HB1755

I am writing in opposition to HB 1755. While framed as a transparency measure, it seeks to challenge the nonprofit status of important Federally Qualified Healthcare Centers (FQHC’s) and critical access hospitals by involving the Attorney Generals office. This bill would have a chilling effect on use of 340B program and funds, making the safety net for low-income patients even more vulnerable, costing the state millions of dollars. Transparency and accountability are important, but HB 1755 undermines federally supported programs, destabilizes nonprofit health care providers, and puts patients at risk.

I writing in opposition to HB 1755. While framed as a transparency measure, this bill challenges the nonprofit status of important Federally Qualified Healthcare Centers (FQHC’s) and critical access hospitals by involving the Attorney Generals office. This bill would have a chilling effect on use of 340B program and funds, making the safety net for low-income patients even more vulnerable and costing the state millions of dollars. Transparency and accountability are important, but HB 1755 undermines federally supported programs, destabilizes nonprofit health care providers, and puts patients at risk. Please vote inexpedient to legislate on this bill.

I am writing in opposition to HB 1755. While framed as a transparency measure, it seeks to challenge the nonprofit status of important Federally Qualified Healthcare Centers (FQHC’s) and critical access hospitals by involving the Attorney Generals office. This bill would have a chilling effect on use of 340B program and funds, making the safety net for low-income patients even more vulnerable, costing the state millions of dollars. Transparency and accountability are important, but HB 1755 undermines federally supported programs, destabilizes nonprofit health care providers, and puts patients at risk. Please vote inexpedient to legislate on this bill.

This bill threatens to make more vulnerable the most vulnerable among us which will in turn threaten the ability for safe, effective, timely, and cost-effective care to provided to all residents of our state and surrounding states who seek health care in NH. As a NH physician, I know the impact of making the vulnerable more vulnerable and increasing barriers to health care all to well - missed diagnoses, delayed diagnoses, and deferred care due to cost concerns lead directly to worse health outcomes and higher health care costs and expenditures for all, not just those who would be most directly impacted by this bill.

This would be detrimental to both FQHCs and critical access hospitals, risking the health and wellbeing of New Hampshire residents. As a physician I oppose this bill.

To the Members of the Health, Human Services, and Elderly Affairs Committee, I am writing in strong opposition to HB 1755. While I appreciate the intent of this bill, I am concerned that HB 1755 would create unintended negative consequences for patients, providers, and the health care system in New Hampshire. As written, the bill introduces additional restrictions and administrative burdens that risk limiting access to timely, high-quality care, particularly in primary care and underserved or rural areas. New Hampshire is already facing significant workforce shortages and increasing patient demand. Policies that reduce flexibility in care delivery, impose rigid requirements, or discourage innovation may worsen access challenges, increase costs, and contribute to provider burnout—without clear evidence that patient safety or outcomes would improve. Importantly, existing state laws, professional licensure standards, and regulatory oversight already provide robust protections for patient safety and quality of care. HB 1755 risks duplicating or complicating these frameworks rather than strengthening them in a meaningful way. I respectfully urge the committee to consider the downstream impacts of this bill and to oppose HB 1755 or recommend further study and stakeholder engagement before advancing legislation that could negatively affect patients and the health care workforce. Thank you for your time and consideration. Respectfully, Dr. Maria Boylan Board Certified Family Physician New Hampshire Medical Society

I writing in opposition to HB 1755. While framed as a transparency measure, it seeks to challenge the nonprofit status of important Federally Qualified Healthcare Centers (FQHC’s) and critical access hospitals by involving the Attorney Generals office. This bill would have a chilling effect on use of 340B program and funds, making the safety net for low-income patients even more vulnerable, costing the state millions of dollars. Transparency and accountability are important, but HB 1755 undermines federally supported programs, destabilizes nonprofit health care providers, and puts patients at risk. Please vote inexpedient to legislate on this bill.

I am in opposition to HB 1755. I am a primary care doctor, and I have worked in a Federally Qualified Healthcare Center (FQHC). This bill would have a chilling effect on use of 340B program and funds, making the safety net for low-income patients even more vulnerable, costing the state millions of dollars. Transparency and accountability are important, but HB 1755 undermines federally supported programs, destabilizes nonprofit health care providers, and puts patients at risk. Please vote inexpedient to legislate on this bill.

Hello, I am asking you to vote inexpedient to legislate on HB1755. It appears the intent is transparency, but it seeks to challenge the nonprofit status of important Federally Qualified Healthcare Centers and critical access hospitals by involving the Attorney General's office. The effect this bill would have on use of 340B programs and funds, would be chilling. It would make the safety net for low-income patients even more vulnerable, costing the state millions of dollars. While transparency and accountability are important, HB1755 would undermine federally supported programs, destabilize nonprofit health care providers, and put vulnerable patients at risk. This is why I am asking you to vote inexpedient to legislate on this bill.

I writing in opposition to HB 1755. While framed as a transparency measure, it seeks to challenge the nonprofit status of important Federally Qualified Healthcare Centers (FQHC’s) and critical access hospitals by involving the Attorney Generals office. This bill would have a chilling effect on use of 340B program and funds, making the safety net for low-income patients even more vulnerable, costing the state millions of dollars. Transparency and accountability are important, but HB 1755 undermines federally supported programs, destabilizes nonprofit health care providers, and puts patients at risk. Please vote inexpedient to legislate on this bill.

I writing in opposition to HB 1755. While framed as a transparency measure, it is unnecessary at a state level, will overburden the ability of Federally Qualified Healthcare Centers (FQHC’s) and critical access hospitals to offer care to their patients. FQHCS treat patients regardless of their ability to pay and are able to offer a sliding fee scale based on income that allows access to primary and preventive care to many patients across NH. The 340B program was intended to support FQHCS and critical access hospitals. This bill includes a substantial fiscal note due to costs, and would have a chilling effect on use of 340B program and funds, making the safety net for low-income patients even more vulnerable, costing the state millions of dollars. Transparency and accountability are important, but HB 1755 undermines federally supported programs, destabilizes nonprofit health care providers, and puts patients at risk. Please vote inexpedient to legislate on this bill.

Position recorded without written comment.

Position recorded without written comment.

Position recorded without written comment.

Position recorded without written comment.

Position recorded without written comment.