Steven C. Jones

Citizens Count Issue Survey, 2026

Do you support the “Education Freedom Account” program, which gives students access to the per-pupil share of state school funding to spend on private school or home school expenses?

"The 'Education Freedom Account' program allows wealthy families, most of whom already had their children enrolled in private schools, to get a refund from the state in the form of a voucher. This is a large drain on funding (to the tune of $60 million currently, across the state). It is not fair. It is another example of transferring wealth to wealthier individuals. If the voucher system is to continue, I support an income cap -- means testing -- on whether one can receive a voucher. Vouchers could be based on a sliding scale: that is, 100% of the full price of a voucher could be available to families with a total annual income this is less than a certain percentage of the Federal Poverty Level, then fade out as income rose, then become zero over a certain income level. There is no reason to give funds to wealthy families."

Citizens Count Issue Survey, 2026

Should New Hampshire’s anti-discrimination law allow segregation based on biological sex in some settings, such as bathrooms and locker rooms?

"Seemingly at issue here are competing fundamental liberties -- of equality, dignity, and identity on the one hand, and of privacy on the other. That is, there is the trans student's right to their own gender identity, to the expression of that identity, and to a feeling of equality and dignity while at school. Seemingly in competition with this is another student's right to have privacy in a restroom or locker room from a person of a different biological sex. There is however no evidence that allowing transgender students to use bathroom facilities that correspond to their gender identity jeopardizes anyone else's safety or privacy. Curtains can be used in locker rooms to maintain privacy. In contrast, there is ample research finding that the exclusion of transgender students from bathrooms that correspond with their gender identities can cause both physical and emotional harm to those trans students. According to a 2019 study in the journal Pediatrics (a well-known, well-respected medical journal), trans youth who experienced restroom/locker room restrictions were significantly more likely to experience sexual harassment and sexual assault than those whose facility use was not restricted. That is, there is a documented risk of real harm to trans students when they are barred from using restrooms and locker rooms that correspond to their gender identity, and no evidence of risks to the safety of other students using restrooms and locker rooms if trans students are allowed to do so. On top of this, trans students already face increased stigmatization even without bathroom or locker room restrictions. How do we love all our students? That can be tough at times, but giving them all a sense of dignity and equality is a start."

Citizens Count Issue Survey, 2026

Should New Hampshire ban abortions during the first trimester (e.g. after 6 weeks gestation)?

"As a retired family practice doctor who provided obstetrical care and delivered hundreds of babies, this is a topic that is particularly important to me. First, in my experience, no one wants an abortion. As a medical student, it was part of our curriculum to go to an abortion clinic and observe the procedure first hand, as it was performed. After that experience, I can say that it is perfectly natural to be uncomfortable with this procedure. At the same time, it is vital to keep abortion safe and available as one of several options for folks who find themselves pregnant, maybe even against their will, maybe as they need some time to wrestle with the complex emotions of their relation to the father, whether the pregnancy was planned, and what is happening in their body, and certainly past 6 weeks, when a significant fraction of women may not even know they are pregnant due to irregular menstrual cycles. With this background and perspective, I support guaranteeing the right to an abortion up to the point where the fetus can survive outside the mother -- the so-called "point of viability," which is generally around 23 weeks estimated gestational age. Before 23 weeks, the mother's bodily autonomy is the overriding concern. After that time, the state has an interest in protecting the fetus. Still, even beyond 23 weeks there are a few, limited instances where a "late-term" abortion may be medically necessary to preserve the life of the mother. That said, such late-term abortions should be rare, highly regulated and carefully reviewed before any obstetrician performs one. They should not be automatic. Hence, I support careful regulation of highly limited, late term abortions. For reasons already mentioned, a ban on all abortions after 6 weeks is not practical. A significant fraction of women do not even know they are pregnant until well after 6 to 8 weeks, even 2 months. In sum, the topic of abortion is one on which reasonable people can disagree. In my opinion, significant movement on this issue should be based on the widest consensus possible. Medicine is not easy. It is often clouded with shades of grey. Answers to difficult medical questions should be carefully considered."

Citizens Count Issue Survey, 2026

Should New Hampshire ban abortions during the second trimester (e.g. after 15 weeks gestation)?

