Delaware State House of Representatives - Republican Caucus

Call Directions Website Contact the organization

Delaware State House of Representatives - Republican Caucus The Delaware House of Representatives Republican Caucus maintains this page to provide news and enco We encourage the independent verification of all content.

Policy for Participation on this Page

These terms of use are maintained by the Delaware House Republican Caucus for this page and other official government social media sites used by our members or the Caucus. Members of the public who post, comment or otherwise submit content to this page agree they have read, understand, and will abide by the following policy, terms, and conditions. The purpose of these social media accounts is to provide timely information about proposed and/or pending legislation and government initiatives and how state government affects you. Any person or entity that uses this page accepts the terms of this policy. Further, the Caucus reserves the right to discontinue this page at any time. This account shall be used for official communication and public participation only. It is prohibited to use this page to communicate any matter that is off-topic to the official communication for which the Caucus has established and is maintaining the account. The following communications shall not be tolerated:
• Ethnic and racial slurs.
• Profanity.
• Personal insults.
• Spam.
• Political campaigning or soliciting funds.
• Material that is harassing, threatening, defamatory, fraudulent, discriminatory under federal, state, or local law, or sexually explicit. Gratuitous links to sites and repeat submissions of the same (or very similar) contributions are viewed as spam and may result in the content being removed and blocking the responsible posting party from any other access to the page. We will remove spam and content that promotes services or products, or gives the appearance of legal, medical, or financial advice. Following, “friending,” liking, or sharing content from a person and/or persons, or organizations is not an endorsement by this page and is only intended as a means of communication. The Delaware House Republican Caucus, its members, and staff are not responsible for any content posted by independent parties. While it is our intent to provide accurate information, we cannot fully guarantee the accuracy of the content appearing on our managed websites, web pages, or social media accounts. Comments on this page are publicly accessible. It is vital that you refrain from posting and/or sharing sensitive personal information, such as Social Security numbers, phone numbers, mailing addresses, or home addresses. Comments in violation of this policy may be removed without notice and may result in the suspension of the privilege to post information in the future. Comments related to election campaigns or commercial activity will also be removed. Communications made through this page will in no way constitute a legal or official notice or comment to the Delaware House Republican Caucus or any official or employee of the Caucus for any purpose. Last Revised: July 25, 2023

NEWS & ANALYSIS:Will Controversial Affordable Housing Bill Actually Achieve its Goals?OCTOBER 11, 2026 -- On Wednesday, ...
10/11/2026

NEWS & ANALYSIS:
Will Controversial Affordable Housing Bill Actually Achieve its Goals?

OCTOBER 11, 2026 -- On Wednesday, Governor Matt Meyer ceremonially signed Senate Substitute 2 for Senate Bill 23, disputed legislation that passed both chambers of the General Assembly on a contested vote. The event was staged to highlight the measure, which had been signed into law nearly three months earlier.

Also known as the Housing for Every Delawarean Act, the new law, sponsored by Sen. Russ Huxtable (D-Milton, Dewey Beach) and Rep. Kendra Johnson (D-Bear, New Castle), aims to increase the availability of affordable housing. However, the bill's methods for achieving its goals are hotly disputed.

The new law requires counties and municipalities with more than 2,000 residents to incorporate affordable housing plans into their comprehensive plans, aiming to make 20% of homes affordable.*

One of the statute’s most controversial aspects is that it establishes a “by-right” review for residential projects that comply with local zoning requirements. Projects meeting this standard can bypass the public hearing process and don't require waivers, special permits, or other discretionary approvals. County and municipal governments must allow it to move forward.

This situation played out recently in Kent County. In early July, the county’s Regional Planning Commission voted 5–1 to deny the proposed Harmony Hills II housing development over several concerns, including the project's single entrance and exit. However, the developers appealed, and the Kent County Levy Court approved the Camden-area project last month, noting that SS 2 for SB 23 compelled their decision.

“My opinion is Huxtable’s Senate Bill 23 tries to fool the people by suggesting it provides affordable housing whereas its purpose is not affordable housing at all,” said former Democratic Sussex County Council member Joan Deaver in a recent social media post. “Its purpose seems to deny the rights of local citizens who used to have public hearings for their testimony on all development applications.”

