September 2026
When I first ran for office, many progressive politicos here in the district and abroad attempted to use me as a cudgel to get Representative Peter Leishman out of office. They’d tell me, ’He’s a secret Republican.’ - ‘He’s only in politics for himself.’ - ‘He gets off on the attention from his Republican colleagues and doesn’t work well with his caucus members.’
These people were hoping that I would blindly accept these assertions, and run with them as truth. They were hoping that I would make my entire campaign about the ferocious rumors they were telling me about Leishman and his record in the State House. I may very well be naive, but I know I’m not as naive as to blindly accept what a politician or politico is telling me as truth.
Now, Peter has been in the State House longer than I have been on this planet. I was open to believing these rumors. It’s natural to have a skepticism of anyone who has survived in politics as long as he has; and I had it.
For a number of reasons, the ongoings of the legislature for the average person are opaque. I’d say it’s mostly due to a lack of a fourth estate, the press, but that’s a story for another letter. Nonetheless, for someone looking in, all they see are the minute and a half clips of the eye-catching bills that our one television news station runs, or if they’re really paying attention then they’ll get a longer summary of those same bills through the print news. The true work of the legislature, the back and forth between members, the fluid nature of the process, and the unique characteristics of it; are often lost context in the flurry of exciting media stories about the rancorous moments.
If you are a member committed to the true work of the legislature, you are lost in the shadow of the flurry. Representative Leishman was lost in the shadow.
As a young man looking in, I had a few benefits when entering elected politics in our House of Representatives. First of which being that I had been geeking out on the New Hampshire legislature as long as I’ve been engaged with history. Second of which being that I did not wait to get involved in politics.
As soon as I was able to get a ride from one person or the other, I was at every event I could be. Which quickly turned into volunteer opportunities, which soon after that landed me on the board of an issues based non-profit working to advance working class politics - all leading to a job on staff of that organization doing education policy organizing in Nashua. All of this work had me going to the State House for a variety of reasons, and directly engaging in the process as a budding adult citizen.
When I chose to run against my districts two incumbents, Peter, and Ivy, the other member representing our district who had been in office just under half my entire life at that point. I did so not because of the votes or behaviors displayed by my incumbents, but because I believed I could do a better job. A better job at engaging with the process of a legislature which hears every bill, a better job at fighting back against those who aim to destroy it, a better job at addressing a fast shifting digital world.
After I concluded in my head and heart that I would put my name onto the ballot in 2022, I knew that I had an obligation to alert the incumbents as well. Ivy and I had a conversation in May of the prior year, but I had never spoken to Peter. Despite being as engaged with the legislature as I was, I had never even met the man. He was lost in the fog of the flurry of both the legislature, and the nasty rumors being spread by colleagues of his with personal vendettas against him.
So I found his AOL email online, and I offered to sit down. Next I knew we had an hours long dinner at Harlows. Talked about family, politics, our philosophies on life and our vision of the future. He told me how his relationships and time served in office led to him passing expanded medicaid, giving insurance to over seventy thousand people, the work he did protecting the retirement of our public employees, and more.
It was clear that the rumors I had been told were not based in truth. It was clear that someone had it out for a legislator who was un-bought, and unchained in a system where that seems to be a requirement.
He bought me dinner, we shook hands, wishing one another luck on our respective campaigns.
After a bit of an arduous back and forth, I was able to sit down with Ivy again for an eight minute long meeting outside of Aesops wherein I was informed we were not allowed to discuss our election.
After being told all these nasty rumors about Peter, and his character, for months by people who knew I was considering running for office. I left the experience of sitting down with both incumbents to inform them of my candidacy against their incumbency with a very different read on the two individuals than I had been told by those in authority saying otherwise.
Peter could have easily ignored my email, or said in any number of polite ways to buzz off, but instead he bought me dinner and gave me wisdom. There’s no doubt that he was sizing me up as an opponent, but he did so respectfully and with grace. That matters.
For the entirety of that first election, he operated with respect and grace. As it became clear that I was no write-off opponent, he didn’t snap back. He didn’t go around saying that a black person could never win in Peterborough as another candidate did. Every time we saw each other, we exchanged a pleasantry, or a joke.
We were political opponents, who were growing into becoming friends. Not because we agreed on everything, but because both of us decided to approach our opposition with respect.
If I had approached my election focused solely on the votes and behaviors displayed by my opponents which I disagreed with, I would have lost. Not because I wouldn’t have been right or wrong in my opinion; but because people today are looking for a politics wherein opponents can engage ferociously, but respectfully. A politics beyond rumors, and underhanded agitation.
When I got elected it became clear very quickly how members such as Peter get the reputations from the activist class that I had been told he had.
Legislating is no simple task, made less simple by the outside groups which have vested interests in legislation being passed. For the Republican caucus, it is the fear of the ‘Americans for Prosperity’ Koch network and their endless amounts of blood money that keeps the traditional Republicans in line with the national bill-mill legislation. Don’t get me wrong, Democrats have their own blood money, but the caucus remains in line instead because of the well funded activist organizations and their bill-mill legislation.
Being on the criminal justice and public safety committee, I had a direct vote on the recommendation our committee gives for the bills related to guns’ vote before the full House. For many, common sense gun legislation is a top priority. Including many of these activist organizations in the state. They, working with the willing members of the democratic caucus, craft legislation on the issue using templates created by the national arm of these organizations. Legislation which, in large part, is crafted for the purposes of an election. Proposed knowing that it will fail, but giving the opportunity to make a speech on the floor.
