Connect with us

New Hampshire

New Hampshire Marijuana Legalization Bill Headed To Conference Committee After House Rejects Senate Amendments

Published

on

New Hampshire Marijuana Legalization Bill Headed To Conference Committee After House Rejects Senate Amendments


House lawmakers in New Hampshire have rejected Senate changes to a marijuana legalization bill, setting the stage for a conference committee to hammer out differences between versions of the legislation passed by either chamber. Many stakeholders think the development could spell the end for the proposal, however, because even a single member of the conference committee could block the path to final passage.

The House on Thursday voted 196–173 to send the legislation to a conference committee following an earlier vote to reject sweeping Senate-made changes to the bill.

Several representatives who back legalization urged colleagues not to sign off on the new Senate provisions just to get the broad reform enacted.

“Instead of rushing to pass a bill that we all know is flawed, let’s reject this amendment and insist on making better policies for our constituents,” Rep. Heath Howard (D) said before the House floor vote. “We will only get one chance to create a well regulated market for adult-use cannabis, and it’s important we get it right.”

Advertisement

“I know the vast majority of my constituents want legalized cannabis,” added Republican Kevin Verville (R). “They want it in New Hampshire and they want it sooner than later. But this is not the right approach for us.”

The House last month passed an earlier version of the bill, HB 1633, which the Senate later made sweeping changes to via major amendments from Sen. Daryl Abbas (R) and Senate President Jeb Bradley (R), among others. Bradley, who himself opposes legalization, repeatedly said that if the legislation had the votes to pass, he intended to tailor it more to his and the governor’s liking.

Some House lawmakers urged colleagues to grit their teeth and sign off on the Senate version of the bill, warning that supporters of legalization are missing an opportunity to skip a conference committee and send the proposal immediately to Gov. Chris Sununu (R).

Rep. Andrew Prout (R), for example, said he was confident the system that would be created by the Senate-amended legislation “will either work, and be better than driving to any of our neighbors” or that “there will be the political will to fix it in a future term.”

Advertisement

All of the states bordering New Hampshire have already legalized marijuana.

Sununu has indicated he’d support the bill with the Senate changes but would oppose the measure as passed by the House. He said this week that if the House passed the bill with the Senate’s changes, he’d sign it.

“I think the Senate version is OK,” Sununu told NH Journal. “They put some other stuff in there that I wasn’t necessarily looking for, but they’re not deal breakers.”

But if House lawmakers “want to make significant changes,” the governor added, “then it’s not going to pass. It’s that easy.”

One factor worrying some advocates is that the Republican candidates likely to replace Sununu when his gubernatorial term expires early next year have signaled that they’d oppose the reform. That means a failure to legalize marijuana this session could delay the policy change indefinitely.

Advertisement

Because the House and Senate have now passed different versions of the legislation, it next proceeds to a conference committee consisting of lawmakers from both chambers.

While finding compromise is panel’s the ostensible goal, reform advocates expect the bicameral committee will be set up to kill the bill, at least on the Senate side. Bradley, the Senate president, will not only pick the members of the committee from that chamber, but he also indicated this week that he might appoint himself to the panel.

Abbas told Marijuana Moment earlier this week that he’s “not optimistic” the bill “would survive a committee of conference.”


Marijuana Moment is tracking more than 1,500 cannabis, psychedelics and drug policy bills in state legislatures and Congress this year. Patreon supporters pledging at least $25/month get access to our interactive maps, charts and hearing calendar so they don’t miss any developments.

Learn more about our marijuana bill tracker and become a supporter on Patreon to get access.

Advertisement

Sununu, for his part, has said that while he personally opposes legalization, he believes the policy change is “inevitable.”

Polls indicate that upward of 70 percent of New Hampshire voters support legalizing and regulating marijuana.

While HB 1633 was initially introduced by Rep. Erica Layon (R), the Senate changes shifted its core regulatory approach to one discussed late last year by a state commission on legalization chaired by Abbas. Though that body ultimately failed at its charge of crafting legislation to enact the reform, Abbas and others in the Senate incorporated a number of provisions that were raised during discussions last year.

Layon previously said she would speak out on the floor against the Senate changes, but she did not participate at all in Thursday’s debate. The lawmaker did not respond to Marijuana Moment’s multiple requests for comment this week.

If the committee does undertake its work in earnest, its job will be to reconcile two complex bills that differ significantly on regulatory structure, criminal justice, licensing, personal possession and THC limits, tax rates, medical marijuana and sundry other issues.

Advertisement

As passed by the Senate, the bill would allow 15 franchise stores to open statewide. Purchases would incur a 15 percent “franchise fee”—effectively a tax—that would apply to both adult-use and medical marijuana purchases. Though stores would be privately run, the government would control their look, feel and operations. The Liquor Commission would have the authority, for example, to set final prices on cannabis products.

