This story was originally produced by the New Hampshire Bulletin, an independent local newsroom that allows NHPR and other outlets to republish its reporting.
A contingent of vaccine skeptics in the New Hampshire House of Representatives has again brought a slate of vaccine-related legislation to the State House in 2026. Some proposals go further than others.
House Bill 1811 seeks to eliminate nearly all vaccine requirements in New Hampshire outright, while House Bill 1719 targets just the hepatitis B vaccine. Others are much more limited in scope and don’t target the requirements as much as specific aspects of the state’s broader vaccine policy, such as House Bill 1022, which seeks to standardize and simplify New Hampshire’s already permissive religious exemption policy. Another, House Bill 1584, would also simplify the exemption policy and require state agencies to better advertise them. House Bill 1616 would completely forbid state agencies from advertising vaccines, and House Bill 1449 would forbid vaccine clinics from being held at New Hampshire schools during school hours. Lastly, House Bill 1219 would prevent state agencies from requiring that people receive any extra vaccines in order to be a foster parent.
Many of the lawmakers behind 2026’s legislation have been fighting against vaccine mandates for years. Among the most notable changes they secured came in 2025, when the Legislature revoked the state health commissioner’s authority to select vaccines to be required for children in the state. This means that only vaccines approved by the Legislature can be required in New Hampshire. However, the final version of the legislation, which was passed along with the budget, grandfathered in all the vaccines that the commissioner had previously approved, meaning the legislation had no immediate effect on what vaccines are required in the state.
Currently in New Hampshire, children are required by state law to be immunized against diphtheria, mumps, pertussis, poliomyelitis (commonly known as polio), rubella, rubeola, tetanus, varicella, hepatitis B, and haemophilus influenzae type B. Children are not legally permitted to enter school or child care until they’re vaccinated. The law includes exemptions for a child if their doctor attests that such a vaccine would be detrimental to their health and for families with religious objections.
A proposal ending all mandates
Rep. Matt Drew, a Manchester Republican and the sponsor of HB 1811, wants to completely eliminate vaccine requirements.
“Mandates are a clear statement of inherent mistrust,” Drew said at a legislative hearing last week. “If your product is so bad that people won’t use it voluntarily, that’s a big flashing neon sign that it is probably unsafe, ineffective, or both.”
Drew attributed the events of the coronavirus pandemic as inspiration. He argued that during the pandemic “the public health establishment went mad with power” and “rushed through a so-called vaccine with minimal testing then promoted it as safe and effective while effectively mandating its use for millions of people. It quickly proved to be neither safe nor effective, but that didn’t stop them.”
The scientific consensus on the COVID-19 vaccine’s role in the pandemic contradicts Drew’s assessment. According to a 2025 report from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the COVID-19 vaccine prevented roughly 68,000 hospitalizations during the 2023-2024 respiratory season. The CDC and other health organizations also report that side effects lasting longer than three days from the COVID-19 vaccine are rare and constitute a lower risk than the risk from the virus itself.
After its hearing on the bill, the House Health, Human Services, and Elderly Affairs Committee added a compromise amendment to the bill Wednesday that would leave just the polio vaccine required. The committee then voted, 10-8, along party lines, to recommend the entire House vote for the bill with the amendment. It will advance to a vote on the House floor in the weeks following.
During last week’s hearing, Dr. Benjamin Chan, New Hampshire’s state epidemiologist, and Megan Petty, chief of the New Hampshire Bureau of Infectious Disease Control, both opposed the bill.
Petty said the bill risks “increasing the number of children who are unimmunized or under immunized in schools and child care which could lead to a risk of vaccine preventable disease transmission and outbreaks which will endanger children, staff, and families and especially those who are medically vulnerable, immunocompromised or too young to receive immunizations.” Petty said they were particularly concerned about the possible resurgence of polio or measles.
Indeed, the United States saw 2,276 reported measles cases in 2025 — the most since 2000 — according to the CDC, a trend that correlates with growing skepticism of vaccines nationwide. That record is on pace to be broken this year, with 733 cases already reported as of Feb. 5.
In April, Idaho became the first U.S. state to get rid of their vaccine mandate with the Idaho Medical Freedom Act.
Another proposal ending just the hepatitis B requirement
Another bill, HB 1719, focuses specifically on one vaccine: hepatitis B.
This bill comes after changes at the CDC under new U.S. Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy, a longtime vaccine skeptic who has elevated vaccine detractors nationwide.
The CDC’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices decided in December to change the federal government’s guidance to not recommend the vaccine at birth for infants unless the mother tested positive for the virus.
The decision, which came months after Kennedy fired every member of the panel and replaced many of them with fellow vaccine skeptics, was instantly controversial and panned by several major medical organizations, including the American Association of Immunologists, the American Academy of Pediatrics, and dozens of others.
New Hampshire is among 24 states that haven’t changed their own vaccine schedules to align with this new guidance, according to the Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy.
