Committee Summary for House Education Policy and Administration (02/02/2026)

Bill/Time	Type	Title	Sponsor
HB1183 00:05:50.320 - 9:01:16 AM	Public Hearing	relative to the mathematics requirement for high school graduation.	Ladd, Rick(R)[B+]2025
HB1836 01:08:08.799 - 10:03:34 AM	Public Hearing	relative to the input-based accountability system requirements and enforcement.	Ladd, Rick(R)[B+]2025
HB1829 01:27:37.280 - 10:23:03 AM	Public Hearing	modifying the definition of persistently dangerous schools.	Litchfield, Melissa(R)[B+]2025
HB1370 01:45:15.360 - 10:40:41 AM	Public Hearing	relative to the reporting requirements for the identification and accommodation of gifted and talented students.	Litchfield, Melissa(R)[B+]2025
HB1548 02:10:53.119 - 11:06:19 AM	Public Hearing	requiring the department of education to collect and publish data regarding the costs associated with providing special education services to students of public, charter, private, trade, and other K-12 schools or academies.	Hicks, Matthew(D)[D-]2025
HB1488 02:26:01.920 - 11:21:27 AM	Public Hearing	relative to rabies vaccines for animals.	Ammon, Keith(R)[A]2025
HB1212 03:06:45.040 - 12:02:11 PM	Public Hearing	establishing a commission to review draft rules related to minimum standards for public school approval and state academic standards developed by the department of education.	Damon, Hope(D)[CT]2025
HB1778 03:24:57.600 - 12:20:23 PM	Public Hearing	relative to prohibiting the use of personal identity ideology in public school instruction and policies.	Litchfield, Melissa(R)[B+]2025
HB1792 04:04:48.239 - 1:00:14 PM	Public Hearing	prohibiting school districts and personnel from the instruction of critical race theory and LGBTQ+ ideologies in schools as well as establishing a private right of action for violations.	Belcher, Mike(R)[B+]2025

HB1183: Representative Rick Ladd, Hanover, NH Support00:05:50.320 - 9:01:16 AM; Representative Ladd introduced HB 1183, advocating for a minimum of four mathematics courses for high school graduation instead of the current three plus one embedded course. He presented data from a House Committee Services study showing 16 states plus DC require four math credits, and 32 of 80 surveyed NH high schools already do so. He highlighted historical efforts since 2012 to improve math performance, noting poor proficiency rates (e.g., 30% of 8th graders proficient in 2022 NAEP), high remediation needs in college (60% of community college students), and economic impacts. Ladd emphasized math's importance for life skills like balancing checkbooks and argued that embedded courses aren't sufficiently improving scores. He stressed alignment of instruction, curriculum, and assessment with student learning styles, and local school boards' role in approving courses, including potential CTE integration. During Q&A, he addressed concerns on statistics/business courses, CTE embedding, standards review, teacher certification, and cohort tracking, maintaining that four years of math by qualified teachers is essential without added statewide costs.
HB1183: Michael Perez, Associate Head of School, Pinkerton Academy, Derry, NH Oppose00:40:53.440 - 9:36:19 AM; Michael Perez expressed concerns about HB 1183, arguing it undermines effective, modern systems in NH high schools like Pinkerton's math-embedded CTE programs, where certified math teachers collaborate with CTE instructors in areas like electrical technology, welding, and construction to apply math practically (e.g., calculating load/voltage, geometry for structural integrity). He noted college-bound students already take four+ years voluntarily, but mandating traditional math forces impossible choices for CTE-focused students pursuing industry certifications, narrowing paths to college and career readiness. Perez urged trusting local educators' robust embedded programs. He disputed claims of no fiscal impact, highlighting challenges in hiring certified math teachers amid shortages and lengthy certification processes. He affirmed schools take math seriously, preparing students for college or careers.