In a press release issued this week, Sen. Huxtable described his legislation as collaboration “with our local governments to drive outcomes that ensure the workers who serve our communities have the chance to live in them. The Housing for Every Delawarean Act does just that by giving local governments the tools to plan for balanced communities and boost our stock of diverse, affordable housing."

While local governments have some limited latitude under the law, it also imposes broad mandates. For instance, zoning reforms and land use plans must allow increased residential density and authorize a broader range of housing types without requiring conditional-use permits or special exceptions.



Additionally, local jurisdictions must adopt at least five strategies from a list of 11 options, including density bonuses, reduced fees, expedited permitting, and conversion of commercial properties.

Many residents and elected officials in areas already struggling with rapid-development pressures, such as lower New Castle County and eastern Sussex County, have viewed a law that is likely to increase those challenges with skepticism.

The Delaware League of Local Governments, a nonpartisan, nonprofit organization of local government leaders, lobbied against the legislation, noting that its mandates largely usurp local discretion without any assurances that it makes housing more affordable.

SS 2 for SB 23 relies heavily on the idea that making it easier to build more homes faster will improve housing affordability. Critics of the bill concede that removing development restrictions and requiring more housing density should increase availability, but they say availability and affordability are not synonymous.

Housing demand plays a major role in the law's potential to achieve its goals.

Compared with surrounding states, Delaware’s low local property tax rates have incentivized migration into the state. Based on 2024 data, the Tax Foundation reports that Delaware has a significantly lower median effective property tax rate (the annual tax bill as a percentage of a property's value) than New Jersey, Maryland, or Pennsylvania. For instance, the Garden State's effective median property tax rate is three-and-a-half times higher, and Pennsylvania’s rate is more than double Delaware’s.

There is no indication this housing-sales driver will not continue well into the future.

Additionally, a study by the Delaware State Housing Authority found that the state has an existing shortage of nearly 20,000 affordable rental units for low-income households. The new statute does not guarantee that market prices will fall or that homes already out of reach of modest-income families will become any more obtainable. That concern is all the more worrisome considering the average rate for a 30-year fixed mortgage currently tops 7.4%.

Despite the enthusiastic optimism expressed by the bill’s supporters less than four weeks before the general election, the outcome of enacting SS2 for SB 23 will not be fully known for years. The key question in evaluating this law is not just whether more homes are built in the First State, but whether enough homes are built in the right places at price points that meaningfully improve affordability for the people the law is purportedly intended to help.

-- * Affordability is defined in the bill in terms of the Area Median Income (AMI), which varies by area, the number of people in the household, and whether citizens are renting or purchasing. The law sets two income thresholds: one for rental housing (households earning up to 80% of the AMI) and another for homeownership (households earning up to 120% of the AMI). Although it's not in the law, standard budgeting models suggest that no more than a third of gross income should go toward housing, including rent or mortgage payments, taxes, and insurance.

OPINION:  Governor Vetoes Reform Bill, Choosing to Retain Unlimited Power Over CitizensBy Joseph FulghamDirector of Poli...
10/06/2026

OPINION: Governor Vetoes Reform Bill, Choosing to Retain Unlimited Power Over Citizens

By Joseph Fulgham

Director of Policy & Communications

Delaware House of Representatives

Republican Caucus

OCTOBER 5, 2026 -- Governor Matt Meyer recently rejected a bipartisan effort to reform Delaware law and add a check on the unlimited power his office wields during a State of Emergency.

Last Wednesday, the governor vetoed House Substitute 1 for House Bill 329 (as amended) – a decision he delayed until the last possible moment, when he was legally forced to act.

To understand what is at stake, a little context is needed.

At present, a governor can declare a State of Emergency in response to an emergency or disaster, or when such an occurrence is imminent. A State of Emergency can be maintained for up to 30 days and then renewed for an additional 30 days, an unlimited number of times. During the State of Emergency, the governor becomes an autocrat, able to unilaterally issue executive orders that carry the weight of law.

No one disputes that the state’s chief executive needs such power to quickly and decisively deal with a manmade or natural occurrence that suddenly endangers the public welfare. This sweeping authority had never been questioned until COVID-19 appeared.

After declaring a State of Emergency in March 2020, Governor John Carney maintained it for two years through a series of rolling renewals, issuing hundreds of edicts contained in dozens of executive orders during that span. These orders carried the weight of law and impacted the daily lives of every Delawarean in countless ways.