Marijuana possession wouldn’t become legal until 2026, once the state’s licensed market is up and running.

The proposal would limit each municipality to only a single cannabis retail establishment unless it’s home to more than 50,000 people, though only two cities in the state, Manchester and Nashua, meet that threshold. Local voters would also need to pre-approve the industry in order for businesses to open in that jurisdiction.

Adults could possess up to two ounces of marijuana under the Senate plan. Home cultivation of cannabis for personal use would remain illegal, and the state’s Cannabis Control Commission would have the authority to enforce that provision.

Smoking or vaping marijuana in public would be a violation on the first offense and an misdemeanor for second or subsequent offenses within five years, a charge that could carry jail time. Consuming cannabis in other forms in public—for example, drinking an THC-infused beverage—would carry no punishment, unlike open container rules around alcohol.

Advertisement

The bill would also outlaw consumption of cannabis by any means, including edibles, by any driver or passenger of a vehicle being driven in any way. That would also be an unclassified misdemeanor with the potential for jail time.

The version of the bill passed by the House in April, by contrast, would legalize through a so-called “agency store” model proposed by Layon, in which the state would oversee a system of privately run stores, with strict limits on marketing and advertising. That version also includes a higher personal possession limit of four ounces and a lower, 12 percent fee on purchases. Further, medical marijuana would be been exempt from the state surcharge, and personal possession would become legal immediately.

The House bill, like the Senate version, would not allow home cultivation of cannabis.

The Senate changes led supporters of the reform to disagree on how the House should proceed. Advocates with the state ACLU chapter and the Marijuana Policy Project (MPP), who poured hours into lobbying lawmakers on the bill, said the revised proposal represented an imperfect but nevertheless important reform in New Hampshire, urging House lawmakers to accept the Senate changes and move the legislation along.

Other advocates, however, including the New Hampshire Cannabis Association (NHCann) and the bill’s lead sponsor, Layon, argued the House shouldn’t sign off on the amendments, even if that meant derailing the bill.

Advertisement

New Hampshire lawmakers worked extensively on marijuana reform issues last session and attempted to reach a compromise to enact legalization through a multi-tiered system that would include state-controlled shops, dual licensing for existing medical cannabis dispensaries and businesses privately licensed to individuals by state agencies. The legislature ultimately hit an impasse on the complex legislation.

Bicameral lawmakers also convened the state commission tasked with studying legalization and proposing a path forward last year, though the group ultimately failed to arrive at a consensus or propose final legislation.

The Senate defeated a more conventional House-passed legalization bill last year, HB 639, despite bipartisan support.

Last May, the House defeated marijuana legalization language that was included in a Medicaid expansion bill. The Senate also moved to table another piece of legislation that month that would have allowed patients and designated caregivers to cultivate up to three mature plants, three immature plants and 12 seedlings for personal therapeutic use.

After the Senate rejected the reform bills in 2022, the House included legalization language as an amendment to separate criminal justice-related legislation—but that was also struck down in the opposite chamber.

Advertisement

Lawmakers Push To Let VA Doctors Recommend Medical Marijuana And End THC Testing For Federal Job Applicants

Photo courtesy of Chris Wallis // Side Pocket Images.

Marijuana Moment is made possible with support from readers. If you rely on our cannabis advocacy journalism to stay informed, please consider a monthly Patreon pledge.

Become a patron at Patreon!





Source link

Advertisement

New Hampshire

Senate panel endorses reporting exemption for players on New Hampshire Fisher Cats

Published

on

Senate panel endorses reporting exemption for players on New Hampshire Fisher Cats





Advertisement





Source link

Continue Reading

New Hampshire

Possible 2028 Democratic White House contenders weigh in on Iran with New Hampshire voters

Published

on

Possible 2028 Democratic White House contenders weigh in on Iran with New Hampshire voters


As the U.S.-Israeli war with Iran overtakes the foreign policy debate in Washington, two Democratic governors with potential 2028 presidential aspirations — Gavin Newsom and Andy Beshear — recently traveled to New Hampshire, introducing themselves to the state’s famously engaged voters. The two weighed in on the war and both criticized and questioned President Trump’s strategy and endgame. 

“If a president is going to take a country into war, and risk the lives of American troops and Americans in the region, he has to have a real justification and not one that seems to change every five to 10 hours,” Beshear told CBS News after a Democratic fundraiser in Keene. 

“This President seems to use force before ever trying diplomacy, and he has a duty to sell it to the American people and to address Congress with it,” Beshear continued. “He hasn’t done any of that. In fact, it appears there isn’t even a plan for what success looks like. He’s gone from regime change to strategic objectives and now is talking about unconditional surrender, which isn’t realistic where he is.”

Beshear also said he thought that Congress should have reined in Mr. Trump’s war powers.

Advertisement

“He is trying to ignore Congress. He’s trying to even ignore the American people,” Beshear said. 

