House Judiciary committee hears constitutional amendment to recognize a "right to compute"

Representative Keith Ammon, the prime sponsor, told the House Judiciary Committee that CACR 6 would add to the state constitution a right for individuals "to freely access, use and employ computational resources, including devices and networks essential to computation." Representative Keith Ammon, prime sponsor, opened the hearing by citing a rescinded 2023 federal executive order that he said set a precedent for registration and government control of high‑capacity AI systems.

The amendment’s sponsor said the change is meant to protect free expression, economic opportunity and private thought in a computing‑dependent age. “Using computation allows you to be more successful. It enhances your thought processes,” Ammon said, adding that the proposal is intended to prevent government or private actors from imposing “discriminatory rates, restrictions or limitations that unreasonably burden that right.”

The committee’s questions focused on how the amendment would interact with encryption, network security and public‑safety limits. Representative McFarland asked whether the amendment should explicitly mention encryption; Ammon replied that encryption is “necessarily involves computation” and he thought the amendment’s wording implicitly covered it but that clarity could be useful. Representative Turner asked whether the first sentence could preclude ordinary security measures such as authentication or network access controls; Ammon compared the proposed right to the freedom of the press—protecting the right to use a medium, not a state obligation to provide others’ resources.

Representative Smith raised a common statutory concern: whether people convicted of violent or sexual crimes should be able to use computational tools in ways that could harm the public. Ammon answered that, as with other constitutional rights, limits exist where the right is abused and that the amendment’s phrase “unreasonably burden” would moderate absolute claims.

Representative Horrigan and other committee members pressed on energy and infrastructure externalities tied to compute‑heavy data centers, citing historical examples around cryptocurrency mining and the energy demands of AI model training. Ammon acknowledged those concerns but said he did not believe compute would “eat up the whole economy,” and framed the amendment as promoting an environment favorable to innovation and startups.

Sarah Scott, deputy state director for Americans for Prosperity, testified in support. She told the committee that she sees the amendment as a way to protect innovation from regulatory uncertainty and to keep New Hampshire competitive for technology firms. Scott said the amendment should be written simply because the text will go to voters.

Committee members debated whether a narrow or broader drafting approach would be more likely to succeed with voters and whether the amendment should explicitly carve out encryption, national‑security exceptions, or energy‑grid management authority. Several representatives asked for more drafting detail showing how the amendment would coexist with criminal restrictions, public‑safety laws and private‑sector network management.

The hearing closed with committee members thanking the witnesses. No committee action or vote on CACR 6 was taken at this session.