"As a retired family practice doctor who provided obstetrical care and delivered hundreds of babies, this is a topic that is particularly important to me. First, in my experience, no one wants an abortion. As a medical student, it was part of our curriculum to go to an abortion clinic and observe the procedure first hand, as it was performed. After that experience, I can say that it is perfectly natural to be uncomfortable with this procedure. At the same time, it is vital to keep abortion safe and available as one of several options for folks who find themselves pregnant, maybe even against their will, maybe as they need some time to wrestle with the complex emotions of their relation to the father, whether the pregnancy was planned, and what is happening in their body, and certainly past 6 weeks, when a significant fraction of women may not even know they are pregnant due to irregular menstrual cycles. With this background and perspective, I support guaranteeing the right to an abortion up to the point where the fetus can survive outside the mother -- the so-called "point of viability," which is generally around 23 weeks estimated gestational age. Before 23 weeks, the mother's bodily autonomy is the overriding concern. After that time, the state has an interest in protecting the fetus. Still, even beyond 23 weeks there are a few, limited instances where a "late-term" abortion may be medically necessary to preserve the life of the mother. That said, such late-term abortions should be rare, highly regulated and carefully reviewed before any obstetrician performs one. They should not be automatic. Hence, I support careful regulation of highly limited, late term abortions. For reasons already mentioned, a ban on all abortions after 6 weeks is not practical. A significant fraction of women do not even know they are pregnant until well after 6 to 8 weeks, even 2 months. In sum, the topic of abortion is one on which reasonable people can disagree. In my opinion, significant movement on this issue should be based on the widest consensus possible. Medicine is not easy. It is often clouded with shades of grey. Answers to difficult medical questions should be carefully considered."

Citizens Count Issue Survey, 2026

Should NH add an income tax on earned income?

"Over the last 10 years, State policy -- enacted by the legislature and passed by the Governor -- has either eliminated or reduced many broad-based, state-wide taxes, such as the Interest and Dividends Tax, resulting in less revenue at the State level. This means there is now less State money to share with towns and cities. To pick up the slack to pay for schools and other local measures, towns and cities in New Hampshire have been forced to increase property taxes. If we are to bring down local property taxes without making painful cuts to public schools and local government, a small amount may come from efficiencies at the local level. This is something that every municipality and school district should be doing already. However, to truly decrease property taxes, new money will have to come from the State. That means we need a discussion about sources of funding at the State level. I support having that discussion. It does not necessarily mean having an income tax but exploring ways to share costs more equitably."

Citizens Count Issue Survey, 2026

Should New Hampshire lower business taxes?

"I do not support cutting taxes further for businesses while individuals are hurting due to high property taxes and other costs. Businesses, especially large and multinational corporations, should pay their fair share of the combined state and local tax burden. The shift of the tax burden toward property taxes and away from other state-wide sources of revenue, including cutting taxes on businesses, has been a legislative trend for the last 10 years. Since 2015, the Business Profits Tax has been cut from 8.5% to 7.5%, and the Business Enterprise Tax has been cut from 0.75% to 0.55%. In order to compensate for this loss of state-wide revenue, localities have had to increase property taxes to pay for public schools and other local services. With regards to the Business Profits Tax, it has been the wealthiest of corporations that have paid the bulk of revenue. Small businesses have not. In 2023, just 98 businesses filing state Business Profits Tax returns -- that is, 1/10th of 1% of all filers -- paid 41% of the entire tax. Combined multinational filers paid 64% of it. Going further, in 2019 three out of four of all Business Profits Tax return filers paid no tax. Cuts to this tax are not a favor to the general store on Main Street, nor to the single-owner café, nor to your favorite independent bookstore. Three quarters of them never paid a Business Profits Tax in the first place. Cuts to this tax are a favor to large and multinational businesses. Lastly and importantly, there is no evidence that the business tax cuts enacted in the last 10 years have generated enough new economic activity, or jobs, to make up for the revenue lost. Through these cuts, we have given large amounts of tax revenue away, and not received much, if anything, in return. Empirically, 'trickle-down' economics does not work."

Citizens Count Issue Survey, 2026

Should the state do more to encourage municipalities to remove zoning barriers to housing development?