Delaware had never experienced a State of Emergency maintained for such a long span. It quickly demonstrated the need for change.

Over those two years, thousands of Delawareans contacted their state legislators expressing wide-ranging concerns about the governor’s orders. Those constituents often cited valid concerns about equity, safety, effectiveness, violations of constitutional freedoms, business viability, the quality of remote public education, and more. State lawmakers could do little beyond sharing their objections with the governor’s office and asking his staff to bring them to his attention. Citizens were powerless to impact the process because their elected officials had no recourse when the governor issued an order.

Under the circumstances of the pandemic, the courts were also not much of a check on gubernatorial authority.

The purpose of HS 1 for HB 329, sponsored by State Rep. Rich Collins (R-Millsboro), was to give Delaware citizens the ability to be heard, through their elected representatives, should such a situation ever recur.

Under the proposal, the governor would continue to be able to declare and maintain a State of Emergency for up to six consecutive months (180 days). The governor could renew the order, but the General Assembly could amend or terminate any subsequent renewal through a concurrent resolution.

The bill also pointedly included a clause that it would not take effect until after Gov. Meyer left office, even if elected to a second term. This legislation would not affect his administration.

In his eight-page veto message, the governor complained that the bill “tries to give the General Assembly the power to act with the force of law without requiring it to follow the constitutional lawmaking process.” That objection is transparently hypocritical. This is precisely the authority the governor’s office currently wields during a State of Emergency. Giving the state legislature the ability to check the governor’s unfettered power does not skew the process; it balances the scales.

The governor’s veto message also contended that “in an emergency, divided command means delayed action, confused responders, and blurred accountability. When public safety is at stake, Delaware needs one clear chain of command and one official the public can hold accountable.”

Both points are ludicrous. As previously noted, the reform bill keeps the governor’s ability to declare and maintain a State of Emergency for up to six months intact, as well as the unlimited authority to issue unquestioned orders. The emergency declaration could still be maintained afterward. The only change would be that after the first 180 days, state lawmakers would have a seat at the decision-making table.

The second aspect of the governor’s objection, accountability, strikes at the heart of the matter. At present, citizens have no available option to hold a governor accountable during a State of Emergency. None. The governor is driving the car, and citizens are restrained in the back seat along for the ride.

At an unfortunate time in our state and nation, when Republicans and Democrats cannot seem to agree on anything, Delaware’s lawmakers found common ground on the need for reform. This bipartisan bill cleared the House and the Senate unanimously.

When the 154th General Assembly convenes next year, legislators should return to this topic and seize the opportunity to improve our state’s emergency response laws, safeguarding the right of all Delawareans to have their voices heard.

NEWS: Controversial Law to Provide Free Drug Paraphernalia to Addicts Signed Into LawSUBHEAD: Governor Meyer Issues an E...
10/04/2026

NEWS: Controversial Law to Provide Free Drug Paraphernalia to Addicts Signed Into Law

SUBHEAD: Governor Meyer Issues an Executive Order to Implement the Law, Addressing Earlier Concerns Raised by House Republicans

OCTOBER 4, 2026 -- Several days ago, Gov. Matt Meyer signed into law legislation to provide free supplies to facilitate the use of illicit drugs by people suffering from substance addiction.

Senate Bill 249 (as amended) requires the Division of Substance Abuse and Mental Health to license public programs for distributing items used for “injecting, ingesting, inhaling, or otherwise introducing substances into the human body.” These supplies include “needles, syringes, cookers, cotton, tourniquets, clean water, mouthpieces, filters, and straws.”

These programs would be designed to encourage “peer-to-peer distribution” of state-supplied sterile drug paraphernalia. Participants would be granted anonymity, but would receive referrals for primary and behavioral healthcare and vaccinations, assistance with transportation and housing needs, and enrollment in public benefits programs.

The legislation also decriminalizes the possession of drug paraphernalia, but maintains felony violations for selling, delivering, or manufacturing the same items.

When the measure was debated in the House three months ago, State Rep. Nnamdi Chukwuocha (D-Wilmington), a prime sponsor of the bill, characterized the legislation as an extension of the needle exchange program, which Delaware authorized 20 years ago. The program was updated in 2023, dropping the requirement for a one-for-one needle exchange in favor of a needs-based approach, which the new law mimics.