HB1183: Jerry Fu, Associate Executive Director, New Hampshire School Administrators Association Oppose00:48:15.680 - 9:43:41 AM; Jerry Fu expresses concerns about HB 1183, noting the ongoing shortage of certified math teachers and questioning who would teach additional classes. He appreciates the sponsor's goal to improve student achievement but highlights recent legislative additions like statistics, data analysis, and financial literacy courses that already address related topics such as spreadsheet work and balancing checkbooks. Fu argues that the bill represents an unfunded mandate, requiring additional resources for math teachers or coaches in elementary schools. He emphasizes focusing on quality instruction in the first 11 years rather than adding a fourth year of math, especially given uncertainties about which graduating class it would apply to, as course selections for next year are imminent. Fu questions whether the bill considers CTE programs and integration credits, and notes that not all students are suited for four years of math, potentially impacting motivation and post-high school success without proficiency measures. He suggests clarifying these issues before advancing the bill.
HB1183: Nate Green, Division Director, New Hampshire Department of Education Information Only00:53:19.040 - 9:48:45 AM; Nate Green discusses concerns with HB 1183, particularly the removal of language allowing embedding of mathematics content, which would mandate four years of traditional math courses taught by certified math teachers, eliminating flexibility for integrating math competencies into CTE, business, finance, or science courses. He shares a personal example from his teaching days where calculus-based physics counted as a fourth-year math credit. Green also raises issues with the current statute's requirement for math competency each year in high school, which forces some gifted students who double up on math early to take unnecessary additional courses in senior year despite meeting the four-credit requirement. He notes this disproportionately affects advanced students and suggests reviewing similar requirements for other subjects like ELA. Green provides context on state standards, minimum standards revisions, and proficiency reporting, including opt-out impacts on school accountability. He addresses questions on ELOs, applicability to different school types, and ongoing math initiatives.
HB1183: Caitlyn Bernier, Merrimack, NH Oppose01:01:38.480 - 9:57:04 AM; Caitlyn Bernier, with a special education background, opposes HB 1183 from the perspective of students with math-related IEPs or learning disabilities. She explains that these students already struggle to meet current math requirements and benefit from flexibility to take non-traditional math courses integrated with CTE programs, which help maintain motivation and allow pursuit of other strengths. Removing this option could make graduation more difficult, reduce participation in CTE, and overlook diverse learning needs, despite the bill's intent to improve math proficiency (citing 2025 preliminary results of 44% proficiency in grades 3-8). Bernier also reiterates concerns about it being an unfunded mandate, as previous speakers noted the need for more math teachers.
HB1836: Representative Rick Lad, Sponsor, Haverhill, NH Support01:08:08.799 - 10:03:34 AM; Representative Rick Lad introduces HB 1836, aimed at enforcing the Input-Based Accountability System (IBAS) reporting requirements under RSA 193-E. He explains that while financial reports have enforcement mechanisms like withholding funds, IBAS reports (due January 15 annually, including narratives) lack such 'hammers,' leading to non-compliance. Lad references a 2024 compliance report showing 294 elementary, 70 middle, and 83 high schools, with some fully compliant, partially compliant (deficient in areas like Holocaust education, digital learning, math, health), or not submitting at all—including schools in his district. The bill mandates all schools to submit IBAS reports, eliminates acceptance of NEASC accreditation reports as substitutes (as they don't align with state needs), and authorizes the Commissioner to withhold grant funds (not adequacy aid) until compliance. Lad argues this 'carrot and stick' approach, similar to past grant conditions, ensures reporting without affecting core funding, citing examples like non-compliant districts along the Connecticut River despite warnings.
HB1836: Jerry Fu, New Hampshire School Administrators Association Oppose01:19:18.320 - 10:14:44 AM; Jerry Fu questions HB 1836's implementation, requesting explicit definition of 'grant funds' to avoid litigation ambiguity. He notes high overall compliance (431 of 447 schools) and examines the 16 non-compliant schools, attributing issues to administrative transitions in districts like Newport, Farmington, and Fall Mountain (among the state's poorest). Fu argues withholding funds would disproportionately harm vulnerable, low-income districts rather than incentivize compliance. He recalls past DOE site visits (stopped due to funding issues) to verify compliance and suggests providing technical assistance under the new commissioner instead of punitive measures, emphasizing support over punishment to help districts meet obligations.
HB1836: Nate Green, New Hampshire Department of Education Information Only01:24:31.440 - 10:19:57 AM; Nate Green supports clarifying 'grant funds' in HB 1836 to specify what can be withheld, noting the term is too vague for implementation. He addresses questions on whether this includes state or federal grants (unclear) and provides data context: IBAS reports are collected biennially in even years, with a new report forthcoming. Green notes the department is currently gathering 2026 data to assess repeat non-compliance patterns.
