Where Things Stand on Some of the More Controversial Bills in the NH House and Senate
Spring has finally sprung at the State House.
As the 2025 legislative session nears the end, the New Hampshire House and Senate will vote this week on bills that have already passed in the other chamber. But to get to the governor’s desk for signature, both chambers must agree on and then pass identical versions of a bill—or the bill dies. Here’s a progress report on some of the more controversial bills.
The Budget
HB 1 and HB 2, the two state budget bills, are in the hands of the Senate Finance Committee, which is scheduled to meet every day Monday through Friday of this week as it preps the budget for a final vote in the Senate.
On a positive note, the committee has already voted to reverse the House’s 3% rate cut for the state’s Medicaid providers, and to restore funding to address the developmental disabilities waitlist and for community mental health support.
The Senate has until June 5 to pass a budget, after which negotiations will begin with the House on a final version. While the Senate’s revenue projections are more generous than those of the House—opening the door to some of the most controversial House budget cuts potentially being reversed—they are less optimistic than the governor’s projections because of concerns over business growth.
Bottom line: Although Republicans control all major branches of New Hampshire government, there is disagreement among them not only over spending priorities—but over how much the state will actually be able to collect in revenue over the next two years. Added to that is the uncertainty over federal money the state would normally see coming in from Washington combined with the desire of the Trump administration to downshift the cost of disaster relief, key education programs, nutrition programs, and a growing number of other services to the states..
Immigration
Headed to the governor for her likely signature are:
HB 511, a bill that requires law enforcement agencies to comply with immigration detainers issued by ICE. The bill passed 15-8 along party lines in the Senate last Thursday. Under the bill, local law enforcement would not be allowed to enact a blanket policy against compliance with immigration detainers, and they could not restrict use of inmate immigration information. Sold as a “sanctuary cities ban” what the bill actually does is remove the ability of county and municipal boards to have any say in the level of support that law enforcement agencies nominally under their control that their taxpayers pay for are allowed to provide to support ICE activities. Federal law provides the option for local law enforcement agencies to assist ICE. This bill puts that decision into the hands of local law enforcement officials themselves and prohibits other elected officials from intervening. More.
SB 62, a bill that explicitly authorizes law enforcement executives to pursue cooperation agreements on their own with the U.S. Department of Homeland Security—regardless of whether their governing board or executive of the municipality, county or state supports participation—passed in the House earlier this month after being amended. On Thursday, the Senate concurred with the House’s amendment, which sends the bill on to the governor for signature. More.
HB 71, a bill reminiscent of the Jim Crow laws of the pre-civil rights also passed in the Senate 15-8. It would prohibit using public school and public higher education facilities as shelters for undocumented immigrants—an issue that has never come up in New Hampshire and one that is unlikely to ever come up. But passing good legislation wasn’t the point here. Dehumanizing and ginning up fear of a group of people already targeted by a hate campaign directed at them by the highest levels of government was the point.
Thankfully, two anti-immigrant bills failed last week in the Senate:
HB 452, which would have created a number of new hurdles for undocumented people and those without U.S. citizenship to obtain driver’s licenses, was re-referred to committee by the Senate for additional work and could come back next year.
HB 461, which would have required that all New Hampshire driver’s license examinations and related materials be “distributed in the English language only,” was killed in the Senate on a voice vote.
Book Banning
HB 324, a bill that allows a parent or guardian to file a complaint about books or materials in public schools if they believe they are obscene, harmful or inappropriate for the grade level, passed 15-8 in the Senate. Schools, educators, and librarian who don’t remove the material in question or comply with the complaint process specified in the bills would be subjected to civil and criminal penalties. The bill now moves on to the governor. More.
“Parents Rights”
SB 72, under the guise of supporting “parent’s rights”, would compromise the rights of NH teachers and children. The bill received a party-line 9-7 “Ought to Pass with Amendment” recommendation from the House Child and Family Law Committee and will come up for a vote this coming Thursday on the House floor. Among other things, the bill undermines the Department of Education’s One Trusted Adult Program and requires school staff respond to “any and all” parental inquiries, regardless of their appropriateness, including students’ romantic and personal. It also written permission before doctors can treat children. (Currently parents can provide verbal consent for routine services like prescription refills and telehealth appointments, but this bill will end that practice. Further, the amended bill would strip the rights of teenagers to access birth control or receive pre- and postnatal care without written parental permission.
HB10, a similar bill, passed the House in March and is now in the hands of the Senate Education Committee.
School Vouchers
Both the New Hampshire House and Senate have passed bills to remove the income eligibility requirement for the Education Freedom Account (EFA) program. The changes, which would go into effect in the 2025-2026 school year, aim to make EFAs accessible to all students in the state, regardless of family income. (A separate provision making education freedom accounts universal by fiscal year 2027 was also inserted into the state budget passed by the House in April and is now under consideration in the Senate.)
SB 295, which passed in the Senate on a 16-8 party-line vote and then passed in the House is now awaiting a recommendation from the House Finance Committee. The bill would remove income limits immediately but would include a 10,000-student cap on the program for the first year.
