Senate Bill 247, sponsored by Concord Sen. Dan Feltes, would strengthen testing of children for lead poisoning and also set up a new fund that would appropriate money for remediation in rental properties.
New Hampshire, along with most states, long ago outlawed lead paint, but it was commonly used prior to 1978. The state has the oldest housing stock in the country, with 62 percent of our homes built before lead-based paint was banned.
This older housing is a danger to children because it is most likely to house lower-income families and to be in disrepair with chipping or peeling paint around baseboards and windows. Younger children at the ages of one and two, a time when everything goes into their mouths, find these areas within their reach. Over time, scientific evidence has shown us that any amount of lead can have a major effect on a child’s brain. This is a health threat that can be detected and can be prevented.
SB 247 is the result of landlords and the Conservation Law Foundation and many other stakeholders reaching a compromise and working together. This has not often been the case in the past.
Landlords want to prevent their renters’ children from having lead poisoning, but often can’t afford or aren’t even aware that there is lead paint in their property. This legislation provides grants for early remediation of aging households, so that upon early childhood screening and detection of lead paint, the landlord can get financial assistance in removing and mitigating the hazard of lead paint on their property.
SB 247 expands the number of children who will be tested for lead paint in New Hampshire toward 100 percent in the future. It also lowers the levels at which parents and landlords will be notified to 3 micrograms so that remediation can take place earlier than current practice.
Sounds like a win-win right? The state Senate believed so. Unfortunately, the House Finance Committee decided to delay passage of this bill to deal with other issues.
Republican leadership of the Finance Committee stated the legislation “needed work,” it “wasn’t proactive,” it didn’t address “single owned homes, just rental property,” there wasn’t enough money to solve the problem, the fund didn’t fully staff the program at the Department of Health and Human Services and the bill set up a new fund that was too confusing.
In short, the majority sacrificed the good for the perfect.
During the committee work sessions on the legislation, Republicans refused to consider amendments offered that addressed these issues. Instead, they decided the best course was to delay the legislation for another year.
Lead-paint poisoning is a difficult issue, one that we have worked on for a number of years and is an evolving solution. We need to approach it in a myriad of ways. SB 247 was not offered as the final solution, but it was created to offer a major step toward achieving healthier and safer homes. What will a delay of a year bring us, especially if leadership refuses to address the very changes they suggested be made?
How many more children will be poisoned by lead paint? How many more families will be unable to find safe and affordable housing? How many more children will be forced to have higher needs for education and health care due to our negligence in preventing lead poisoning? Maybe the majority of the finance committee can “study” these questions while they delay action.
New Hampshire is the last state where a child died of lead-paint poisoning. What I dread is the possibility we will be the next state where a child dies of lead-paint poisoning.
(Rep. Katherine Rogers, a Concord Democrat, is a member of the House Finance Committee.)