"Yes, the state should do more. We face a housing crisis in this state. We need more housing inventory to bring down the cost of a home. Young people are opting to move out of state because housing prices are too high. This bodes poorly for our economy. We especially need smaller and more attainable homes. These can create more housing options for renters, first-time buyers, working families, and older adults looking to down-size to less expensive housing. In addition, we should allow for: 

- Increased housing density, especially in and near downtowns; 

- Smaller lot sizes; 

- Adding height to additional downtown structures (i.e., "building up"); and 

- More permits for duplexes, triplexes and even fourplexes, not just single-family homes."

Citizens Count Issue Survey, 2026

Should New Hampshire do more to encourage the development of nuclear power, including small modular reactors (SMR), in the state?

"Despite concerns about nuclear waste, it is more pressing that we produce electricity without adding greenhouse gases to the atmosphere. New Hampshire should encourage nuclear power and, in particular, small modular reactors, while continuing to encourage solutions to safe nuclear waste storage."

Citizens Count Issue Survey, 2026

Do you support legislation to expand the net energy metering system capacity cap from 1 MW to 5 MW for all residential and commercial customers in New Hampshire?

"I support allowing home owners -- especially those who don't have the ability to have rooftop solar -- to buy into cooperatively owned, solar arrays of 1 to 5 MW. I also support the ability of commercial and industrial customers to opt into such opportunities. We can do so without shifting costs onto other utility ratepayers. Grid fees on all ratepayers and “grid hardening” (initiatives to make the electrical grid more resilient) can still be paid for equitably among all ratepayers. Such legislation could be combined with incentives for battery usage, which contributes to grid resilience. To combat climate change, and for energy independence, New Hampshire needs clean, renewable energy to be part of a diversified state portfolio of energy resources."

Citizens Count Issue Survey, 2026

Should New Hampshire restore funding for the Office of the Child Advocate?

"I support restoring funding for the office. Without the Child Advocate, we lack an independent agency to review case files, investigate complaints and monitor state practices. Dangerous systemic gaps could go unnoticed. The Office of the Child Advocate has an unusual mandate. The Child Advocate is an independent authority, an ombudsman, whose job, by law, is to 'advise in a non-partisan manner the public, governor, commissioners, speaker of the house of representatives, senate president, and oversight commission about how the state may improve its services to and for children and their families.' The Child Advocate's work is to be a voice for children, who cannot vote, to review the state's system of care for children -- from legislative decisions to specific DCYF case reviews -- and to promote the best interests of children in the state. The law to create the office was a bipartisan effort. It was initially enacted in 2017 after a tragedy in which two toddlers were killed by family members despite repeated warnings to New Hampshire's DCYF. The law naturally and inherently can put the Child Advocate at odds with the New Hampshire legislature and state agencies. Thus, it is not surprising in 2025 that, when the last legislature did not like what the Child Advocate was saying, it eliminated funding for the position. (In April 2024, the Advocate was one of several speakers at a press conference to oppose more than 30 bills that targeted LGBTQ youth, including a transgender sports ban and a parental 'bill of rights.' The Child Advocate warned of a 'chilling effect' for children in general. She later met with the Governor urging him to veto four bills. In both instances, the Advocate did her job: she gave non-partisan advice to the public and to the Governor as required by law.) Although it is understandable that partisans might punish an agency they see as opposed to their point of view, the well-being of children throughout the state remains a bipartisan issue, and children deserve a voice on their behalf in state government."

Citizens Count Issue Survey, 2026

Should New Hampshire guarantee the right to access abortion before 24 weeks?