During the House debate, State Rep. Valerie Jones Giltner (R-Georgetown), in photo, a nurse and a member of the House Health & Human Development Committee, said that while the needle exchange program has been successful in its goals of reducing the spread of infections, she questioned the wisdom of expanding the drug paraphernalia distributed by the state.

“We are basically engaging in malpractice,” she said. “We are taking the research from a needle exchange program and translating it to mean that by giving them a cooker, cotton, and tourniquets, we’re going to reduce overdoses.”

Rep. Jones Giltner said the bill should be restructured to focus on what studies have verified as effective in reducing overdose deaths. “Let’s stick with the science,” she urged her colleagues.

State Rep. Mike Smith (R-Pike Creek Valley) echoed the sentiment. “My mother and my uncle both died of an overdose, he said. “I found both of them…I can understand the emotion behind wanting to support (this bill).”

Rep. Smith said the bill's proposals should first be piloted and evaluated before full statewide implementation. “This is the type of thing you want to be science-based," he told the chamber in June. "You want it to be data-driven before we make the decision, because we want that statistic to continue to go down.”

Ultimately, House and Senate Democrats passed the bill without any amendments addressing the Republican suggestions.

However, Governor Matt Meyer apparently agreed with the points made by Reps. Jones Giltner and Smith. In signing the bill on Wednesday, he also issued Executive Order 28, establishing protocols for how the new law will be implemented. The order requires medically informed regulations, measurable outcomes, phased implementation, and ongoing consultation with public health and public safety officials.

Under the order, the Department of Health and Social Services (DHSS) will prioritize existing syringe services and other interventions with an established evidence base, including naloxone distribution, infectious disease screening, drug-checking supplies, wound care, overdose education, safe disposal, and connections to treatment, housing, and other services.

For components of the law where the evidence is still emerging, the executive order establishes additional safeguards. Any subsequent expansion of state funding for drug supplies will require a written determination from the DHSS Secretary that the preceding phase of the initiative produced positive public health results without significant unintended harm.

The order also requires DHSS to establish clear baseline measurements and track performance outcomes, report its findings to the governor, and share them with the public.

ELEPHANT'S GRAVEYARD: A CONTINUING OPINION FEATURE LOOKING AT BILLS SUPPORTED BY HOUSE REPUBLICANS DURING THE 153RD GENE...
10/01/2026

ELEPHANT'S GRAVEYARD: A CONTINUING OPINION FEATURE LOOKING AT BILLS SUPPORTED BY HOUSE REPUBLICANS DURING THE 153RD GENERAL ASSEMBLY THAT DID NOT BECOME LAW...BUT PROBABLY SHOULD HAVE.

THIS INSTALLMENT: Bills Seeking to Increase Electricity Supply and Eliminate Needless Expenses Left to Die

OCTOBER 1, 2026 -- Several measures sponsored by House and Senate Republicans to lower power costs and increase electricity supply failed to advance in the 153rd General Assembly. Here are examples of some of the proposals and their fates:

-- Encouraging the Construction of Efficient, New Power Plants

HOUSE BILL 186: State Rep. Kevin Hensley (R-Townsend, Odessa, Port Penn) and State Sen. Brian Pettyjohn (R-Georgetown) sponsored this bipartisan bill to increase power generation in Delaware. It would incentivize the construction and operation of up to three high-efficiency combined-cycle gas turbine generation facilities, with outputs between 100 MW and 500 MW, by creating an Electricity Production Tax Credit (EPTC) and bonus credits.

Two 500 MW plants would provide more than enough electricity to serve every residential dwelling in the state at peak demand.

Combined-cycle gas turbine power plants are a proven technology that can provide significant dispatchable power to meet Delaware’s growing energy needs. These facilities are a foundation of modern energy grids, offering a blend of operational flexibility and lower environmental impacts than most traditional power plants. Rep. Hensley said the proposal would increase cost-effective production within the state. Delaware currently imports most of its electricity, which reduces energy security and adds transmission expenses.

The bill would not require any public expenditure.

STATUS: Died in the House Revenue & Finance Committee. A reworked and improved version of the legislation is expected to be introduced in the upcoming 154th General Assembly.

-- Curtailing an Ineffective Program Costing Ratepayers Cash

HOUSE BILL 80: The Renewable Portfolio Standard is the percentage of electricity that utilities must source from renewables. This is presently set at 25.5% and will increase annually, topping out at 40% in 2035.