HB1829: Representative Lisa Freeman, Belnap County District 8 Support01:27:37.280 - 10:23:03 AM; Representative Freeman introduces HB 1829, which adds incidents of physical harm (such as simple assault and reckless conduct) and persistently poor academic performance to the criteria for designating a school as persistently dangerous. She notes alignment with a May 7, 2025, US Department of Education memo under ESSA section 8532 for unsafe school choice options, providing copies to the committee for clarity.
HB1829: Bear Christina, New Hampshire School Boards Association Oppose01:29:47.600 - 10:25:13 AM; Bear Christina opposes HB 1829, acknowledging federal guidance but emphasizing it is not law and sets a concerning precedent by including non-dangerous academic factors in the 'persistently dangerous' definition. She notes no New Hampshire schools currently meet the existing criteria, questioning the need to expand it beyond health and safety issues. During Q&A, she discusses the threshold of three incidents from ten categories over three years, argues most listed crimes are serious felonies, highlights potential disparities in academic performance due to socioeconomic factors unrelated to violence, and suggests federal funding impacts are possible but outside her expertise.
HB1829: Caitlyn Bernier, Merrimack NH Oppose01:37:11.440 - 10:32:37 AM; Caitlyn Bernier opposes the bill, expressing concerns that adding poor academics and single incidents like physical harm or hazing could negatively impact large districts, especially lower-income ones, by triggering transfer requirements under 20 USC 7912 and affecting funding. She also notes the added cost of mandating School Resource Officers (SROs) for such districts already facing budget cuts.
HB1829: Nate Green, New Hampshire Department of Education Information Only01:39:18.159 - 10:34:44 AM; Nate Green raises concerns about lines 14-15 on academic performance, noting the undefined term 'persistently poor' and the specific example of Targeted Support and Improvement (TSI) schools, which could identify up to 90 schools compared to 15-18 Comprehensive Support and Improvement (CSI) schools, potentially jumping from zero to nearly 100 designations. He advises against mixing academic and health/safety data, which are handled by different teams, and confirms no departmental request for lines 11-13 additions. He states Title I funding is unlikely impacted and only Title I schools qualify as TSI.
HB1370: Representative Mike Moffett, Merrimack District 4 Support01:45:15.360 - 10:40:41 AM; Representative Moffett introduces HB 1370 for the prime sponsor, referencing the 2021 RSA 189:29B from HB 321, which ranked New Hampshire low in supporting gifted students due to focuses on equity and self-esteem. The original law required districts to report identification and support efforts to DOE, including acknowledging if doing nothing, to stimulate discussion and create a best practices folder. HB 1370 removes the 'doing nothing' reporting requirement to encourage more action, rejecting claims of it being an unfunded mandate as it only involves simple emails. He expresses interest in implementation updates like the best practices folder.
HB1370: Representative Belchure Information Only01:51:08.560 - 10:46:34 AM; Representative Belchure asks Representative Moffett about the technical effects of the bill, suggesting that striking the last sentence removes the requirement for a specific report statement but does not mandate gifted programs, and questions if schools would still need to submit reports with broader content.
HB1370: Representative Moffett Information Only01:52:15.360 - 10:47:41 AM; Representative Moffett, as a co-sponsor, clarifies he is not the prime sponsor and supports raising awareness for gifted education. He agrees the intent is to lessen the burden on schools without programs but notes he had no issue with the current language and would not object if the line is not struck.
HB1370: Representative Hall Information Only01:53:19.360 - 10:48:45 AM; Representative Hall inquires about the contents of the gifted and talented folder referenced in the bill.
HB1370: Representative Woodcock Information Only01:54:24.480 - 10:49:50 AM; Representative Woodcock asks what schools without gifted programs would report if the last line is removed, questioning the implications for compliance.
HB1370: Caitlyn Bernier, Merrimack Oppose01:55:57.199 - 10:51:23 AM; Caitlyn Bernier, a school budget committee member with two children in public school, one in gifted program, opposes the bill due to uncertainty about consequences for not having programs. She describes how budget cuts eliminated their district's gifted program, leading to bored and disruptive gifted students, and notes students fleeing to charter schools. She highlights the lack of funding and fear of tax increases preventing program restoration.
