I oppose this bill.
HB608
House · 2025 sessionRepublicanKilled in HouseNotarized absentee ballot affidavits
AIRequires the affidavit on an absentee ballot envelope to be a fully executed legal affidavit witnessed and signed by a notary, election officer, or other person authorized by law to administer oaths, verifying the voter's identity and signature.
requiring moderators to inspect absentee ballot affidavits for full execution including use of a notary, election officer, or any person authorized by law to administer oaths.
Status
Killed in the House — Inexpedient to Legislate · March 26, 2025- ✓Introduced
- ✕House
- Senate
- Governor
- Law
Division of testimony
589 submissionsArgument digest · AI-generated
from 137 of 137 written submissionsHB608 would require election moderators to inspect absentee ballot affidavits to confirm they were properly executed before a notary, election officer, or other person authorized to administer oaths. The overwhelming majority of submitters oppose the bill, arguing it burdens elderly, disabled, and rural voters, adds unnecessary cost and administrative work, and is unsupported by evidence of fraud; a small number of supporters say the requirement would strengthen verification of absentee ballots.
- Strengthens verification of absentee ballotsSupport2 of 137 reviewed
A small number of submitters support the bill, describing it as restoring the intended integrity of absentee ballot execution and strengthening the verification process.
“This bills returns absentee ballots to the original intent of execution. Thank you for passing this bill.”
— Carol Petrusewicz, Rochester · #399481 — read full submission →
“This would strengthen the verification process for absentee ballots”
— Steve Frechette, Nashua · #401207 — read full submission →
- Burdens disabled, elderly, and homebound votersOppose36 of 137 reviewed
Many submitters argue notarization would disproportionately harm voters with disabilities, seniors, and homebound or immunocompromised individuals who already rely on absentee ballots because they cannot easily travel.
“Many voters—particularly in rural areas or those with mobility challenges—may have difficulty accessing notaries or election officials who are authorized to administer oaths.”
— Ashley Hartson, Bow · #400503 — read full submission →
“Requiring ballots be notarized or signed by another authorized official will most directly impact voters with disabilities and seniors who may already be voting absentee because they aren’t able to easily travel to vote in person.”
— Carol Kraus, Peterborough · #398545 — read full submission →
- No evidence of fraud; current system already secureOppose21 of 137 reviewed
Submitters contend absentee voting is already safe and reliable, noting affidavits are signed under penalty of perjury and that there is no documented evidence of wrongdoing to justify the added requirement.
“All aspects of the current NH absentee ballot process are very safe and secure. Sworn affidavits are required, with severe penalties for perjury attached to falsehood.”
— Gregory Davis, Salem · #385768 — read full submission →
“VOTER FRAUD IS A MYTH, and efforts like this proposed legislation only serve to undermine our democracy and the systems in place that ensure free and fair elections are held across our state and country.”
— Meghan Eckner, Hopkinton · #386380 — read full submission →
- Notarization is a costly, poll-tax-like barrierOppose7 of 137 reviewed
Some submitters argue that requiring notarization imposes travel time and fees, functioning like a poll tax and creating a particular hardship for voters in rural areas without easy access to a notary.
“would force them to pay in order to vote, which is essentially a poll tax and therefore is just wrong.”
— Lee Ann Kane, Brentwood · #397767 — read full submission →
“To incur the expense of a notary and find one in the rural areas is a hardship we should not have to undertake in order to practice a fundamental right.”
— Steve Sniderman, Kensington · #402847 — read full submission →
- Adds unnecessary work for moderators and clerksOppose13 of 137 reviewed
Several submitters, including current election officials, argue the bill would create duplicative, time-consuming administrative work for moderators and clerks who are already stretched on election day.
“If our moderator had to inspect each ballot affidavit in the way that this bill proposes, all of their attention on a busy election day would be spent looking at paper work. This bill is a waste of time and resources.”
— Marcella Termini, Manchester · #391819 — read full submission →
“This Bill would cause the Moderator to duplicate the work already accomplished by the Town or City Clerk.”
— Merilynn Bourne, CORNISH · #395859 — read full submission →
- Bill amounts to intentional voter suppressionOppose12 of 137 reviewed
A number of submitters characterize the bill as a deliberate, politically motivated attempt to suppress turnout or disenfranchise voters rather than a genuine integrity measure.
“This is absolutely voter suppression. Finding and potentially paying for notary service would impact so many voters.”
— Kathryn Ess, Bow · #400051 — read full submission →
“This is a bare attempt to destroy our democratic freedoms. The people who support this are in favor of an authoritarian government, I am not.”
— Steven Rand, Plymouth · #396353 — read full submission →
- Inconsistent with in-person voting and existing checksOppose4 of 137 reviewed
Some submitters note that in-person voters are not required to have anything notarized and that existing ID, registration, and affidavit requirements already verify voter identity, making notarization redundant.
“Why would you need a notary to vote absentee when that is not required to vote in person??”
