Jonah Wheeler’s politics don’t necessarily align with those of Education Commissioner Frank Edelblut.

Like the rest of his party, the Democratic state representative from Peterborough opposes the expansion of Edelblut’s school voucher program.

But as Wheeler sat in a Concord coffee shop across from the State House during an interview with the Monitor, Edelblut approached Wheeler.

“Very composed,” Edelblut said.

“Thank you very much, sir,” Wheeler responded. “Thank you.”

The interaction threw Wheeler off for a moment: “Things like that are strange.”

Such exchanges are growing rarer in a world of political division and polarization that has seeped from the national parties down to the state and local levels. At the same time, they’re becoming more common for Wheeler, who made a speech in March that strayed from his party’s opposition to Republican legislation that would allow the separation of bathrooms by biological sex instead of gender.

The 22-year-old lawmaker serving his second term in the House of Representatives is no stranger to breaking ranks with Democrats. Yet, the same votes that won him compliments from conservatives have alienated Wheeler from his own party.

Rather than toe the party line, Wheeler said he does his research and votes his conscience. But in the New Hampshire House, that can come with political consequences.

Wheeler is not alone. On the opposite side of the fence, multiple Republicans have said party leadership removed them from their committees this spring because they refused to vote a certain way on select issues. Wheeler speculates his reassignment was spurred by the same motivations.

Rep. Dave Nagel, a Republican from Gilmanton, said he entered the Legislature with an expectation that he’d answer to his constituents and his conscience – and that party loyalty would be “a distant third.”

“It turns out that’s a fiction,” Nagel said.

At least two GOP members were removed from their committee positions on Tuesday, including Rep. Mark Pearson of Hampstead, who chaired the Children and Family Law Committee, and Rep. Arnold Davis of Milan, the vice chair of the Resources, Recreation and Development Committee.

“The House Republican alliance just put out a report card and my voting record was 96.7%. I was told I was removed because that number needed to be 100%,” Davis said in an emailed statement. “I feel I need to vote for my constituents and my conscience first and then my party. I hold no ill will, but refuse to compromise my integrity.”

Pearson, like Nagel, was told by a former party leader years ago to “vote your conscience, vote your legislative district, vote your party” in that order.

“The faction that is currently in power as House Republican Leadership does not hold that position,” Pearson said in a statement. “While the State Republican Party continues to widen the tent in welcoming a wider spectrum of people, House Republican leadership continues to move in the opposite direction. It’s not that I’m a liberal or even a moderate … The problem is that I have not always voted the way House leadership demanded of me.”

How it happens

The punishments take various forms, some more extreme than others. Sometimes it’s a reassignment, like in Wheeler’s case, while others lose their spot on their committee altogether without getting a new placement. A slap on the wrist can come in subtler forms, like moving someone’s seating assignment in the House chamber.

Republicans who spoke to the Monitor pointed to a strong-arm culture emanating from the higher-ups, which includes several more representatives who were ousted from their committee assignments this week. Nagel, who was removed from the Health, Human Services and Elderly Affairs Committee in February, said he got summoned for a conversation with House Speaker Sherman Packard and other party leadership – an occurrence he said is somewhat common.

“It’s like getting called to the principal’s office,” Nagel said.

Wheeler, who voted against the party on about 15 different bills during his first term on everything from guns to land use, was reassigned this legislative session to the Environment and Agriculture Committee.

Just before Christmas, House Democratic Leader Alexis Simpson informed him that he’d be moving committees, citing communication challenges and sentiments from his fellow committee members. The latter was a surprise, Wheeler said, as none of them had brought up any issues to him personally. 

Instead, he believes it was a result of his votes.

“What else would it be?” he said. “It was just obvious.”

Simpson’s office declined an interview for this story, saying she “prefers not to speak publicly about caucus personnel decisions.”

Wheeler acknowledged he could’ve done more to communicate with Democratic leadership. He doesn’t visit their office and only tells the top Democrat on his committee how he plans to vote, not Simpson or the caucus.

Despite the circumstances, Wheeler said he was excited to work on environmental and agricultural issues in his new assignment.

Reshuffling committee membership can be a routine part of the legislative process and Wheeler is one of nearly two dozen Democrats serving on a new committee this year. 

Less common is the removal of representatives from their assigned committees mid-year. Republican leadership has ousted at least four people so far this year. Several representatives said it happened after they took votes or expressed beliefs that didn’t comply with the majority office’s wishes.

Rep. Mike Bordes, a Laconia Republican, has been outspoken about the “totalitarian” and “do as I say or else” attitude in the House on social media. He opted out of serving on a committee several years ago because he didn’t want to deal with the pressure, along with time constraints.