HB1370: Representative Murray Information Only01:59:37.119 - 10:55:03 AM; Representative Murray expresses concern for twice-exceptional gifted students and their higher dropout rates, asking about potential impacts of the bill's changes on existing programs.
HB1370: Nate Green, Department of Education Support02:00:40.400 - 10:56:06 AM; Nate Green clarifies no requirement exists for districts to have gifted policies, and striking the line removes reporting mandates for those without. He supports gifted programs but highlights department capacity issues in data collection, follow-up, and publication due to prioritization of other data. He notes data was collected in 2022-2023 but not published due to resource constraints, advocating for resources to enable effective data work.
HB1370: Representative Cornell Information Only02:03:08.159 - 10:58:34 AM; Representative Cornell asks about access metrics for the gifted folder and suggests hiring staff for data management.
HB1370: Representative Kuger Information Only02:05:00.639 - 11:00:26 AM; Representative Kuger, a former gifted teacher, advocates for the programs and asks if they could fall under special education like in other states.
HB1370: Representative Selig Information Only02:06:49.520 - 11:02:15 AM; Representative Selig raises concerns about socioeconomic and racial disparities in gifted program access and funding impacts on early education.
HB1370: Representative Murray Information Only02:07:52.560 - 11:03:18 AM; Representative Murray asks if reports include data on twice-exceptional students like those on the autism spectrum in gifted programs.
HB1370: Chair Information Only02:08:51.920 - 11:04:17 AM; The Chair ends the hearing on HB 1370.
HB1548: Representative Hicks, Merrimack District 24 Support02:10:53.119 - 11:06:19 AM; Representative Hicks, the prime sponsor with 30 years in education, supports the bill to gather aggregate data on special education costs across public, charter, private, and other schools. He emphasizes that data is neutral and the bill allows flexibility for the Department to define specifics, highlighting the lack of state-level understanding of costs below catastrophic levels in small and large districts.
HB1548: Representative Belchure Information Only02:13:02.320 - 11:08:28 AM; Representative Belchure questions if the granular reporting could expose individual high-cost students to scrutiny, especially in small districts.
HB1548: Representative Murray Information Only02:13:59.679 - 11:09:25 AM; Representative Murray notes the ongoing commission studying special education costs until July 2026 and existing data reports, suggesting the bill might be premature.
HB1548: Representative Belony Information Only02:14:59.440 - 11:10:25 AM; Representative Belony asks about the intent and hoped uses of the data, relating it to costs in charter schools.
HB1548: Representative McDonald Information Only02:16:06.880 - 11:11:32 AM; Representative McDonald questions the 'if' clause regarding data collection, asking if the data is currently collected and why not.
HB1548: Representative Murray Information Only02:17:04.800 - 11:12:30 AM; Representative Murray mentions suppressive data laws protecting student identities in small groups and asks if Hicks is aware.
HB1548: Andrew Bolinsky, Merrimack District 24 Support02:17:04.800 - 11:12:30 AM; Andrew Bolinsky supports the bill as complementary to RSA 186-C:18 on special education aid, providing missing data below the 3.5 times average cost threshold. He notes local districts already have this data via IEPs and budgets, and the bill encourages consistent entry into the NH DOE's special education system (NH SPED). This would enable cost analysis, planning, and discussion on thresholds, including cross-district variations.
HB1548: Representative Cornell Information Only02:19:34.319 - 11:15:00 AM; Representative Cornell asks if local districts have the 0-3.5 times cost data available for sharing.
HB1548: Representative Freeman Information Only02:22:12.640 - 11:17:38 AM; Representative Freeman asks how the state would plan for unanticipated special education costs with this data.
HB1548: Representative Murray Information Only02:23:14.560 - 11:18:40 AM; Representative Murray asks about the 60-day effective date's impact on the ongoing commission's work.
