Committee Summary for Senate Health and Human Services (03/18/2026)

Bill/Time	Type	Title	Sponsor
SB647 00:04:56.862 - 8:03:48 AM	Executive Session	authorizing the department of insurance to participate in a cooperative procurement group via an intergovernmental agreement for a prescription drug discount program.	Rochefort, David(R)[B-]2025
SB456 1174 00:19:56.862 - 8:18:48 AM	Executive Session	establishing the commission for children's futures.	Sullivan, Victoria(R)[A-]2025
SB232 00:33:06.489 - 8:31:58 AM	Public Hearing	clarifying certain net metering terms and conditions.	McConkey, Mark(R)[B]2025
HB1763 01:48:06.489 - 9:46:58 AM	Public Hearing	(New Title) establishing a committee to study siting and maintenance rules regarding certain intellectual and developmental disability (IDD) and acquired brain disorder (ABD) community residences.	Drago, Mike(R)[A-]2025
HB1318 -	Public Hearing	renewing the committee to study non-pharmacological treatment options for patients with chronic pain.	Nagel, David(D)[C]2025
HB1685 02:20:00.000 - 10:18:52 AM	Public Hearing	(New Title) establishing a commission to study aiding the growth of assistive technology businesses and adoption of assistive technologies in New Hampshire.	Howard, Heath(D)[F]2025
HB1685 02:35:00.000 - 10:33:52 AM	Executive Session	(New Title) establishing a commission to study aiding the growth of assistive technology businesses and adoption of assistive technologies in New Hampshire.	Howard, Heath(D)[F]2025

SB647: Senator Sponsor (unnamed) Support00:04:56.862 - 8:03:48 AM; The sponsor moves for ought to pass on SB 647 to allow further discussion and work on establishing state-sponsored prescription drug discount programs. Explains that the bill paves the way for such programs with tighter privacy controls and transparency, potentially offering greater savings than existing cards. Notes ongoing consultations with Department of Insurance and Governor's office to determine if legislation is needed. Emphasizes that the state does not fund it; it's manufacturer discounts. Programs are accessible regardless of immigration status. Funded by fees from discounts. Requests passage to buy more time for refinement, as other states like Vermont have implemented similar programs.
SB456 1174: Senator (unnamed) Support00:19:56.862 - 8:18:48 AM; Discussion on amendment 1174 to SB 456, addressing concerns about appointment process and administrative attachment. Notes issue with 17 members appointed by governor and suggests tightening for efficiency. Confirms inclusion of legislators from both parties. Moves to include committee amendment attaching the commission to Department of Education, as confirmed by John Williams from HHS that it falls under Education despite HHS interest. Votes to pass as amended with attachment to Department of Education.
SB456 1174: John Williams, Legislative Director for HHS Information Only00:19:56.862 - 8:18:48 AM; Provides information on administrative attachment of the study commission for children's futures under RSA 200, which falls under Department of Education, though HHS has collaborative interest in issues like behavioral health.
SB232: Representative Mark Pearson, South Central Rockingham County Support00:33:06.489 - 8:31:58 AM; As prime sponsor, introduces SB 232 to protect healthcare providers' rights of conscience regarding abortion, focusing only on this issue and profession. Notes New Hampshire is one of three states without such protections, unlike NY and MA which have no emergency exceptions while this bill does. Clarifies it's not an abortion bill; availability unchanged, just allows refusal and referral. Limits coverage to those who may participate in abortions, excluding non-participants like janitors. Does not apply in emergencies or to those working primarily at abortion facilities. Cites example of a young physician fired for refusal despite others available, leading her to leave NH for Wisconsin. Argues it addresses a real problem and would attract more providers like OBGYNs who object to abortions. Responds to questions on federal protections, examples of issues, and bill language scope, emphasizing it's specific to participants and includes safeguards.
SB232: Representative Lucy Weber, Cheshire District 5 (Walpole and Surry) Oppose00:45:00.000 - 8:43:52 AM; Opposes SB 232, concerned about trend of adding laws to dilute existing ones. Believes personal freedoms require personal responsibility; if conscience conflicts, seek different job. Worries about opportunities for disruptive 'gotcha' behavior despite guardrails. Notes reproductive health organizations provide broad services, making abortions not a 'major part,' so bill wouldn't cover them. Highlights civil penalties like $10,000 fines for posting or informing violations, risking technical abuses. Argues intent is good but potential for abuse high. Responds that federal protections and institutional policies exist; changing law for few bad experiences is poor legislating.