“There probably would be times I would want to vote against leadership, and I wouldn’t want the pressure and the bullying and the tactics they’d use against me,” Bordes said. “I basically gave them no ammo to really do anything to me by not being on a committee.”

In March, Republican Rep. Joe Barton of Littleton was taken off the Legislative Administration Committee, which deals with the nuts and bolts of how the Legislature operates. He said he got “a talking to” the same day he voted to hear a Democratic amendment on a relatively simple bill. His removal came within a few days.

“You shouldn’t remove a person from committee for something like that,” Barton said. “I don’t know what the big deal was.”

Barton said the committee chair, Northfield Republican Gregory Hill, had wanted to do away with the bill, but that his vote deadlocked the committee and allowed an opening for the amendment to be heard.

“I think that killing something before talking about it is not the way to do business,” Barton said. 

Packard’s office declined an interview for this story, saying the speaker’s policy is not to comment on internal personnel matters. Hill did not respond to an interview request.

Nagel, who was booted from the Health, Human Services and Elderly Affairs Committee, said he was told he sided with Democrats too often. A physician of 34 years, Nagel said, some things he can’t in good conscience support, like anti-vaccine bills and a push to abolish the state’s Office of Health Equity.

“If I were to support those things … I’d be a coward, and I can’t deal with that,” Nagel said. “Secondly, that a group of people that I choose to associate with think that those are good ideas is painful to me also.”

In February, a top Republican escorted him to the speaker’s office for a conversation. Nagel told them he’d try to find agreements elsewhere with the party but that he couldn’t do it on those bills.

“I think that they’re used to having people just say, ‘I’m sorry, I won’t do it again,’” Nagel said. “When I said, ‘I can’t do this. You’re making me hurt people, and I can’t do that,’ that was pretty much the end of the meeting.”

A few days later, he received a note informing him he’d no longer be serving on that committee. He has not been reassigned.

Discussions squashed

State representatives said both parties broadly have a habit of stifling questions and discussion.

In Democratic caucuses, party leaders run through each bill on the docket and the action recommended by the majority of Democrats on the committee.

Only five minutes are left at the end for representatives to ask questions, Wheeler said, and it’s an “uncomfortable” place to do so, even for an experienced public speaker.

“I'm not going to get up there and say ‘I'm voting against gun control’ and have everyone yell at me,” Wheeler said. “I don't want my position to be mischaracterized by me getting up here and saying ‘I'm better than all of you,’ which is how it seems. Anytime anyone gets up there to ask a question, that’s how it seems.”

He put the onus on party leaders to fix that.

“People, even if it's not explicitly said, feel like they don't have the agency to be able to ask those questions,” Wheeler said. “They haven’t set a strong enough permission structure for people to feel like they can speak out and have conversations about where they feel their constituents or them are on a particular piece of legislation.”

For Republicans, several said the “bullying” culture can hinder debate. When the people who head up each committee generally “do the bidding” of the speaker, Barton said it stifles any constructive dialogue.

“It kind of prevents the discussion process of pushing legislation through,” Barton said. “It becomes more of the will of the speaker and majority office and less the whole body, so it kind of quashes the discussion factor, which is a really important factor of the whole process.”

In Barton’s view, his removal from a policy committee hasn’t lessened his ability to debate or talk about the issues. He said he’s gotten a positive response from his constituents for promoting the full legislative process, and he doesn’t think his reputation among colleagues matters all that much.

“People still have to work with me when they have to work with me,” Barton said. “I don’t care if the speaker doesn’t like me.”

Whenever a lawmaker is removed from a policy committee, however, it erodes the representation that New Hampshire citizens elected in Concord, lawmakers said. The deepest discussions that go into crafting each bill happen in committee, and lawmakers who are ousted no longer have the same leverage. Bordes, the Laconia Republican, said leadership’s practice to “stack the numbers” of votes in their favor silences community voices.

“These representatives were elected to represent their constituents. They were placed on a committee because it’s a specialty of theirs or they thought it was a good fit for them, and now their voices are being silenced because they might not agree with what leadership wants,” Bordes said. “It kind of silences independent thought and looking out for the best interests of the community. If people are in fear of losing their seat on a committee or some sort of retribution, it’s kind of silencing differing opinions, which isn’t the way the process should really go.”

 

Charlotte Matherly is the statehouse reporter for the Concord Monitor and Monadnock Ledger-Transcript in partnership with Report for America. Follow her on X at @charmatherly, subscribe to her Capital Beat newsletter and send her an email at cmatherly@cmonitor.com.