HB1488: Caitlyn Bernier, Merrimack Support02:26:01.920 - 11:21:27 AM; Caitlyn Bernier from Merrimack serves on the school district budget committee and highlights the increasing costs in special education due to mismanagement by the previous director, who failed to pursue reimbursements for high-cost cases. Last year, they hired three part-time special education administrators to handle paperwork for catastrophic aid cases. She supports the bill for its study and findings, emphasizing the need for better information, but cautions about initial and ongoing costs to school districts, especially those without a director due to budget cuts.
HB1488: Nate Green, New Hampshire Department of Education Information Only02:28:13.840 - 11:23:39 AM; Nate Green from the Department of Education notes that the department lacks the specific data categorization required by the bill for special education finance reporting. Implementing it would require additional personnel, software changes, and data collection adjustments, incurring costs beyond the fiscal note's mention of personnel without a dollar figure. He estimates needing a couple of people in the Bureau of Special Education. He also points out that the 60-day effective date is unrealistic for reporting, suggesting rulemaking authority and a longer timeline. In response to a question, he clarifies that a data analyst position from HB 1808 is separate, focused on academic data, not special education finance.
HB1212: Representative Hope Damon, Sullivan District 8 (Acworth, Langdon, Lempster, Gilsum, Washington, Springfield, Cornish, and Claremont) Support03:06:45.040 - 12:02:11 PM; Representative Hope Damon introduces HB 1212, aimed at improving the revision process for Ed 306 minimum standards for public schools, which must be reviewed every 10 years. She notes concerns from the last revision about exclusion of public education voices and advocates for diverse input from educators. Drafted with input from superintendent Christine Downing, the bill creates a 19-member commission including representatives from education associations, teachers, and experts in competency-based education to review drafts and recommend language supporting high standards, evidence-based practices, and transparency. The commission reports to the Commissioner and State Board within 120 days.
HB1212: Representative Timothy O'Hearn, Strafford County District 10 (Durham) Support03:11:22.080 - 12:06:48 PM; Representative Timothy O'Hearn supports HB 1212 as is, noting it doesn't explicitly include charter schools, public academies, interstate districts, or voucher-subsidized providers, but believes the commission must consider them under RSA 193. He views the 19-member commission as sufficiently large and effective without adding more, recommends an Ought to Pass motion, and hopes for passage on the consent calendar by February 12th.
HB1212: Nate Green, New Hampshire Department of Education Information Only03:13:15.840 - 12:08:41 PM; Nate Green from the Department of Education seeks clarification on the commission's duties: reviewing drafts versus recommending new language for minimum standards, citing potential conflicts in the bill text. He also questions the lack of a review timeline, noting that while major revisions occur periodically, small annual changes from legislation (e.g., math credits) would require commission review, potentially delaying implementation. He suggests extending timelines for bills impacting standards and offers to provide clarifying language. In response to Representative Selig, he agrees to suggest a sentence to reconcile the language.
HB1778: Representative Belchure (standing in for prime sponsor) Oppose03:24:57.600 - 12:20:23 PM; Representative Belchure introduces HB 1778 by title, which prohibits teaching personal identity politics in schools and requires the State Board of Education to develop related policies. On behalf of the absent prime sponsor, she conveys a preference for a different solution to the issue, recommending a motion to retain in committee, study, or find inexpedient to legislate (ITL), and concurs with this view.
HB1778: Caitlyn Bernier, Merrimack Oppose03:27:29.200 - 12:22:55 PM; Caitlyn Bernier opposes HB 1778, questioning the vagueness of line 12 regarding 'establishing and maintaining environments promoting the equality of opportunities for all students,' arguing that such environments are not yet established in schools and the concept is unclear in practice.
HB1778: Unknown Speaker Oppose03:28:18.800 - 12:23:44 PM; The speaker expresses concern that the bill prohibits teaching or discussing DEI and historical topics related to race, color, biological sex, sexual orientation, national origin, religion, and gender identity. They question if this means pretending events like slavery and the Holocaust did not happen. They highlight that the bill could lead to lawsuits against schools for answering valid student questions about these topics, causing discomfort to some students, and argue that even studying this bill is unworthy.