He went on to note that the president’s State of the Union address took place “three — four days before he launched this attack,” and Mr. Trump “didn’t even have the respect to tell the American people the threat that he thought Iran posed to us.” 

Last week, both the House and the Senate failed to pass resolutions to limit Mr. Trump’s war powers and stop him from taking further military action against Iran without congressional support.

Democratic Kentucky Gov. Andy Beshear speaks with voters in Keene, New Hampshire, on March 7, 2026.

Advertisement

Anne Bryson


For Newsom, the war with Iran constitutes part of a broader criticism of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. 

At an event last Tuesday in Los Angeles, Newsom had compared Israel to an “apartheid state.” Later, in New Hampshire, he sought to clarify his comment.

“I was specifically referring to a Tom Friedman [New York Times] column last week, where Tom used that word of apartheid as it relates to the direction Bibi is going, particularly on the annexation of the West Bank,” Newsom explained during a book tour event Thursday night in Portsmouth. “I’m very angry, with what he is doing and why he’s doing it, what he’s going to ultimately try to do to the Supreme Court there, what he’s trying to do to save his own political career.” 

Friedman wrote that at the same time that the U.S. and Israel are prosecuting a war in Iran, within Israel, Netanyahu’s government has undertaken efforts to annex the West Bank, driving Palestinians from their homes; fire the attorney general who is leading the prosecution against Netanyahu for corruption; and block the government’s attempt to establish a commission to examine the failures that led up to the Oct. 7, 2023, massacre of Jews by Hamas.

Advertisement

CBS News has reached out to the Israeli Embassy in Washington, D.C., for comment.

On Iran, Newsom said, “I’m very angry about this war, with all due respect, you know, not because I’m angry the supreme leader is dead. Quite the contrary. I’m not naive about the last 37 years of his reign. Forty-seven years since ’79 — the revolution,” Newsom said. “But I’m also mindful that you have a president who still is inarticulate and incapable of giving us the rationale of why? Why now? What’s the endgame?”

img-4603.jpg

California Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom speaks with political commentator Jack Cocchiarella at an event in Portsmouth, New Hampshire, on March 5, 2026.

Anne Bryson


Many attendees at Newsom’s book event said that the situation in Iran is a top-of-mind issue for them, too. Some said they’re “horrified” by what is happening.

Advertisement

29-year-old Alicia Marr told CBS News she decided to attend Newsom’s event because of his social media response to the war with Iran. 

“There was one spot left, and I decided to pick it up, and it was due to his response to the war, that it is just unacceptable, and I would agree with that,” Marr said.

While some voters like Marr are eager to hear about where potential candidates stand on foreign policy, many at Newsom’s event said they care most about how potential candidates plan to address domestic issues. 

“I’m more focused on getting the middle class back on track and fighting the oligarchy, and I’m less invested in international issues,” said Anita Alden, who also attended Newsom’s event, 

“I wouldn’t call myself America first, but we have so many problems at home that are my priority,” she told CBS News. 

Advertisement

Former Vice President Kamala Harris, who may also be weighing another White House bid, told Fox 2 Detroit last week that she “unequivocally opposes” the Trump administration’s military action in Iran and urged Congress to take action. 

“If we want to stop Donald Trump with this random decision that he has arrived at, then Congress must act, and Congress must act immediately. The American people do not want our sons and daughters to go into this unauthorized war of choice,” Harris said. 

Mr. Trump has lashed out against Democrats who have pushed back on his Iran strategy, calling them “losers” last week and arguing that they would criticize any decision he made on Iran.

“If I did it, it’s no good. If I didn’t do it, they would have said the opposite, that you should have done this,” the president said.

Advertisement



Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

New Hampshire

Mass. man nabbed after allegedly driving over 100 mph in N.H.

Published

on

Mass. man nabbed after allegedly driving over 100 mph in N.H.


Local News

Police say the Attleboro man was driving 104 mph in a 55 mph zone on Route 202 near in Rindge, New Hampshire.

A Massachusetts man was arrested late Wednesday night after police say he was driving more than 100 mph on a New Hampshire roadway. 

Officers with the Rindge Police Department stopped a vehicle shortly after 11 p.m. on Route 202 near Sears Drive in Rindge following a report of a car traveling at excessive speed, according to a statement from Chief Rachel Malynowski. 

Advertisement

The vehicle, a 2020 Kia Stinger, was spotted traveling at 104 mph in a posted 55 mph zone, Malynowski said. 

The driver, a 21-year-old man from Attleboro, was arrested and charged with reckless operation of a motor vehicle, according to police. 

He is scheduled to be arraigned April 5. If convicted, the man faces a fine of at least $750, in addition to the court’s penalty assessment, and a 90-day license suspension, Malynowski said. 

Sign up for the Today newsletter

Get everything you need to know to start your day, delivered right to your inbox every morning.

Advertisement





Source link

Continue Reading

Trending