SB232: Representative Lucas, Grafton County District 7 (Campton and Waterville Estates) Oppose00:48:06.489 - 8:46:58 AM; As retired OB/GYN physician, opposes SB 232 due to concerns over patient confidentiality and safety. Points to broad definition of healthcare provider including non-medical staff like receptionists and custodians who enable care. Worries passage could encourage unauthorized access to medical records to exercise conscience, violating HIPAA with severe penalties. Also notes risk to patient safety if individuals seek employment at abortion providers to obstruct.
SB232: Dr. Oak Young, retired OB-GYN, Concord Oppose01:03:06.489 - 9:01:58 AM; Dr. Young, with 40 years of experience as an OB-GYN in Concord and past president of the New Hampshire Medical Society, opposes SB 232. She states that in her career, she never witnessed a provider being forced to perform an abortion against their will. She describes a respectful practice in her group where providers with differing views on abortion accommodated each other without coercion. She argues the bill addresses a non-existent problem, offends the medical profession, and is politically motivated rather than protective of providers or beneficial for women's health care. She urges the committee to oppose the bill.
SB232: Rachel Potter, Policy Associate, ACLU of New Hampshire Oppose01:18:06.489 - 9:16:58 AM; Rachel Potter opposes SB 232, arguing it grants sweeping refusal rights that jeopardize patient health and undermine non-discrimination protections. She highlights New Hampshire's strained hospital capacity, workforce shortages in maternity care, and closures of labor units, noting the bill exacerbates the reproductive health care crisis. The bill's broad definitions of health care providers and institutions could include non-clinical staff, leading to delays in care. She cites examples from other states where similar laws resulted in women dying while awaiting care. The bill creates legal risks for hospitals and exceeds federal Title VII protections for religious accommodations, potentially interfering with patient safety and medical professionalism.
SB232: Bob Dunn, Director of Public Policy, Roman Catholic Diocese of Manchester Support01:25:00.000 - 9:23:52 AM; Bob Dunn supports SB 232 for providing greater state protections for health care providers' conscience rights regarding abortion. He praises the civil discussion on the topic and references the New Hampshire Constitution's recognition of inherent, unalienable rights of conscience. He argues that conscience is especially critical in matters involving the taking of human life and that logical consistency in abortion debates requires respecting providers' choices as much as patients'. He draws on Catholic ethical directives emphasizing informed conscience formation based on moral norms.
SB232: Jason Hennessy, President, New Hampshire Right to Life Support01:33:06.489 - 9:31:58 AM; Jason Hennessy supports HB 232, comparing forced participation in abortions to the coercion faced by Uyghurs in China. He notes that most religions, atheists, agnostics, and the Hippocratic Oath oppose abortion, and 47 states protect conscience rights. He cites a Vermont case investigated by HHS and a personal anecdote of a Dartmouth medical student leaving the state due to pressure to perform abortions. He argues the bill aids recruitment of OBGYNs by appealing to the 86-93% who do not perform abortions. He suggests removing vague language about businesses where abortion is a major part and supports an emergency exception.
SB232: Representative Pearson, Prime Sponsor Support01:40:00.000 - 9:38:52 AM; Representative Pearson clarifies the story of his wife, a family practice physician who mentors others. He explains the individual affected was in a position where abortions occurred and conscience was not respected, leading to her departure. He emphasizes the bill allows coverage by willing colleagues without forcing participation and addresses real instances where conscience is violated.
SB232: Courtney Tanner, Senior Director of Government Relations, Dartmouth Health Oppose01:45:00.000 - 9:43:52 AM; Courtney Tanner opposes SB 232, stating Dartmouth Health respects employee conscience under federal law and prioritizes patient access to care, including reproductive health. With 1,500 clinical vacancies, workforce retention is key, but the bill is unnecessary as federal remedies exist via the Office of Civil Rights. She raises concerns about contradictions with federal law, broad definitions leading to access issues (e.g., no warm handoff for refusals), operational challenges stricter than ADA accommodations, vagueness in 'major part of services,' and balancing patient rights. She offers to collaborate if the committee pursues state protections.