HB 115, which passed the House in April, would temporarily increase the program’s income cap will to 400% of the federal poverty level before it’s done away with entirely. The cost of the bill for the first year alone is projected to be $17.5 million more than Gov. Kelly Ayotte proposed in her budget for the program. The bill is awaiting a recommendation from the Senate Education Committee.
Anti-Transgender Legislation
HB 148, an anti-transgender bathroom bill which makes a mockery of New Hampshire anti-discrimination laws, will receive a vote in the Senate on Thursday. The bill is unchanged from the version previously passed in the House, which would permit businesses, organizations, and governmental entities to prohibit transgender people from using bathrooms corresponding to the gender they identify with. The bill would also legalize policies that separate people by biological sex in athletic or sporting competitions, prisons, jails, juvenile detention centers, and mental health hospitals and treatment centers. In addition to legalizing discrimination in response to a manufactured issue, this bill unnecessary and harmful bill compromises the privacy and safety of a vulnerable group of people who simply want to be left alone. More.
HB 377, after being passed earlier this year in a 197-167 party-line vote by the House, is awaiting a recommendation vote from the Senate Health and Human Services Committee. The bill would ban the use of hormone replacement therapy and puberty blockers as part of gender-affirming care for people who are younger than 18. Teens already taking these medications would be required to either stop immediately or taper off of them by Jan. 1. Gender-affirming hormone therapy, which can be estrogen- or testosterone-based, and puberty blockers are forms of medical care given to transgender people to achieve physical characteristics that align with their gender identities. Both are types of gender-affirming care given to those diagnosed with gender dysphoria, a condition where people perceive their gender identities differently from what they were assigned at birth. Not every person with gender dysphoria seeks this medical care due to cost, access or simply because of personal choice. Under HB 377, medical professionals providing such treatments to transgender youth could face criminal charges. More.
HB 712, a bill that would ban gender-affirming breast surgeries for minors, has passed in the House and received a recommendation for passage from the Senate Health and Human Services Committee. But the bill has yet to come to the Senate floor for a final vote.
Abortion
HB 191-FN, which imposes criminal and civil penalties for the transporting of an unemancipated minor in order to obtain a surgical procedure without parental permission, will receive a vote in the Senate on Thursday. Passed previously in the House, the bill was amended in the House to replace specific references to abortion with “surgical procedure.” However, the intent of the bill remains unchanged. The bill would also apply to friends and even siblings age 18 or over.
Cryptocurrency
HB 639, a bill forbidding state agencies and local officials from banning cryptocurrency mining in their city, town, or elsewhere in the state, was re-referred to committee by the Senate and is dead for 2025 but could be back after more work for a vote in 2026. More.
HB 302, allowing the treasurer to invest up to 5% of state assets in Bitcoin and gold, was signed into law earlier this month by Gov. Ayotte. The law also permits investment in other cryptocurrencies with a market capitalization of more than $500 billion. More.
Child Marriage
HB 433, a bill that would have created an exception to NH’s minimum marriage age of 18 if one of the parties is a member of the military on active duty was killed by voice vote last Thursday in the Senate. It had passed earlier in the House. More.
Car Inspections
HB 649, which would have ended annual vehicle inspections, was re-referred to committee by the Senate. While this seemingly kills the chance for passage in 2025, the bill could come back for a vote after some additional work in 2026. More.
It’s Not Just You: Here’s Why Even the Closest State House Observers Get Confused This Time of Year
There are many ways to kill a bill in the NH House and Senate. But sometimes bills you think have been killed have a way of springing back to life near the end of the legislative session.
For example, the language of a bill that passed in the House but was killed or re-referred in the Senate, can be attached as an amendment to a Senate bill making its way through the House. This can also happen to House legislation making its way through the Senate. These amendments can be offered as committee amendments or they can be made as floor amendments, which bypass the committee recommendation process.
Wait…There’s more!
It’s also possible for totally new legislation to be added on to another bill at the last minute via a “non-germane amendment”—an amendment that introduces new subject matter to a bill that is outside the scope of the original bill. While a public hearing and committee approval are required before unrelated language that hasn’t previously been passed can be formally attached to a bill, the extra effort can sometimes result in making the overall bill seem more attractive to legislators who may not have originally supported it. Or conversely, a non-germane amendment might make ta bill that has some level of bipartisan support bill less attractive (think “poison pill”) in an attempt to kill it. An example of the former occured recently when language requiring public schools to offer firearms safety training for K-12 students was tacked on to SB 54 —a bill increasing penalties for drivers accused of DUI who refuse a breathalyzer test. The addition of the firearms safety training requirement for children, so the thinking behind it goes, may make it easier for a segment of GOP legislators who view breathalyzer requirements as unconstitutional self-incrimination to support the Senate version of a House bill they helped kill last month. It remains to be seen whether this particular “sweetener” will make a difference for legislators who rejected a similar bill on principle earlier.
Bottom line: until this session mercifully draws to a close—hopefully in June—expect the unexpected.
Are You a Portsmouth, Newington or New Castle Voter? Attend Our May 28 Legislative Listening Session.
Your local legislators will be there to listen to your concerns and answer your questions!