“The thing is, Delaware does not have enough renewable energy to meet the current mandate, let alone the future,” said State Rep. Mike Smith (R-Pike Creek Valley). “But our state allows utilities that can’t hit the mark to buy their way out of it with 'alternative compliance payments' (ACPs)."

In 2025 alone, Delmarva Power customers paid $14.3 million in ACPs—costs that were passed along to ratepayers.



Rep. Smith’s proposal would have rolled back the Renewable Portfolio Standard to 10% and frozen it for 10 years, providing time to build new renewable energy capacity and connect it to the regional grid while giving ratepayers some needed relief.

STATUS: The bill died in the House Natural Resources & Energy Committee after being tabled.



-- Eliminating the Tax You Didn’t Know You Were Paying

SENATE BILL 65: Delaware belongs to a group of 11 states called the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI), initially formed to cut carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions from power plants.

In these states, fossil fuel generators must buy “allowances” to emit CO2. These costs are quietly passed along to ratepayers. In 2025, Delaware ratepayers collectively paid an additional $12.3 million in RGGI-imposed costs. Participating states have reduced their annual power sector CO₂ emissions by about 50% since the program's 2005 benchmark year, far exceeding the program's initial goals.

This proposal, sponsored by Sen. Gerald Hocker (R-Ocean View) and State Rep. Bryan Shupe (R-Milford South), would remove Delaware from the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative, eliminating the hidden tax it imposes on Delawareans.

Supporters of the bill say Delaware's residential electricity costs are higher than in most states and that continuing Delaware's membership in a program that has already met its objectives is a needless burden on ratepayers. Exiting the program will give Delaware decision-makers more flexibility to pursue prudent energy policies while improving affordability.

STATUS: The bill died after spending more than a year awaiting action in the Senate Environment, Energy & Transportation Committee without receiving a hearing.

NEWS: Court Ruling and a New Law Combine for Peculiar Effect on Young Adult Hunter Supervision Requirements-- State Rep....
09/29/2026

NEWS: Court Ruling and a New Law Combine for Peculiar Effect on Young Adult Hunter Supervision Requirements

-- State Rep. Jeff Spiegelman and State Sen. Brian Pettyjohn Pledge Corrective Measure in the Upcoming General Assembly --

SEPTEMBER 29, 2026 -- A Delaware Supreme Court ruling earlier this month on a four-year-old state law, combined with recently enacted legislation, has created an odd situation in which some young adults will require a greater degree of supervision than teenagers.

The seeds of this dysfunction began with the enactment of a 2022 state law (House Bill 451) changing the age at which a person could possess, purchase, and sell a fi***rm in Delaware. Although the law was not intended to apply to hunting with a fi***rm, it inadvertently imposed a new requirement that an older adult directly supervise hunters between the ages of 16 and 21.

Last year, a Superior Court judge overturned a portion of the law, ruling that Delaware’s constitutional right to possess and use fi***rms applied to all Delawareans age 18 or older. That decision eliminated the supervision mandate for hunters ages 18 to 20.

A new law enacted earlier this summer (House Bill 427) eliminated the supervision requirement on 16- and 17-year-olds.

However, the Delaware Supreme Court’s decision to overturn the Superior Court’s determination that people between the ages of 18 and 21 enjoyed the same constitutional fi***rm rights as other adults has created an irrational situation. While 16- and 17-year-olds hunting with a fi***rm and meeting certain requirements* can do so without direct supervision, adults ages 18 through 20, hunting with some types of fi***rms cannot.

Eighteen-, 19-, and 20-year-old hunters can hunt without the direct supervision of an older adult when using a sh***un, muzzleloader, handgun, or a r***e using straight-walled handgun am******on. However, if hunting with a rimfire or centerfire r***e, they must legally be under direct supervision.

“This is exactly the type of confusing and unfair patchwork of requirements I was trying to address by sponsoring and advocating for the successful enactment of HB 427 earlier this year,” said State Rep. Jeff Spiegelman (R-Townsend, Smyrna, Clayton), a co-chair of the General Assembly’s bipartisan Delaware Sportsmen’s Caucus (DSC).