"As a retired family practice doctor who provided obstetrical care and delivered hundreds of babies, this is a topic that is particularly important to me. First, in my experience, no one wants an abortion. As a medical student, it was part of our curriculum to go to an abortion clinic and observe the procedure first hand, as it was performed. After that experience, I can say that it is perfectly natural to be uncomfortable with this procedure. At the same time, it is vital to keep abortion safe and available as one of several options for folks who find themselves pregnant, maybe even against their will, maybe as they need some time to wrestle with the complex emotions of their relation to the father, whether the pregnancy was planned, and what is happening in their body, and certainly past 6 weeks, when a significant fraction of women may not even know they are pregnant due to irregular menstrual cycles. With this background and perspective, I support guaranteeing the right to an abortion up to the point where the fetus can survive outside the mother -- the so-called "point of viability," which is generally around 23 weeks estimated gestational age. Before 23 weeks, the mother's bodily autonomy is the overriding concern. After that time, the state has an interest in protecting the fetus. Still, even beyond 23 weeks there are a few, limited instances where a "late-term" abortion may be medically necessary to preserve the life of the mother. That said, such late-term abortions should be rare, highly regulated and carefully reviewed before any obstetrician performs one. They should not be automatic. Hence, I support careful regulation of highly limited, late term abortions. For reasons already mentioned, a ban on all abortions after 6 weeks is not practical. A significant fraction of women do not even know they are pregnant until well after 6 to 8 weeks, even 2 months. In sum, the topic of abortion is one on which reasonable people can disagree. In my opinion, significant movement on this issue should be based on the widest consensus possible. Medicine is not easy. It is often clouded with shades of grey. Answers to difficult medical questions should be carefully considered."

Citizens Count Issue Survey, 2026

Should New Hampshire reinstate the interest and dividends tax?

"New Hampshire's tax policy is upside down. Currently, the lowest 1/5th of income earners pay over 3 times the percentage of their income to state and local taxes (8.9%) than the wealthiest 1% (2.8%). Wealthier taxpayers should pay their fair share; everyone should contribute; and the total tax burden on New Hampshire residents should remain the same. The Interest and Dividends Tax affected mostly the well-off. In that sense, it was more progressive than a property tax, which hits anyone with a house and is regressive. But it still had a flat tax rate after an individual met its deductible. I support re-instating this tax as a way to tax wealthier individuals more than we currently do, and furthermore I would support graduating the tax with three or so brackets -- i.e., make it progressive -- so wealthier individuals would pay a higher percentage than less wealthy investors. This could be paired with decreasing property taxes in a zero-sum solution: the Interest and Dividends tax (and maybe other taxes) goes up, property taxes go down, with the net burden on all of New Hampshire residents being the same as it is now."

Citizens Count Issue Survey, 2026

Do you support New Hampshire’s current system of public school funding, with about two-thirds of total funding coming from local property taxes?

"Having strong public schools in New Hampshire benefits the economy of the whole state. New Hampshire's current system though -- funding public schools through an over-reliance on local property taxes -- is broken and unsustainable. No state leans harder on property taxes for education than does New Hampshire. In FY 2025, 59% of all combined state and local tax revenue came from property taxes. The nearest competitor was Texas at 41%, and the national average is 27%. I support a more balanced approach to funding public schools -- a more appropriate mix of state-generated revenue balanced with a decrease in property taxes."

Citizens Count Issue Survey, 2026

Should New Hampshire legalize the recreational use of marijuana by allowing home-growing and private use without sales?

"Marijuana has many beneficial uses -- pain control, suppression of anxiety, appetite support for cancer patients, to name a few. At the same time, excessive amounts and prolonged use can lead to addiction. With this background, I support a cautious approach to legalizing marijuana for recreational use in the Granite State. I support legislation that would: 

- allow adults 21 or older to possess small amounts of cannabis, concentrated cannabis, and small amounts of infused products with THC; 

- maintain OUI's for driving while high; 

- create criminal penalties for the sale or resale of such products to people under the age of 21; 

- involve the State in the sale of such products, either through State stores or in coordination with private entities; and 

- use the proceeds on all such sales to pay for addiction services, oversight of addiction and recovery services, drug court and diversion programs."

Citizens Count Issue Survey, 2026

Should New Hampshire legalize the recreational use of marijuana by licensing growers and private retail locations?

"Marijuana has many beneficial uses -- pain control, suppression of anxiety, appetite support for cancer patients, to name a few. At the same time, excessive amounts and prolonged use can lead to addiction. With this background, I support a cautious approach to legalizing marijuana for recreational use in the Granite State. I support legislation that would: 

- allow adults 21 or older to possess small amounts of cannabis, concentrated cannabis, and small amounts of infused products with THC; 

- maintain OUI's for driving while high; 

- create criminal penalties for the sale or resale of such products to people under the age of 21; 

- involve the State in the sale of such products, either through State stores or in coordination with private entities; and 

- use the proceeds on all such sales to pay for addiction services, oversight of addiction and recovery services, drug court and diversion programs."