HB1778: Representative Timothy Han, Durham Oppose03:30:30.720 - 12:25:56 PM; Representative Han criticizes the bill's vague phrase 'personal identity ideology' and its definition, arguing that individual merit and personal identity are not in conflict. He questions the inclusion of language on gender identity and preferred pronouns, stating everyone has a gender identity and should use corresponding pronouns. He opposes allowing any aggrieved person to sue schools, notes the fiscal note's large cost, and points out the bill does not cover private schools subsidized by programs like EFA, including Catholic schools whose views might conflict with the bill. He suggests amending the bill to remove DEI ban provisions from RSA 186:72.
HB1778: Nancy Brennan, Warner Oppose03:33:59.359 - 12:29:25 PM; Nancy Brennan, a retired public educator from Warner, argues that HB 1778 seeks to homogenize school populations, erase diversity, marginalize minorities, and punish teachers for recognizing each child's uniqueness. She specifically criticizes the prohibition on declaring gender identity or preferred pronouns, seeing it as enabling bullying of transgender individuals. She shares a personal anecdote about a court case allowing misgendering and quotes a teaching philosophy emphasizing the teacher's power to humanize or dehumanize, concluding that the bill dehumanizes and should be eliminated.
HB1778: Heather Barber, Durham Oppose03:36:52.080 - 12:32:18 PM; Heather Barber, a retired University of New Hampshire faculty member in sports psychology, explains social identity theory, which posits that identities like gender, occupation, race, ethnicity, religious beliefs, and family roles shape who we are and how we navigate the world. She argues that understanding different identities is essential for learning about others and that limiting discussions on identities restricts understanding and education. She states that HB 1778 limits education, which is antithetical to school environments, and advocates for expanding learning instead.
HB1778: James McKim, Manchester NAACP Oppose03:39:16.880 - 12:34:42 PM; James McKim, a New Hampshire resident, parent, management consultant, and first vice president of the Manchester NAACP, opposes HB 1778. He agrees it is not appropriate to prioritize personal identity over individual merit but disputes the bill's premise that schools are doing so, stating he has seen no evidence of this as a parent, community member, and consultant. He views the bill as addressing a non-existent problem. He emphasizes that schools teach about historical and ongoing prioritization of certain identities over merit, sanctioned by government, and that recognizing and correcting these injustices is justice, not favoritism, helping students contribute to a more equitable society.
HB1778: Unidentified Speaker Oppose03:41:50.960 - 12:37:16 PM; The speaker urges the committee to find the bill inexpedient to legislate, arguing it undermines equity and merit in education. They highlight the welcoming sign at the New Hampshire border and state that bills like this make people of color feel unwelcome. The speaker criticizes the bill's vagueness, which could lead to confusion in schools and costly litigation, referencing two prior pieces of legislation from House Bill Two that banned DEI teachings and practices.
HB1778: Deborah House, President, American Federation of Teachers New Hampshire Oppose03:44:12.560 - 12:39:38 PM; Deborah House opposes HB 1778, noting it repeats unconstitutional mistakes from previous New Hampshire laws like the 2021 divisive concepts law, struck down in 2024 for vagueness and chilling educator speech, and the 2025 anti-DEI law under injunction. The bill bans ill-defined personal identity ideology, harming students by restricting curriculum on race, national origin, religion, sexual orientation, and gender identity essential for complete public education. It threatens educators' licenses, violates First Amendment, due process, and equal protection, and risks further court losses. She urges finding the bill inexpedient to legislate and provides written testimony.
HB1778: Rachel Potter, Policy Associate, ACLU of New Hampshire Oppose03:48:03.520 - 12:43:29 PM; Rachel Potter compares the bill to Groundhog Day, repeating constitutional issues rejected by courts in 2021 (banned concepts law) and 2025 (anti-DEI law). HB 1778 uses vague terms like 'prioritizes personal identity characteristics' without clear guidance, risking arbitrary enforcement, chilling effects on educators, and limiting students' education on critical topics like lived experiences of marginalized groups. It could lead to fiscal costs of $100,000-$500,000 annually for enforcement without funding. She urges finding the bill inexpedient to break the cycle of unconstitutional laws.
HB1792: Representative Mike Belchure, Representative from Carroll/Wakefield Support04:04:48.239 - 1:00:14 PM; Representative Belchure introduces HB 1792, his bill named after Charlie Kirk, founder of Turning Point USA, whom he describes as a Christian activist, husband, father, and martyr assassinated for his faith. He views Turning Point USA as a Christian apologetics ministry and ties the bill to Kirk in two important ways, though the testimony cuts off before elaboration.