Fellow DSC co-chair, State Sen. Brian Pettyjohn (R-Georgetown), agreed this circumstance needs to be fixed. "It makes no sense that a 17-year-old can hunt on their own while a 19-year-old needs someone looking over their shoulder to hunt squirrels with a .22," he said. "These are adults who can vote, sign contracts, and serve in our Armed Forces. Nobody intended this outcome, and I'm confident we can work across the aisle in January to fix it."

Both men said that because the 153rd General Assembly is in recess, nothing can be done immediately to address the problem during the current fall hunting seasons. However, they pledged to introduce legislation in January to give 18-, 19- and 20-year-olds the same hunting freedoms that currently apply to 16- and 17-year-olds.

* Hunters who are 16- and 17-years-old can hunt without direct supervision if they have permission from a parent or guardian, have completed an approved basic hunter education course, and are in possession of a valid hunting license.

# # #

FEATURE: Confusion Over Solicitation and Political Canvassing Creates Friction, ConflictSEPTEMBER 27, 2026 -- With less ...
09/27/2026

FEATURE: Confusion Over Solicitation and Political Canvassing Creates Friction, Conflict

SEPTEMBER 27, 2026 -- With less than six weeks remaining until Election Day, political candidates and their supporters throughout Delaware are actively campaigning, leading to more complaints and confrontations over confusion between solicitation and canvassing.

Decades of case law have established Americans' right to advocate for political, religious, and non-profit causes door-to-door, even in privately owned communities.

Solicitation involves situations in which individuals go door-to-door to sell goods or services. By contrast, canvassing is a noncommercial exercise of free speech guaranteed by the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. In political canvassing, volunteers or candidates visit homes to share information, discuss public issues, register voters, or encourage people to vote. Canvassing for political, religious, and non-profit groups is a protected right. Noncommercial canvassers are legally entitled to go door-to-door, speak with residents, and distribute literature.

Federal court cases over more than sixty years have affirmed and framed these rights, striking down state and local attempts to prohibit or unreasonably restrict such activities.

In Lovell v. City of Griffin (1938), the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) found that a city ordinance requiring a permit to distribute “circulars, handbooks, advertising, or literature of any kind” was unconstitutional. The ruling established a precedent for broadly allowing canvassing and the distribution of flyers, declaring it a form of protected speech.

In Martin v. City of Struthers (1943), the Supreme Court found unconstitutional a municipal ordinance that barred anyone from contacting citizens in their homes to distribute handbills or circulars. Delivering the prevailing opinion, Justice Hugo Black noted that the ability to distribute information to every citizen was “so clearly vital to the preservation of a free society that…it must be fully preserved.”

Generally, constitutional freedoms cannot be suspended inside privately owned communities.

In Marsh v. Alabama (1946), the High Court considered a case in which religious materials were being distributed in Chickasaw, a town exclusively owned by a corporation. Company officials posted the notice stating: "This Is Private Property, and Without Written Permission, No Street, or House Vendor, Agent or Solicitation of Any Kind Will Be Permitted."

A woman handing out literature for the Jehovah's Witnesses was later arrested when she refused to comply with the declaration. In this case, the justices found that even though the community was under exclusive private ownership, the owners could not arbitrarily curtail citizens’ constitutional rights. “Ownership does not always mean absolute dominion,” the court’s prevailing opinion stated. “When we balance the Constitutional rights of owners of property against those of the people to enjoy freedom of press and religion, as we must here, we remain mindful of the fact that the latter occupy a preferred position.”

Political canvassers cannot be required to obtain a license, pay a fee, wear an identification card, be subject to a criminal background check, or get permission from any municipality or homeowners association –- all rights affirmed in decisions made in the decisions of: Murdock v. Pennsylvania (1943); Watchtower Bible & Tract Society of New York, Inc. v. Village of Stratton (2002); and Lovell v. City of Griffin (1938).

While political canvassing is legally protected and cannot be prohibited by state law, municipal ordinance, or most homeowners’ associations, it is not without limits.

Private, gated communities, whose roads are not open to public access, can bar canvassers from entering.

Within reason, restrictions can limit the hours during which political canvassing can occur, such as between 9 a.m. and 9 p.m.

Homeowners have the right to bar canvassers from their properties by posting “No Trespassing” or “No Canvassing” signs.