HB1763: Representative Drago, Prime Sponsor Support01:48:06.489 - 9:46:58 AM; Representative Drago supports HB 1763, which proposes a study committee to review siting and maintenance rules for community residencies serving individuals with intellectual and developmental disabilities and acquired brain disorders. The bill aims to assist DHHS in enforcing standards, reducing inconsistencies from out-of-state providers, and ensuring smooth operations. It acknowledges the need for stakeholder input to identify improvements without directly legislating changes.
HB1763: Marissa Berg, Executive Director, Community Support Network Oppose01:50:00.000 - 9:48:52 AM; Marissa Berg opposes HB 1763, representing area agencies serving over 1,000 residential programs for people with developmental disabilities. She argues the bill risks conflicting with the Fair Housing Act and a 1980 Supreme Court ruling (Rehabilitation Association of Virginia v. Koziol) prohibiting zoning discrimination against disabled housing. New Hampshire's fully community-based system has worked well for 45 years without institutions. She notes a recent housing impact study under HB 1168 was disbanded despite support and suggests addressing concerns via SB 670's oversight group. Issues like fencing and parking are necessary for safety, and programs help bring individuals back from out-of-state care.
HB1763: Matthew Cordero, Interim CEO, Farmsteads of New England Support02:00:00.000 - 9:58:52 AM; Matthew Cordero supports HB 1763, speaking for his agency. He highlights issues like poor maintenance, elopement risks, and inadequate services in some residences, exacerbated by out-of-state providers exploiting loopholes after system changes three years ago that reduced area agencies' oversight. Licensing cannot address these due to rule gaps. The study committee offers a collaborative way to fix problems without excluding disabled individuals from communities, involving experts to recommend improvements via GELCAR, praising it as a non-prescriptive approach.
HB1763: Karen Rosenberg, Policy Director, Disability Rights Center Information Only02:10:00.000 - 10:08:52 AM; Karen Rosenberg provides information without taking a position but expresses concerns about HB 1763's focus and resource use. Troubling incidents stem from oversight lapses, not siting rules. She recommends using SB 670's robust commission for oversight, monitoring, quality improvement, and addressing gaps, including inadequate services for individuals with disabilities, as it involves diverse stakeholders efficiently.
HB1685: Senator Kevin Avard, District 12 Support02:20:00.000 - 10:18:52 AM; Senator Avard presented HB 1685 on behalf of the absent sponsor, Representative Howard. He briefly described the bill as establishing a commission to study aiding the growth of assistive technology businesses and adoption of assistive technologies in New Hampshire.
HB1685: Vanessa Blais, Director of Policy and Planning, New Hampshire Council on Developmental Disabilities Support02:25:00.000 - 10:23:52 AM; Vanessa Blais spoke in support of HB 1685 on behalf of the NH Council on Developmental Disabilities. She explained that the bill aligns with the goal of making New Hampshire a tech-first state, similar to other states, to address barriers in the disability community, particularly in workforce participation. She provided resources on the tech-first framework and expressed concern that AT in NH, the state's Assistive Technology Act program at the university, is not included as a representative on the commission, emphasizing their expertise and offering to connect the committee with their director.
HB1685: State Representative Heath Howard, Strafford District 4 Support02:28:00.000 - 10:26:52 AM; Representative Howard spoke in favor of HB 1685, which establishes a commission to promote the growth and adoption of assistive technologies in New Hampshire. He highlighted that NH is one of only 10 states without tech-first benchmarks and described the framework as prioritizing technology for participation, inclusion, and self-determination for people with disabilities. The commission would include diverse stakeholders to identify benchmarks for access, attract businesses for economic growth, and foster collaborations. He noted bipartisan support in other states and urged an Ought to Pass vote.
HB1685: Committee Chair Vote02:35:00.000 - 10:33:52 AM; The committee entered executive session to discuss HB 1685. They agreed to propose a committee amendment to add a representative from AT in NH to the commission, based on testimony provided. The chair noted the alignment among members and suggested handling the amendment and vote next week due to scheduling. A motion to go out of executive session was made, seconded by Senator Prentice, and passed unanimously with all in favor.

Rochefort, David(Chairman)(R)[B-]2025	Avard, Kevin(V Chairman)(R)[B]2025	Birdsell, Regina(R)[B-]2025
Prentiss, Suzanne(D)[F]2025	Long, Pat(D)[F]2025