As amended, this bill limits how far in advance absentee ballots may be requested, restricting UOCAVA federal post card applications to no earlier than January of the election year and other applications to no earlier than 6 months before the election.
(New Title) limiting how far in advance of an election an absentee ballot may be requested.
Hatched = form letter · 27 of 646 written submissions (4%) came from organized campaigns
HB288 would require voters to request an absentee ballot at least six months before an election. A small number of supporters argue this would reduce opportunity for absentee-ballot misuse and give officials more time to verify eligibility. The overwhelming majority of submitters oppose the bill, arguing a six-month advance requirement is impossible for voters to plan around given unpredictable illness, travel, and family or work emergencies, and characterizing it as a thinly veiled voter-suppression measure given New Hampshire's already-restrictive voting laws and lack of evidence of fraud.
Supporters argue the current absentee ballot system is prone to abuse and that an earlier request deadline would limit exposure to misuse and give officials more time to confirm voter eligibility; some offer general support without further elaboration.
“The absentee system has become overly abused and has opened our election systems to fraud. This legislation will rightly restrict absentee ballots for those who truly need it such as our military members.”
— Joseph Abasciano, Milton · #395680 — read full submission →
“Limits exposure of the absentee process to misuse and provides more time to verify requirements.”
— Steve Frechette, Nashua · #401103 — read full submission →
Opponents argue voters cannot know six months ahead of time whether illness, injury, travel, or a family or work emergency will prevent them from voting in person, so the requirement would effectively eliminate absentee voting for many who need it.
“Had I known six months before I became ill and fell, severely injuring myself, that I had to get all my affairs in order because I would be confined to home for over a month, maybe I could have done that. However, that's not the nature of illness or accident in our lives.”
— Christine Hague, Weare · #392784 — read full submission →
“They would need a foolproof way to know ahead of time that they will be unavailable due to a chemo treatment for a cancer that hasn't been detected yet.”
— Carol Linstid, AMHERST · #389775 — read full submission →
Opponents describe the bill as a deliberate, often partisan effort to reduce turnout and disenfranchise eligible voters under the guise of election administration.
“This bill proposes to make voting significantly more difficult for everyone in New Hampshire. It, and HB418 are BLATANT attempts at voter suppression and disenfranchisement, and it is shameful that these bills are even being considered.”
— Kavita Finn, Bedford · #388284 — read full submission →
“HB288 is an outrageous attempt to prevent registered voters from accessing absentee ballots.”
— John Petit, Litchfield · #399353 — read full submission →
Opponents note that New Hampshire's voting laws are already among the most restrictive in the country and that officials from both parties confirm voter fraud is not a problem, so additional restrictions on absentee voting are unnecessary.
“New Hampshire is already one of the most restrictive states in the country when it comes to voter laws. We already require IDs to vote and make it difficult for absentee voting.”
— Timothy Doxzon, Nashua · #401575 — read full submission →
“The Secretary of State and many officials from both parties confirm that voter fraud is not an issue in New Hampshire.”
— form letter, submitted 24 times · #392549 — read full submission →
Opponents argue the requirement would fall hardest on the elderly and disabled, military service members and their families, college students, and workers with unpredictable schedules such as nurses, truckers, and traveling professionals.
“Many voters, particularly those who are elderly, disabled, or living in remote areas, may face challenges in determining their need for an absentee ballot that far in advance.”
— Ashley Hartson, Bow · #400421 — read full submission →
“This is clearly an attempt to restrict voting from college students. But it also can impact long haul truckers, traveling nurses, construction workers, military personnel, and anyone who travels for business.”
— Sylvia Olson, Portsmouth · #398468 — read full submission →
Opponents frame the bill as contrary to democratic values and voting rights generally, with some invoking constitutional protections or New Hampshire's 'Live Free or Die' identity.
“Voting is a Constitutional Right and much like the warning in the 2nd amendment - it Shall Not be infringed.”
— Cynthia Couture, MOULTONBOROUGH · #394085 — read full submission →
“Live Free or Die includes the ability to live free to vote how you please. New Hampshire does not need further restrictions; that makes our land less free.”
— Liam Lavoie, Derry · #401477 — read full submission →
A small number of opponents point to specific mechanical problems, such as the bill summary appearing to conflict with its actual text, or the lack of a remedy if a mailed ballot is lost during the waiting period.
“The full wording states that requests must be made within 6 months of the election”
— Arleen Andreozzi, Hampton · #403449 — read full submission →
“What happens if you lose the ballot during the 6 months prior to the vote? You are not allowed to get another ballot 2 weeks before the vote so your voting rights have been denied once again.”
— Merilynn Bourne, CORNISH · #395794 — read full submission →
Generated by claude-sonnet-5 (claude code agent) on Jul 20, 2026. Quotes are verbatim excerpts, verified against the cited submission before publication. Summaries are AI interpretation of the record, not part of it.
27 submissions match 2 shared templates; 231 are individually written.
The bill is argued to be voter suppression because requiring absentee ballot requests six months in advance would prevent many eligible voters from casting their ballots.
HB288 is a nonsensical bill. Requiring voters to request absentee ballots 6 months prior to an election would basically eliminate many absentee ballots. This bill is voter suppression as it would result in many voters not being able to vote at all. Most voters do not plan trips out of state, whether business-related or vacations, that far in advance. Likewise, voters can become ill or disabled within a 6 month window. Other examples of instances requiring an absentee ballot well short of 6 months notice are numerous. NH has a safe absentee ballot system and one of the most restrictive in the country. Calls for further restrictions are purely voter suppression tactics.
The template argues that existing voter laws are already restrictive and that proposed changes would make voting more difficult rather than improving election integrity.