HB1792: Representative Belchure (sponsor) Support04:06:02.479 - 1:01:28 PM; The sponsor provides a detailed historical and ideological background on critical theory, tracing its roots from Marx to modern applications in education like critical race theory, queer theory, and intersectionality. He argues that these theories promote division, hatred, and violence, citing examples such as attacks on pro-life centers, assassinations, and campus occupations. He explains the bill targets specific pedagogies like Gloria Ladson-Billings' culturally responsive pedagogy and Paulo Freire's liberation theology, which he claims indoctrinate students into identity-based oppression narratives. The bill prohibits such indoctrination in K-12 public schools while allowing factual historical discussions, emphasizing remediation over harsh penalties and clarifying it does not apply to higher education, private schools, or homeschooling. He addresses potential criticisms on vagueness, free speech, and fiscal impact, asserting the bill promotes productive citizenship and respect for the Constitution without restricting academic freedom.
HB1792: Representative Han, Durham Oppose04:26:27.199 - 1:21:53 PM; Representative Han disagrees with the sponsor's narrative on critical theory and Marxism, viewing it as contrary to his understanding from his time at Columbia University. He acknowledges historical issues like race and class since the American Revolution but sees no need for the bill. He notes the bill exempts higher education, private schools, and homeschooling, including those in the EFA program, preventing lawsuits against families. He plans to research mentioned theorists like Gloria Ladson-Billings and Paulo Freire but opposes the bill, stating he would not vote for it.
HB1792: Representative Sam Fington Support04:32:13.760 - 1:27:39 PM; Representative Fington supports the bill but believes it should extend to higher education. He shares a personal experience from a college class where he was taught to be an 'anti-racist' in a way that portrayed white people as inherent oppressors, aligning with critical theory's oppressor-oppressed dichotomy. He argues this indoctrination creates division rather than educated citizens, describing it as a Marxist psychological war on youth that he observed in high school history lessons on indigenous peoples, which he felt were taught through a biased lens rather than factually.
HB1792: Nancy Brennan, retired teacher Oppose04:35:18.719 - 1:30:44 PM; Nancy Brennan opposes the bill, arguing it turns public education into a right-leaning institution by muzzling teachers, erasing identities, and slanting history. She criticizes the prohibition on 'indoctrination' as itself indoctrinating by ignoring diverse lenses, and questions vague terms like 'patriotic disposition.' She worries about penalties for teaching alternative views like Howard Zinn's or empathy exercises, seeing the bill as promoting blind patriotism that honors only white straight men while suppressing stories of diverse communities.
HB1792: Ann Marie Banfield, parental rights advocate Support04:38:43.920 - 1:34:09 PM; Amry Banfield supports the bill, comparing it to RSA 191 prohibiting advocacy of communism. She argues that while history on race and slavery should be taught factually, 'anti-racism' crosses into political ideology that promotes racism via liberation theology. She cites examples like SAU16 purchasing 'This Book is Anti-Racist' for middle schools, which categorizes students as oppressors or oppressed, and professional development in SAU 621 pushing one viewpoint on transgender issues without neutrality. She calls for viewpoint discrimination prevention and offers to email more examples, noting some issues have lessened over time.
HB1792: Robert Wallace, former teacher family, retired software developer Oppose04:42:19.280 - 1:37:45 PM; Robert Wallace opposes legislative micromanagement of curricula, arguing teachers are professionals who want to teach appropriately and issues should be handled by local school boards. He questions the need for the bill without specific egregious examples of critical race theory in schools, criticizing the long homage to Charlie Kirk as uninformative. He calls for focusing on helping families rather than divisive policies, sarcastically referencing ideas like segregating students by party.
HB1792: Rachel Potter, ACLU of New Hampshire Oppose04:45:48.718 - 1:41:14 PM; Rachel Potter opposes HB 1792 as unconstitutionally vague classroom censorship, banning undefined terms like 'critical theories' and 'identity-based ideologies' without clear definitions, risking arbitrary enforcement, job loss, and lawsuits for educators. She notes similar 2021 and 2025 New Hampshire laws were struck down for vagueness. The bill invites First Amendment viewpoint discrimination and due process violations by chilling speech and academic freedom. She warns of precedent for broader idea bans and urges opposition.
