Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Technology Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
‘Right to Compute’ bill draws pushback from municipalities and AG's office
Summary
Representative Keith Ammon's HB1124, which would enshrine a broad "right to compute," drew support from innovation advocates but sustained concern from the New Hampshire Municipal Association and the attorney general's office that its sweeping definitions and a "compelling interest" enforcement standard could preempt local zoning and make enforcement of existing consumer-privacy laws harder.
Representative Keith Ammon opened the hearing on House Bill 1124, the "Right to Compute" Act, framing computation as a civil-rights-style interest that deserves statutory protection and likening computation to a modern printing press. "Computation is becoming ... the 21st-century version of the printing press," Ammon said, arguing the bill would protect individuals and small developers from overbroad regulation.
Supporters told the committee the bill would promote innovation and ensure New Hampshire remains attractive to companies and developers. Sarah Scott of Americans for Prosperity said state protections can signal that New Hampshire is "open for business" and avoid wrapping new technologies in unnecessary red tape.
Municipal officials and the attorney general's office urged caution. Sarah Burke Cohen of the New Hampshire Municipal Association said, as drafted, HB1124 would create "vague new constitutional-style rights" that could preempt local ordinances governing zoning, noise, and water use by imposing a "compelling interest" standard on enforcement. She warned that towns could face new litigation and that routine local land-use decisions would become constitutional fights.
Brandon Grod, a senior assistant attorney general and chief of the consumer protection and antitrust bureau, said the attorney general's office was neutral on the policy aim but warned the bill's sweeping definition of "computational resources" ("any tool, technology, system or infrastructure whether digital, analog, existing or otherwise") could be read to hinder enforcement of existing statutes, including the state's consumer-privacy law, RSA 507-H. Grod urged redrafting to make clear the bill does not raise the burden of proof for enforcing consumer-protection or criminal statutes.
Committee members repeatedly asked whether the bill would prevent towns from regulating large physical projects such as data centers that consume substantial water and electricity. Witnesses acknowledged the draft includes language addressing common-law nuisance created by physical data-center infrastructure but said the bill should be clarified if the intention is to exempt or preserve municipal authority in those contexts.
The sponsor said he was willing to work with the attorney general's office on revised language. The transcript closes the hearing without a committee vote recorded in the excerpt.