Citizens Count Issue Survey, 2026

Should New Hampshire legalize the recreational use of marijuana by establishing state-run cannabis stores?

"Marijuana has many beneficial uses -- pain control, suppression of anxiety, appetite support for cancer patients, to name a few. At the same time, excessive amounts and prolonged use can lead to addiction. With this background, I support a cautious approach to legalizing marijuana for recreational use in the Granite State. I support legislation that would: 

- allow adults 21 or older to possess small amounts of cannabis, concentrated cannabis, and small amounts of infused products with THC; 

- maintain OUI's for driving while high; 

- create criminal penalties for the sale or resale of such products to people under the age of 21; 

- involve the State in the sale of such products, either through State stores or in coordination with private entities; and 

- use the proceeds on all such sales to pay for addiction services, oversight of addiction and recovery services, drug court and diversion programs."

Citizens Count Issue Survey, 2026

Should New Hampshire require new voters to provide proof of U.S. citizenship, such as a birth certificate or passport, when registering to vote?

"Previously, New Hampshire state law was that, within 30 days of an election and on election day, an eligible voter could swear an affidavit attesting to their citizenship in order to register to vote. That changed with a law that took effect after the election in November 2024. The new law required documentary proof of citizenship for all voters when registering to vote for the first time in New Hampshire. The new law aimed to keep noncitizens from voting. It was ruled unconstitutional by a Federal District Court judge in May, 2026, leaning heavily on the following rationale. There is no evidence that significant numbers of non-citizens vote in our elections. Of the 8.3 million ballots cast in New Hampshire elections from 1998 to 2024, there were 47 documented cases of wrongful voting, only eight of which involved non-citizens -- which is less than one in a million. Furthermore, evidence shows that swearing an affidavit attesting to citizenship is the only method of proof available to a significant number of New Hampshire voters. A 'conservative' estimate by Michael Herron, a Dartmouth professor, is that between 5,433 and 31,291 -- and as many as 59,583 -- eligible voters in New Hampshire currently lack documents to prove their citizenship. In sum, voter fraud in the Granite State is rare. Voter fraud by noncitizens is exceptionally rare and is certainly not enough to throw an election one way or another. At the same time, requiring documentary proof of citizenship would mean that thousands, or even tens of thousands, of eligible voters in New Hampshire would be kept from voting. This would hurt voters of all stripes: Independents, Republicans and Democrats alike."

Citizens Count Issue Survey, 2026

Should New Hampshire allow at least 10% of students in each school district to enroll in a different public school, regardless of where they live?

"Parental choice is a good thing, but it has to be based in a fair funding system. 10% Open Enrollment would disrupt planning due to less predictable enrollment numbers. Furthermore, disputes over placement decisions and funding the associated services for special education and students with 504 medical plans, could end up in court, which is expensive for all concerned. (For example, the proposed 10% Open Enrollment system would create uncertainties about how students' home districts would ensure children are getting legally required special education services at their new school.) New Hampshire already has an open enrollment law which allows students in most communities to attend schools outside their districts. Currently, communities can adopt policies that limit the number of non-resident students who can enroll in their schools, and prohibit their students from using open enrollment to go elsewhere. Communities need this ability in order to control costs."

Citizens Count Issue Survey, 2026

Should New Hampshire repeal the ban on abortion after 24 weeks gestation?

