it would work in this state. I'm open to the idea, but would want to understand how it's worked elsewhere before forming an opinion.

Leave immigration laws to federal government? YES

This is a tough question, and I don't think the federal government has done its job well in this area -- we need reform. But I am concerned that 50 different sets of laws in 50 different states will wreak havoc with our economy and with the lives of legal as well as undocumented workers.