CONCORD — The House of Representatives voted to indefinitely postpone action on a bill that would have required both men and women to be 18 years old to marry, with no judicially approved exceptions allowed.
The 179-168 vote on Thursday was unexpected, as HB 499 was voted “ought to pass” 11-0 by the Committee on Children and Family Law.
Supporters of the measure cited high divorce rates, more medical and mental health problems, a 50 percent dropout rate from high school, and much greater likelihood of future poverty as consequences of marrying too young.
But opponents, led by Rep. David Bates, R-Windham, argued that the bill would have unintended consequences, particularly on military couples, and would increase the number of children born out of wedlock.
“This provision has been our law for 110 years,” he said. “It has been working and there haven’t been problems with the judicial waiver process.”
Bates described a scenario in which a young military recruit is being deployed and wishes to get married to someone younger than 18, and wants to ensure that the partner is eligible for any military spousal benefits.
“It is improper for us to have someone enter the military, put their life on the line for our country and say they are not mature enough to make decisions about marriage,” he said.
Rep. Marybeth Walz, D-Bow, argued that benefits can be assigned to beneficiaries, regardless of marital status, and that having children out of wedlock “is not the same problem it once was.”
“Almost 41 percent of children in this country are already born out of wedlock,” she said.
Late-term abortion ban defeated
A bill to ban abortions after a fetus reaches the point where it could survive outside of the womb failed as lawmakers voted 280-82 to table the measure.
The lopsided vote to table HB 578 came after an amendment, which made up the heart of the legislation, was defeated in a 189-170 vote.
If signed into law, the bill would have created the “Viable Fetus Protection Act.”
“This bill, both in its original form and as amended by the Judiciary Committee, restricted the right of New Hampshire women to make private medical decisions later in pregnancy,” said Molly Cowan, communications manager for Planned Parenthood of Northern New England. “It is part of a larger strategy by the bill’s proponents to chip away at abortion rights through multiple restrictions.”
Shannon McGinley from the pro-life organization, Cornerstone Action, said representatives missed an opportunity to “balance the interests of pregnant women and their viable children.”
The House also refused to repeal an existing law that provides for a buffer zone to keep protesters at bay around abortion clinics.
Those who wanted the law repealed argued that it infringed on the free speech rights of abortion protesters and was unconstitutional. Supporters pointed to a federal appeals court ruling in January that upheld the New Hampshire buffer zones.
No abortion provider in New Hampshire has actually created a buffer zone, which was noted in the federal court ruling.
Minimum wage defeated
The House also defeat HB 115, a bill to create a state minimum wage with a rate of $9.50 per hour that would rise to $12 per hour beginning in 2019. New Hampshire will now continue to follow the federal minimum wage of $7.25 per hour.
Also defeated was a bill that would have prohibited employers from using credit history in employment decisions (HB 130); and a bill that would forbid questions about criminal history on a job application (HB 442).
“The unemployment rate in our state is at a historically low level, indicating a labor shortage,” said Rep. Keith Murphy, R-Bedford. “Wages have been steadily increasing in response, to the point that very few people are earning the minimum age of $7.25 per hour.”
Rep. Doug Ley, D-Jaffrey, the ranking Democrat on the House Labor Committee, said the vote means New Hampshire will continue to have difficulty attracting younger workers.
“With minimum wage rates of at least $9 an hour in all of our surrounding states, New Hampshire has become the low-wage island of New England,” he said. “By failing to establish a reasonable minimum wage, New Hampshire will continue to have difficulty attracting the young workers we need to expand our workforce.”
Commented
Sorry, there are no recent results for popular commented articles.