The three bills being used by the opposition to my incumbency in this current election, the red flag law, a ban on guns within 1000 feet of any educational facility, and a ban on guns at polling places; are specific examples of what I’m talking about. When the ten democrats on the committee caucused on these bills, we had a fairly pointed conversation when it was clear that three of us had objections to the specific language of the bills. Which if passed would lead to consequences ranging from disastrous, to unconstitutionally disastrous.
In response to our objections, a caucus leader in a calm, condescending voice that I will never forget said - sometimes ‘our job is to throw spaghetti on the wall. This issue matters to our voters and that’s all that should matter to us.’
Well, I’m not in the legislature for a food fight, I’m here to legislate. To put the best law on the books, and repeal bad ones. To protect the constitutionally enshrined natural rights recognized by our government. That includes the right to due process, and yes, defense of ones self.
Going into the committee room that day, the three of us who voiced the opposition to these bills were informed that we would be risking our seat on the committee. It was a tense morning. I had troubles leaving for the hour ride up to Concord that frigid winter day, and as soon as I walked in; it was clear that the organizations were out in force for their legislation.
Let me stop here and add a little aside, these organizations rely on these bills moving forward regardless of whether or not they are good legislation. The more ‘work’ they can claim they do for their grants, and other fund raising sources, the more fundraising they will do. So as a legislator it’s important to respect lobbyists, especially when they’re generally on your side ideologically; but I see far too many in this legislature hand their duties over to these organizations and blindly accept what they’re handed because of the general ideological agreement.
That is where the danger lies.
When I sat in my seat that day, I had little on my mind but imagining the headline reactions to voting against a red flag law, school gun ban, and polling place ban. The headlines wouldn’t be big enough to mention I was supporting background checks, voting against allowing violent felons their weapons rights, giving the data of who currently lost their weapons rights to the federal nix database, and other common sense gun safety laws. I had a hunch there wouldn’t be room in the body for it either. That wouldn’t make for as tantalizing a story as, ‘young dem breaks with party to support killing kids in school, and voters at the polls.’
Though in the end, I could not vote based on the reaction to a bill, I have to vote based on the actual bill. I could not vote out of fear of losing my seat in committee, or facing retribution from leadership. I had to vote for what was the best law for our state of New Hampshire.
The image in my head of the other two democrats on the committee who had concerns, crying as they voted out of fear, will never be forgotten.
What members need to understand is, your seat, your license plate, that feeling of importance you get working in a building of such grandeur, is meaningless if you aren’t upholding the responsibilities you swore an oath to. That includes making hard votes knowing that those votes will require explanation. When elected, you get two years, that is it. As soon as you begin gamifying the decisions you make in the state house; ‘oh if I stay silent on this then I can do that.’ - ‘If I do the what’s wrong now, I can do what’s right later.’ Then you will lose yourself.
Politics is a nasty business. It seems easier to operate on rumor, and win by agitating - than it is to operate on principle, and win by engaging with the ideas - not the personalities.
Making politics a little less nasty, will happen when we have people who are unafraid to bend to the whims of the political winds. People, especially elected legislators, who know that the right decision may not always be the most popular; but that doesn’t make it the wrong one. The more leaders make the right decision because it is right, the better our society will be in ways yet unimagined.
People who have a vested interest in stopping Peter and I from crumbling their house of cards, want you to believe that I am an anti-gay, anti-vax, pro-gun to the max, libertarian conservative fascist plant. In the state house sitting around twiddling my thumbs until the opportunity to speak comes around.
If you took some of the rumors, advertisements, and headlines at face value; you'd have to believe it.
Responding to this is a fine line to walk. People who believe that, have genuine real concerns which I in no way want to dismiss. However the source of those rumors can’t be ignored.
In this election, I’ve chosen to instead simply focus on the vision.
The legislature must collaborate on our tax system so that we make it one that doesn’t serve as a second mortgage, a sensibly funded education system which gives the children in it the best education available to us, an environment that will be here for the children of our grandchildren. This is an elevator pitch, but it is also the truth. These are the top issues before the legislature, not to mention the other budgetary issues facing the state, artificial intelligence and the million other small grievances the legislature must act on. If it is to redress those grievances, it must do so working beyond the partisan lens found on most.
In my particular election, I can but hope that people hear my record of having served on the criminal justice and public safety committee, and the relevant subcommittees therefrom - bail, parole study committee, restorative justice study etc. The environment and agriculture committee, and a variety of subcommittees therefrom on specific bills. The Hillsborough County executive committee, and much more. I hope people see the many bills my names on which have become law, and the many more I've worked on beyond that. Legislation around the very issues I lay out in the vision above. There is no honest reading of my record which leads to the conclusion I am who the top at the house of cards of these rumors would like you to believe.
And I am confident this district will rise above. Continuing to send a delegation to the House of Representatives unafraid to collaborate with everyone on the critical issues before the State, so that it exists for generations to come.
Repudiating the nasty business of politics.
Our debate on the 28th of October at 7pm in the Peterborough library, will clear this up.
Nonetheless, it is an honor to serve. To participate in this process. To be a witness to the mechanics of our great Republic. I can’t thank you enough for this opportunity.
Back to all