— Jana Sellarole, Walpole · #400071 — read full submission →
“Identification through a driving license is sufficient to vote in person, why should the onerous additional requirement for notarization be added to an absentee ballet request or vote”
— Graham Johnson, Sanbornton · #398421 — read full submission →
- General objection: unnecessary barrier to votingOppose41 of 137 reviewed
Many submitters oppose the bill in brief, general terms, describing it as an unnecessary, burdensome, or unjustified obstacle to exercising the right to vote without citing a specific mechanism.
“HB 608 represents an effort to make voting onerous and costly. This bill is unnecessary and obstructs NH citizens' right to vote .”
— janet Ward, Contoocook · #385380 — read full submission →
“Creates an unnecessary barrier for people to exercise their right to vote”
— John Proctor, Charlestown · #401974 — 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.
Oh for goodness sakes! Really? Strongly opposed to these unnecessary barriers.
Requiring notarized absentee ballots puts an undue burden on voters. It's not necessary, amounting to duplication of requiring identification. Please reject this bill.
This legislation would add unnecessary burdens to NH residents seeking to exercise their right to vote by requiring them to get their absentee ballot notarized, which would require transportation and funds to access the notary.
There is simply no need for notarization.
Bill is too restrictive and would deny right to vote to people who would have trouble getting their ballot application notarized. Requiring notarization of ballot application is an unnecessary burden for those who find it hard to get to govt. offices to find a notary which is why they need to vote absentee in the first place.
It’s must more efficient to process any received absentee ballots before Election Day. Speeds up the process on Election Day if they can get ahead of the legal absentee ballots received earlier.
Voting absentee in NH already requires a signed affidavit, a legal document signed under penalty of perjury that already carries heavy consequences if falsified. Requiring the ballot itself to be notarized does nothing to increase the security of process but does create a whole extra burden on folks who are already pressed for time.
This is an effort to disenfranchise voters for trivial reasons.
We need to make easier for people too vote, not harder. We already have an excellent track record on protecting election integrity.
Notarization? Why make voting so difficult and expensive. Please trust NH citizens!
This goes counter to the whole reason absentee ballots are offered. Adding more steps and requirements is a bad idea.
Requiring moderators to inspect absentee ballot affidavits for full execution including use of a notary, election officer, or any person authorized by law to administer oaths. This suggestion is ignorant, sucks up valuable time from a moderator who is overseeing the entire election, is disruptive, and just plain stupid. If a person has signed an affidavit under the penalty of perjury, that person realizes the seriousness of the affidavit and does not need one more check by a moderator. DUMB, DUMB, DUMB.
I don't think the identity should have to be notarized to have an absentee ballot. Anyone who has a valid ID can go to the town Hall where I live and request an absentee ballot due to being away, or concern about accessibility, health, illness, or other reason and get an ballot. In many States everyone gets his/her ballot by mail and mails it in. We don't need any more red tape or barriers to keep people from voting. The more people vote, the better the democracy. Joanna Andros
As an Elections Volunteer, I can attest that this process already works. Don't try to fix what isn't broken.
To incur the expense of a notary and find one in the rural areas is a hardship we should not have to undertake in order to practice a fundamental right.
Thank you for taking my comments! As with HB 686, I would like to voice my opposition to HB 608. It seems that this will create a LOT more work for the clerks since they will in the vast majority of cases do the notarization. And, an election official (clerk or deputy clerk) are the ones receiving the absentee requests so the witnessing seems duplicative. Please vote this bill down! Thank you Rodney Phillips Moderator, Town of Loudon
People who vote in person don't need their ballot notarized. There is no reason to require it of people voting by absentee ballot. That would be an unnecessary extra step and extra expense that could deter voters. If someone is unable to get to the polling place because they are disabled or out of town, they also are likely to get to a notary. I have been really impressed by how the election officials work to enforce the rules AND ensure everyone who is eligible can vote. Please don't change that.
Creates an unnecessary barrier for people to exercise their right to vote
Requiring notarization of absentee ballot applications can be difficult for those who already have reasons why they can’t get to the polls. This places undue burden on NH absentee voters. Vote no on this bill.
So many co-sponsors, so much distrust! Why would you make it more difficult for ANY voter, especially the least able to access assistance for voting, by making them (and/or anyone assisting them) to have their signatures notarized? And to get a color copy of documents (for some disabled voters, who may only have an old black and white printer at home, this is a hardship). Where is the voter fraud in past elections that has caused you to introduce this legislation?? By the way, it is INCORRECT to say that someone can notarize their own signature; rather, one has one's signature notarized (by a person authorized to do so). The current process and requirements are adequate--there is no reason to make voting more difficult, especially for those who are exercising their rights under the duress of circumstances beyond their control.
I oppose this bill which adds further requirements for those attempting to vote by absentee ballot --- requiring the absentee ballot affidavit be notarized or further signed by an election officer. There has been no evidence of serious fraud around absentee ballots and this will further disenfranchise eligible voters – especially those with disabilities who are registering absentee because they are unable to do so in person. Finding and paying for a notary add further burdens. If law makers want everyone to vote in person, they should make the whole process easier as is done in other countries - make it a holiday and expand hours for voting. Bills like this are not helping the process.
I oppose this bill.
The right to a free and fair election is one of the most important rights we hold in this country
Difficult for seniors.