Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Education Curriculum topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
House advances ‘Charlie Act’ language banning instruction, sends HB 17-92 to finance after heated debate
Summary
After hours of debate over whether HB 17-92 would ban instruction of critical race theory and create a private right of action for parents, the House adopted the committee report and referred the bill to the Finance Committee. Supporters said it protects parents and classrooms; opponents warned it is vague and invites litigation.
The New Hampshire House on Feb. 12 advanced House Bill 17-92, dubbed the "Charlie Act," sending the measure to the Finance Committee after a lengthy, often contentious floor debate over classroom speech and parental rights.
Supporters of the bill, which the committee described as "the Countering Hate and Revolutionary Leftist Indoctrination in Education Act," told the chamber it draws a bright line between instruction and discussion. Representative Perrineau, speaking for the committee, said the bill "prohibits school districts from instructing, not discussing, not mentioning, instructing children in critical race theory and radical gender ideology," and that it "gives parents the right to hold schools accountable" through a private right of action.
Opponents pushed back on several fronts. Representative Coker said the bill is part of a pattern of using government to silence opposing viewpoints, urging colleagues to "lead the party when it strays from what normal people want," and recommending a 'no' vote. Representative Selig warned the measure is "too vague to follow," arguing phrases such as "revolutionary leftist indoctrination" and "LGBTQ ideologies" are not defined in the statute and could produce confusion, uneven enforcement and lawsuits that would divert taxpayer money away from classrooms.
Parliamentary inquiries and floor exchanges underscored the policy stakes. Members asked whether the bill would expose local school districts and teachers to increased litigation and whether it would interfere with schools' statutory duties to protect students from bullying and harassment. Representative Balboni referenced federal court rulings against similar statutes, advising caution about constitutional and litigation risk.
The House recorded a roll-call on the committee report; the body adopted the committee recommendation and referred HB 17-92 to the Finance Committee for further consideration. No final enactment occurred on the floor that day.
What’s next: HB 17-92 will be reviewed by the Finance Committee, which will consider fiscal implications and may hold additional hearings. The House action sends the bill to the next stage of the legislative process rather than authorizing statewide implementation.
Quotes in this article come directly from the chamber record and floor remarks by Representatives Perrineau, Coker and Selig as recorded on Feb. 12.