New Hampshire is already one of the most restrictive states in the country when it comes to voter laws. The Secretary of State and many officials from both parties confirm that voter fraud is not an issue in New Hampshire. We need to enter the 21st century and make voting easier NOT more difficult! Our nation is based on free and fair elections ~ restrictions do not make this either!!!
Detected by text-similarity clustering; campaign names are AI-generated.
Forcing an individual to request an absentee ballot six months prior to an election is blatant voter suppression! Our voting system and procedures already are safe. This is an attempt at a solution where there is no problem.
I oppose this bill. It is unreasonable to expect the voter to know 6 months prior to the election if they will be able to vote in person on that day.
It is exceedingly common in my profession that I would be called out of town on very short notice. I also know many people who have had , for instance, family issues or medical issues which must be attended to on equally short notice. Long lead times for committing to an absentee ballot are just a barrier. Or, of course, many people might realize the best course is to simply pull an absentee ballot application ahead of time. That would be wasteful. You could only pull the application, of course, since actual ballots wouldnt be ready in the designated timeframe, but even that would just be a waste. Arent budgets tight enough without that kind of waste?
This bill doesn’t make any sense. Many people won’t know 6-months in advance if they won’t be in town for the election. This is voter suppression.
I can’t believe this has actually been proposed. There are many reasons why a voter might not know that they will need to vote absentee 6 months before an election.
6 months prior to an election for absentee ballot requests is an impediment to absentee voting and much too far in advance for real life circumstances.
Please do not support this bill. Requiring 6 months in advance to vote absentee is not enough time for many to know they will be unable to vote in person. This is voter suppression.
This ridiculous requirement will disenfranchise most of NH's absentee voters, which I suspect is the goal. For shame!
New Hampshire is already one of the most restrictive states in the country when it comes to voter laws. The Secretary of State and many officials from both parties confirm that voter fraud is not an issue in New Hampshire. We need to enter the 21st century and make voting easier NOT more difficult! Knowing if you are going to require an absentee ballot 6 months is advance is OUTRAGEOUS!!! Our nation is based on free and fair elections ~ restrictions do not make this either!!!
New Hampshire is already one of the most restrictive states in the country when it comes to voter laws. The Secretary of State and many officials from both parties confirm that voter fraud is not an issue in New Hampshire. We need to enter the 21st century and make voting easier NOT more difficult! Knowing if you are going to require an absentee ballot 6 months is advance is OUTRAGEOUS!!! Our nation is based on free and fair elections ~ restrictions do not make this either!!!
What possible justification is there for requiring absentee ballots to be applied for 6 mos. in advance?
The summary of HB288 relative to requesting an absentee ballot 6 months prior to an election is directly opposite to the full wording in the complete bill. The full wording states that requests must be made within 6 months of the election
This bill is totally unrealistic. People do not know what their schedule is 6 months ahead. Defeat this bill.
limits exposure of absentee ballots and qualified voters. please support.
HB288 is a nonsensical bill. Requiring voters to request absentee ballots 6 months prior to an election would basically eliminate many absentee ballots. This bill is voter suppression as it would result in many voters not being able to vote at all. Most voters do not plan trips out of state, whether business-related or vacations, that far in advance. Likewise, voters can become ill or disabled within a 6 month window. Other examples of instances requiring an absentee ballot well short of 6 months notice are numerous. NH has a safe absentee ballot system and one of the most restrictive in the country. Calls for further restrictions are purely voter suppression tactics.
Six months in advance requesting an absentee ballot is unreasonable. Many elderly people with illnesses cannot plan that far ahead as to whether or not they will need an absentee ballot. This bill punishes the elderly, prevents them from planning how where, and when they will be able to vote. If one has a chronic illness, it is a day-to-day regimen that changes constantly and needs too be fairly flexible.
This is another voter suppression bill. Circumstances change and requiring absentee ballots to be requested 6 months in advance would disenfranchise a wide range of NH citizens. Illness, extreme weather events, personal emergencies, the list is endless. New residents who may have work obligations would be out of luck. It is pointless, cruel and discriminatory to require such a restriction. Please do not vote for this bill.
We are already such a restrictive state as far as voting, we should definitely do all we can to encourage voting and not do anything to restrict voting. I oppose this bill- especially since it doesn’t make sense to request an absentee ballot six months ahead of time. That is just ridiculous and it’s clearly meant to be just voter suppression.
Current NH voter laws are restrictive enough as it is. I have seen/heard no evidence of voter fraud being an issue in NH. Requiring an absentee ballot be requested 6 months out from an election is ridiculous. Voting is a civic duty we are lucky to have; don't make it an arduous chore as well.
Too restrictive.
This legislation is another attempt to make ballot access more difficult. It should be opposed.
New Hampshire is already one of the most restrictive states in the country when it comes to voter laws. The Secretary of State and many officials from both parties confirm that voter fraud is not an issue in New Hampshire. Voting needs to be easier, not more difficult!! Knowing if you’re going to require an absentee ballot 6 months in advance is OUTRAGEOUS!!! More restrictions do not equal free and fair elections, what our nation is based on.
It is ludicrous to request an absentee ballot 6 months before an election. A lot can change in a person's life in 6 months. I oppose this bill.
HB288 is a nonsensical bill. Requiring voters to request absentee ballots 6 months prior to an election would basically eliminate many absentee ballots. Most voters do not plan trips out of state, whether business-related or vacations, that far in advance. Likewise, voters can become ill or disabled within a 6 month window. Other examples of instances requiring an absentee ballot well short of 6 months notice are numerous.
Sounds like voter suppression to me