The kind of people elected to office has a big effect on the legislative process itself

The current legislative session in Concord has provided a fairly complete lesson in how New Hampshire government works. It has also demonstrated the division of power and checks and balances built into our system.

The 424 legislators, 400 in the House and 24 in the Senate, have acted out their roles in fashioning legislation, often passing laws as sent over from the first to act, but often either passing a different version or passing a completely different bill on the same subject. In either of the latter events, when the bill is sent back to the first one to pass it, or comes over as a different proposal, either the other body accepts the differences, or a committee of conference has to be appointed near the end of the session, made up of members of both bodies and parties, to work out the differences.

Once the conference committees get to work, another attribute of the legislative process becomes evident sometimes. If almost all of the members of the committee agree on a final version but there are one or two holdouts, the speaker of the House or the Senate president has the ability to replace that member with one who will go along with the compromise, in which case it is submitted for passage, or, if the leaders do not replace the member and the member remains opposed, the bill dies.

This demonstrates the power of a leadership position as well as the political power of some members who are not amenable to removal. It also gives the leader the ability to effectively kill legislation.

The governor also has a lot of power in this process.

First, the governor can propose and support legislation, which gives it a boost, especially, as now, when the governor and majorities in both houses are from the same party. Second, the governor can express support for or opposition to pieces of legislation, threatening to veto them or actually vetoing them.

This year, the redistricting of all political districts in the state has been the subject of extensive action, veto threats, redrawing of districts, especially for Congress, the Executive Council and the NH Senate. At this writing, it is not clear if the latest version of the congressional district maps will face a veto or be signed into law.

When used effectively, expressions of support, suggestions for amendment or threats of veto can result in changes to legislation which make the ultimate use of the veto unnecessary. Governor Sununu has proven very adept in his use of this tool on bills ranging from the redistricting maps to legislation like the so-called “parental rights” bill, which was the subject of criticism by the attorney general due to potential legal issues.

The third branch of government, the judiciary, also has gotten into the act this year by hearing a case about the congressional districts. The case alleged that failure to come up with new, constitutionally based districts would result in using the present districts which would be unconstitutional, since the population differences would be too great to be legal, and the Supreme Court agreed. The Court also took the step of appointing a special master to draw districts in the event the Legislature and governor could not agree on legally conforming districts.

Whether this will be the result is not known at this writing, but it does show how a stalemate in such circumstances is handled by our system. Cynics might even suggest this method of decision-making would get all the elected officials off the hook on congressional redistricting.

There are several lessons to be learned from all of these facets of our system:

• The power to get things done is spread out to both houses of the Legislature, the executive and the courts, and power is shared and balanced. Because of the size of the Legislature and the division of power, it takes a head of steam to get things passed, which is how the system was designed to work.

• The personalities of those in positions of power in the system are important, as strong leaders who understand the system can have great influence in shaping the results. Weak leaders often cannot get things accomplished.

• Although New Hampshire has a famously weak governorship, handled correctly, a governor still has great power to influence the process, formally and informally.

Conclusion: With primary and general elections coming up soon, watch carefully who the candidates are, get to know and evaluate them, then vote. The results make a difference.

Brad Cook is a Manchester attorney. The views expressed in this column are his own. He can be reached at bradfordcook01@gmail.com.