Canvassers must also leave the property immediately if the homeowner asks them to. Under Delaware law, people who knowingly violate the property owner's wishes could be found guilty of criminal trespass in the second or third degree.

NEWS: Lawmakers Take Part in Special Event at Historic Site to Commemorate 250th Anniversary of IndependenceNew Castle’s...
09/25/2026

NEWS: Lawmakers Take Part in Special Event at Historic Site to Commemorate 250th Anniversary of Independence

New Castle’s Old Court House, one of the oldest surviving public buildings in the nation, hosted a special event Thursday commemorating the 250th anniversary of the signing of the Declaration of Independence and Delaware’s statehood.

On June 15, 1776, the "colonial assembly of the Lower Counties" met at the New Castle Courthouse and passed the Act of Separation, ending the region’s contentious relationship with the Colony of Pennsylvania and the British Empire. Less than three weeks later, Delaware delegates joined the Continental Congress in Philadelphia to sign the Declaration of Independence.

Thursday’s ceremony was part of Delaware’s America 250 celebration. The 153rd General Assembly held a commemorative special session nearly 250 years after the first General Assembly met in the same building to adopt the state’s first constitution.

Appearing in period dress (top photo), State House Republican Whip Jeff Spiegelman (R-Townsend, Smyrna, Clayton) joined other legislative leaders in reenacting aspects of the historic proceedings.

"I told the Speaker and President Pro Tem that I had received a correspondence from the 2nd Continental Congress," Rep. Spiegelman said. "We had declared independence by voting in favor of the motion of independence introduced by Richard Henry Lee, a delegate from the Virginia House of Burgesses. A committee had put together a document listing the reasons, and I read it to the chamber."

In group photo: Among those taking part in the special session were, from left, State Rep. Danny Short, State Sens. Eric Buckson & Brian Pettyjohn, State Rep. Jeff Spiegelman, and State Sen. Dave Wilson.

09/16/2026

NEWS VIDEO: Bill Prompted by Brutal Crime Signed Into Law

-- Grace Peterson Act Sponsored, Supported by House & Senate Republicans --

SEPTEMBER 16, 2026 -- A violent assault and abduction of an elderly Seaford woman prompted legislation that was recently signed into law during a ceremony in Gov. Matt Meyer's Legislative Hall office.

State Sens. Stephanie Hansen (D-Middletown) & Bryant Richardson (R-Seaford) and State Rep. Danny Short (R-Seaford) were the prime sponsors of Senate Bill 292, also known as the Grace Peterson Act.

The new law is intended to close a gap in how reentry housing operators handle former offenders transitioning back into society after serving their sentences.

The measure is named for former Seaford councilwoman Grace Peterson, who was carjacked, kidnapped, robbed, assaulted, and driven over 30 miles south into Wicomico County in her own car. She was bound, pistol-whipped, thrown into the Wicomico River, and left for dead. She was 80 years old at the time of the attack.

Immediately prior to the incident, the 26-year-old assailant had been evicted from the House of Mercy, a reentry house in Seaford located in Ms. Peterson's neighborhood. The eviction was carried out without any discharge plan, transportation, or notification of local police and Corrections officials.

Rep. Short said that for the last three years, Ms. Peterson has advocated for closing the legal loophole that created the circumstances leading to the crimes committed against her.

The new law, which will take effect in six months, will require reentry housing operators to help tenants develop a discharge plan before carrying out an eviction when the tenant's rent is fully or partially paid with state money. The plan must include an effort to directly connect the tenant with shelter and another support arrangement to help ensure continuity.

The legislation also mandates that, in the event of an eviction, the landlord notify the entity making the housing payments and, if the tenant is under the supervision of the Department of Corrections, inform that agency and local law enforcement.



Nearly half of the General Assembly sponsored or co-sponsored the bipartisan bill.

Address

411 Legislative Avenue
Dover, DE
19901

Opening Hours

Monday 8am - 5pm
Tuesday 8am - 5pm
Wednesday 8am - 5pm
Thursday 8am - 5pm
Friday 8am - 5pm

Telephone

+13027444184

Alerts

Be the first to know and let us send you an email when Delaware State House of Representatives - Republican Caucus posts news and promotions. Your email address will not be used for any other purpose, and you can unsubscribe at any time.

Contact The Organization

Send a message to Delaware State House of Representatives - Republican Caucus:

Shortcuts

Share