HB1792: Deborah House, President of American Federation of Teachers New Hampshire Oppose04:51:35.120 - 1:47:01 PM; Deborah House opposes HB 1792, arguing it is unconstitutionally vague, similar to the previous divisive concepts law overturned by courts. She explains that the vagueness arises from uncertainty in classroom teaching, discussions, and responses to current events, making it hard for educators to know what is prohibited without risking lawsuits. The bill censors core academic content, violates the state's duty to cherish public education by narrowing studies, harms safe learning environments especially for LGBTQ students, and enacts viewpoint discrimination by banning certain perspectives while promoting vague 'neutral and patriotic' ones. She warns it will lead to legal challenges and divert funds from schools, urging the committee to find it inexpedient to legislate.
HB1792: Mary Wilkey, retired public school teacher from Concord Oppose04:58:37.120 - 1:54:03 PM; Mary Wilkey, a retired teacher from Concord, opposes HB 1792, noting she never encountered critical race theory in her 1990s teacher training. She criticizes the bill's cruel rhetoric targeting LGBTQ people and its insulting title, which slanders dedicated public school teachers as hateful indoctrinators. Drawing from 20 years of teaching, she describes teachers' compassion and extra efforts for students, like providing transportation, food, and emotional support, with no parental complaints in her experience. She argues the bill assumes all teachers are indoctrinating, which is unfair, and urges sponsors to observe real classrooms. Wilkey emphasizes that shared American values include valuing public education, referencing Thomas Jefferson.
HB1792: Brian Hawkins, NEA New Hampshire Oppose05:03:50.320 - 1:59:16 PM; Brian Hawkins opposes HB 1792, reiterating its vagueness and lack of definitions, which create a narrative difficult to follow. He notes much has been said by prior speakers, especially teachers, and emphasizes that guidance cannot clarify such ambiguity via op-eds. The bill risks exacerbating teacher shortages, as reported in the 2021 teacher shortage committee, by fostering fear in teaching controversial topics and critical thinking, similar to HB 2's ban on concepts. This has led to retention issues. He asks the committee to find HB 1792 inexpedient to legislate.
HB1792: Shawn Lock, Senior Assistant Attorney General, Department of Justice Information Only05:07:48.240 - 2:03:14 PM; Shawn Lock provides technical guidance on HB 1792 from the Department of Justice's civil rights unit. He highlights conflicts with state anti-discrimination laws (RSA 354-A:27-28, RSA 193:38), which prohibit discrimination in public education based on race, religion, national origin, disability, sex, sexual orientation, and gender identity. The bill jeopardizes schools' ability to address hostile environments for LGBTQ+ students by prohibiting 'affirmation of LGBTQ+ identities' (page 2, lines 26-28), creating a catch-22: liability for not addressing bullying/harassment versus liability for actions seen as affirming identities. This could chill efforts to foster inclusive environments, leading to negative outcomes like absenteeism and mental health issues. The bullying prevention carveout does not extend to addressing misconduct, lacking a safe harbor. He suggests a good faith safe harbor for educators addressing misconduct could mitigate concerns.

Noble, Kristin(Chairman)(R)[A+]2025	Drye, Margaret(Clerk)(R)[B+]2025	Peternel, Katy(V Chairman)(R)[A]2025
Cornell, Patricia(D)[F]2025	Freeman, Lisa(R)[B+]2025	Belcher, Mike(R)[B+]2025
Hall, Muriel(D)[CT]2025	Terry, Paul(R)[B+]2025	McDonnell, Valerie(R)[B+]2025
Selig, Loren(D)[D-]2025	Balboni, Peggy(D)[CT]2025	Murray, Megan(D)[CT]2025
Tenczar, Jeffrey(R)[B+]2025	Litchfield, Melissa(R)[B+]2025	Woodcock, Stephen(D)[F]2025
Kluger, Lee Ann(D)[F]2025	Snodgrass, Jim(D)[F]2025	Nadeau, Brian(R)[B+]2025