"As a retired family practice doctor who provided obstetrical care and delivered hundreds of babies, this is a topic that is particularly important to me. First, in my experience, no one wants an abortion. As a medical student, it was part of our curriculum to go to an abortion clinic and observe the procedure first hand, as it was performed. After that experience, I can say that it is perfectly natural to be uncomfortable with this procedure. At the same time, it is vital to keep abortion safe and available as one of several options for folks who find themselves pregnant, maybe even against their will, maybe as they need some time to wrestle with the complex emotions of their relation to the father, whether the pregnancy was planned, and what is happening in their body, and certainly past 6 weeks, when a significant fraction of women may not even know they are pregnant due to irregular menstrual cycles. With this background and perspective, I support guaranteeing the right to an abortion up to the point where the fetus can survive outside the mother -- the so-called "point of viability," which is generally around 23 weeks estimated gestational age. Before 23 weeks, the mother's bodily autonomy is the overriding concern. After that time, the state has an interest in protecting the fetus. Still, even beyond 23 weeks there are a few, limited instances where a "late-term" abortion may be medically necessary to preserve the life of the mother. That said, such late-term abortions should be rare, highly regulated and carefully reviewed before any obstetrician performs one. They should not be automatic. Hence, I support careful regulation of highly limited, late term abortions. For reasons already mentioned, a ban on all abortions after 6 weeks is not practical. A significant fraction of women do not even know they are pregnant until well after 6 to 8 weeks, even 2 months. In sum, the topic of abortion is one on which reasonable people can disagree. In my opinion, significant movement on this issue should be based on the widest consensus possible. Medicine is not easy. It is often clouded with shades of grey. Answers to difficult medical questions should be carefully considered."

Citizens Count Issue Survey, 2026

Should state law cap how much local school districts can increase their budget each year?

"A new law enacted this July requires for the first time a measure on the general election ballot on whether to impose a school district tax cap at a local level. This law was hastily drafted, is confusing, and should never have been adopted. Discussions of, and voting on, school budget tax caps should happen instead in the context of discussions and voting on annual school budgets. Already, State law allows communities to enact tax caps if enough residents propose a cap. Further, without a specific tax cap, voters already may vote down a new budget and leave a default budget in place. The tax cap for a local school district (which folks are asked to vote on in November) would limit local school spending to the rate of inflation and limit administrative costs. Supposedly, a cap would not affect student instruction or services, but that is not possible to guarantee. Additionally, if enacted these caps would lock in public education disparities between wealthy and less wealthy communities. Specifically, the new law states, "(1) the local property tax levy may not grow beyond the prior year's amount, adjusted for inflation and new construction; (2) SAU central office spending may not exceed 6 percent of total school district appropriations; and (3) bonded capital costs are excluded from both limits." Although this cap can sound reasonable, large portions of school budgets are not discretionary and not subject to the routine rules of "general inflation." For example, the cost of insurance in general, and of health insurance in particular, can jump some years by 8 to 10%, far beyond the general rate of inflation. Negotiated, multi-year contracts with unions can also lead to jumps one year (and stability in subsequent years) beyond the consumer price index for urban consumers for the Northeast Region (the gage of standard inflation that the law requires we use). If these costs rise beyond the general rate of inflation, then cuts will need to be made elsewhere, typically by letting staff go, as personnel costs are a main driver of school budgets. Herein lies the problem. It is impossible to guarantee that cuts will not be to student instruction or services. Lastly, tax caps would lock in property tax disparities between rich and poor communities, and they would not reduce property taxes for anyone. Wealthy communities that have been able to fund their schools at above average levels would be less affected by a cap. And if they reject a cap (as many well-off communities are apt to do), then they would not be affected at all. Meanwhile, less well-off communities that enact a cap -- districts with below average property values -- would be at an even greater disadvantage than they already are. The result: the disparity in funding for education -- and therefore in the quality of educational options -- between less well-off communities and those more well-off could become locked in. The path forward is for the state to take on its fair share of school funding, through state-generated revenue, and provide relief for property tax payers in compensation."

Citizens Count Issue Survey, 2026

Should NH pass stricter gun control laws?

"Approximately 3 years ago, 18 people were killed when an Army reservist opened fire at a bowling alley and a bar and grill in Lewiston, Maine. The reservist was in the midst of a downward, mental-health spiral. His state was known to many who were close to him. It led to his hospitalization, and it left him paranoid and delusional. And yet, he had access to a gun. In response to this terrible event, last year Maine passed a "red flag" law by referendum. The law takes the common-sense position that family members should be easily able to petition a court to restrict a potentially dangerous person's access to guns. This is the sort of common-sense legislation that I support -- one that does not restrict hunting (which I support!) or self-defense, but that safeguards the public from a person in the midst of a mental health crisis who otherwise has easy access to guns."