Kelley Potenza, a Rochester Republican and the sponsor of HB 1719, framed the bill as an effort to align New Hampshire with the CDC but ultimately said the inspiration for the bill came from her own family. If enacted, it would eliminate the state’s requirement that children be vaccinated against hepatitis B.
“This is near and dear to me,” Potenza said at a legislative hearing for the bill last month.
Potenza said she believes that the aluminum ingredients contained in the hepatitis B vaccine gave her daughter a lifelong digestive disorder. She claimed aluminum in vaccines administered to infants causes many different health complications.
This runs contrary to the conclusions of several major medical organizations and health regulators. Aluminum is used as an ingredient in several vaccines, including ones for tetanus, HPV, diphtheria, hepatitis A, and hepatitis B, but it’s included in too small doses (typically less than 0.5 milligrams) to have a toxic effect, according to the American Academy of Pediatrics and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. The CDC itself, before December’s recommendation changes, reported that aluminum has been safely used in vaccines for decades, though the advisory panel’s new members have recently questioned that conclusion.
Potenza also argued hepatitis B “is not a disease that spreads through casual childhood contact.” She claimed the “only meaningful risk to a newborn exists when the mother tests positive” and that the vaccine “was created for high risk groups like prostitutes and drug addicts.”
Chan, the state epidemiologist, refuted that during the hearing, saying the viral infection is “50 to 100 times more easily transmitted through the blood-borne route” than other infections like HIV. Petty said it can spread in child care facilities where kids accidentally share bodily fluids through scratching, biting, cuts, or scrapes.
The House, Health, and Human Services Committee advanced the bill and voted, 10-8, to recommend the entire House pass it. The full House is scheduled to vote on it Thursday.
Efforts to alter religious exemptions
Two different bills focus on the religious exemption process. New Hampshire already has a permissive policy that requires parents sign a form stating their religious objection to vaccines. However, in recent years some conservative lawmakers have taken issue with the Department of Health and Human Services’ process, in which they provide a specific form for parents to sign.
HB 1022 is also sponsored by Drew and it would require the form used to obtain a religious exemption simply state “I, (insert parent or legal guardian’s name), hereby attest that I sincerely hold religious beliefs and/or engage in religious practices or observances that dictate the refusal to accept the required vaccination(s). (Insert parent or legal guardian’s signature and date.)”
The House Health, Human Services and Elderly Affairs Committee will vote on this proposal in the coming weeks. The bill faces an uphill battle, though, after Gov. Kelly Ayotte vetoed a similar piece of legislation in 2025, writing that “the State already has an established process by which parents can claim a religious exemption, and I see no reason to change it.”
HB 1584, sponsored by Potenza, would specify in state law that parents are not required to use any specific form, but rather “may provide any written statement attesting to the religious exemption.” HB 1584 would also require that any time the Department of Health and Human Services promotes vaccines in an advertisement, its website, or any printed materials, it has to write that “MEDICAL AND RELIGIOUS EXEMPTIONS ARE AVAILABLE UNDER NEW HAMPSHIRE LAW” in “bold, clearly noticeable, starred print on the front or top portion of the material.” The bill would impose a fine of up to $1,000 on any department employee or officer who violates this requirement. Potenza argued the state makes it too difficult for parents to be aware of their rights to religious or medical exemptions.
“New Hampshire law has long recognized religious and medical exemptions from immunization requirements,” Potenza said at a January legislative hearing. “These exemptions are not new. What has changed is how clearly or how consistently those rights are communicated to parents and the public. This bill addresses that gap.”
The House Health, Human Services, and Elderly Affairs Committee voted, 10-8, to advance HB 1584 with the recommendation that the full House pass it. The House is scheduled to vote on the bill Thursday.
Relatedly, HB 1616, sponsored by Barnstead Republican Rep. Barbara Comtois, would prohibit any state agency or political body in New Hampshire from spending money to advertise vaccines. The House Executive Departments and Administration Committee will vote on this bill in the coming weeks.
Forbidding vaccine clinics during school
HB 1449, sponsored by Hampton Republican Rep. Linda McGrath, would make it illegal for public and charter schools to hold vaccine clinics on their campuses during school hours and would require parents and guardians to be present for a child to get vaccinated at a clinic held at a school outside school hours.
Eliminating foster parent requirements
HB 1219, sponsored by Brentwood Republican Rep. Melissa Litchfield, would eliminate any additional vaccination requirements for foster parents that go beyond what is already enshrined in state law for everyone.
Department of Health and Human Services policy currently requires foster parents be up to date on their pertussis (commonly known as whooping cough) vaccinations if they’re caring for an infant and on their annual influenza (flu) vaccinations if they’re caring for a child with special medical needs.
The House Health, Human Services and Elderly Affairs Committee will vote on HB 1219 in the coming weeks.
New Hampshire Bulletin is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. New Hampshire Bulletin maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Dana Wormald for questions: info@newhampshirebulletin.com.