Written by Andrew Horn of Amherst, NH.

I found ten spelling and/or grammar mistakes in the public listing of New Hampshire Legislature Service Requests (LRS’s), produced by the Office of Legislative Services, which is responsible for drafting legislation, in coordination with legislators. I found nine errors on December 9th among the 878 titles published to the General Court website: the word “in” was spelled “n,” missing an “i”; the word “appropriation” was spelled “appropriatoin,” switching the “o” and “i”; and, the word “issued” was spelled “issused,” with an extra “s.” I found one on November 26th that had since been corrected: “violations” was spelled “volations,” missing an “i.” In addition to these ten mistakes, I found two instances where compound words were incorrectly split. A version of the web page that preserves all spelling and grammar mistakes can be found here.

The Office of Legislative Services is responsible for maintaining the rules of government agencies, drafting legislation, and providing legislative research support for House and Senate members. According to Director of Legislative Services James C. Vara, there are 24 total staff at OLS. He specifies that the office includes 5 administrative staff (3 full-time and 2 part-time), 7 drafting attorneys, 4 research staff, and 7 rules staff (4 full-time attorneys, 1 part-time attorney, and 2 support staff). That breakdown yields a total of 13 attorneys: the 7 drafting attorneys, the 4.5 attorneys who handle rules, plus the Director himself. The Director noted that he has been in the position since November 1 and that although he has not yet publicly outlined a plan to reduce spelling and grammar mistakes, the office takes the issue seriously and may implement a new process soon.

When asked for a comment on the spelling and grammar mistakes, the House Democratic Office had no comment and the Senate Minority Leader’s office said that the Minority and Deputy Minority leaders are currently out of state. I received no response from either the Speaker’s or the President’s office when asked for comment.

I conducted an interview with James Vara, Director of Legislative Services in the New Hampshire State House. I conducted this interview seeking answers to two main questions:

  • Why didn’t anyone in the process paste the titles into Google Docs or otherwise use a spellchecker to find spelling and grammar errors?

  • Even though the errors are in LSR titles, do you think that these mistakes undermine public trust and confidence in the quality of legislative work?

The Director stated that there were 1,153 Legislative Service Requests in process as of that morning, and I had no reason to doubt this figure. He also said that the time frame for writing these titles and bills is extremely tight, which I did not dispute.

When asked why no one ran the LSR titles through a spellchecker before publication, the Director did not offer a direct explanation. Instead, he emphasized the scale and complexity of the office’s work. He noted that the drafting attorneys must produce over a thousand LSR titles within a very short time frame. During the interview, he repeatedly stressed that while they strive for accuracy, human error is inevitable. As he put it, “The only people that no longer make mistakes are underground.”

On the question of whether basic mistakes undermine public trust, the Director did not believe that such errors, especially in preliminary LSR titles, meaningfully affect the perception of the legislature’s integrity or competence. He emphasized that the legislative drafting process is iterative and collaborative. Early, informal summaries posted online are not the final versions of bills and will be reviewed multiple times by attorneys, support staff, legislators, their aides, and other offices—such as Legislative Budget Assistance—before any piece of legislation is finalized. He also framed the LSR stage as just one part of a “large ecosystem” of checks and inputs designed to catch errors over the course of many revisions, rather than at the earliest stage.

Nonetheless, some observers may feel that spelling and grammar mistakes at any stage call attention to details that could undermine trust. While the Director emphasizes that these errors are a natural byproduct of intense workloads and strict deadlines, and that his team is fully dedicated to producing high-quality legislation, the question of public perception remains. Some critics or concerned citizens might argue that a small but visible slip-up prompts questions about other aspects of the legislative process. Such mistakes may prompt questions among some readers about whether they indicate broader problems or whether they are simply an unfortunate result of the heavy workload.

As of the time of publication, it remains unclear whether the Office of Legislative Services will adopt new procedures—such as a mandatory spellcheck step—to reassure the public and limit such errors in the future. Director Vara notes that the absence of a publicly announced plan does not indicate a lack of commitment to address these mistakes, and he welcomes outside feedback and emphasizes the team’s willingness to correct errors once identified. In that spirit, I will update readers on any follow-up measures taken and any new standards implemented to bolster confidence in the legislative drafting process.

In a subsequent follow-up, Director Vara emphasized that the legislative “ecosystem” for producing bills includes multiple stages of redraft and amendment. He encouraged me to consult the OLS legislative orientation manual for further details and referenced the General Court website for additional information.

Here is the complete list of spelling and grammar errors I found:

The word “official” is incorrectly spelled “offical” in LSR number 2025-0121. Retrieved December 9, 2024.

The phrase 'a new vehicles' appears instead of the correct alternatives, 'a new vehicle' or 'new vehicles.' The LSR number is 2025-0252. Retrieved December 9, 2024.

The word “in” is spelled “n” and is missing an “i” in LSR number 2025-0288. Retrieved December 9, 2024.

The word “prohibiting” is misspelled “prohibitting,” with two t’s instead of one in LSR number 2025-0458. Retrieved December 9, 2024.

The word “issued” is misspelled “issused” with three s’s instead of two in LSR number 2025-0501. Retrieved December 9, 2024.

The word “appropriation” is misspelled “appropriatoin” with the final “i” and “o” switched in LSR number 2025-0610. Retrieved December 9, 2024

The word “management” is misspelled “managment,” missing an “e” in LSR number 2025-0664. Retrieved December 9, 2024

The word “accommodate” is misspelled “accomodate,” missing an “m” in LSR number 2025-0711. Retrieved December 9, 2024

The word “violations” is misspelled “volations,” missing an “i” in LSR number 2025-0717. Retrieved November 26, 2024.

The correct phrasing should read: 'relative to tax exemptions for religious organizations managing rental properties.' Instead, it reads: 'relative to tax exemptions religious organizations manage rental properties.' In short, “manage” should instead be “managing.” Retrieved December 9, 2024.

In addition to the ten above spelling and grammar mistakes, there are two additional examples where compound words are incorrectly separated into two words:

The word “nightclub” is incorrectly written as “night club” in LSR number 2025-0378. Retrieved December 9, 2024.

The word “policyholder” is incorrectly written as “policy holder” in LSR number 2025-0562. Retrieved December 9, 2024.

Citizen in a Republic is nonpartisan and non-ideological and is dedicated to publishing opinions addressing political problems in New Hampshire, especially opinion pieces from or about members of marginalized groups. If you want to submit an opinion piece for publication, please submit it here. If you want to submit a letter to the editor for publication, please submit it here.