I strongly oppose the non-germaine amendment which is the text of HB1616.
SB572
Senate · 2026 sessionDemocraticKilled in HouseSelling the Anna Philbrook Center property
AIExempts the sale of the state-owned Anna Philbrook Center for Children property in Concord from standard hospital real estate sale requirements and directs its sale, offered first to the city and county.
relative to New Hampshire hospital real estate.
Status
Killed in the House — Inexpedient to Legislate · May 7, 2026- ✓Introduced
- ✓Senate
- ✕House
- Governor
- Law
Division of testimony
379 submissionsHatched = form letter · 11 of 379 written submissions (3%) came from organized campaigns
Argument digest · AI-generated
from 184 of 194 written submissionsSB572 is nominally a bill about New Hampshire hospital real estate, but nearly all testimony addresses a non-germane amendment that would revive HB1616 (tabled last session), barring state and local government agencies from using public funds to advertise or promote vaccines. Testimony is overwhelmingly opposed to this amendment, including from several submissions tagged 'support' that clarify they support the underlying real-estate bill but oppose the added vaccine-advertising restriction; no submission was found substantively defending the restriction itself. Opponents argue the amendment is an improper legislative maneuver, would silence important public health communication, risk federal funding, and reflects anti-science political influence rather than sound health policy.
- Amendment is a non-germane, improper legislative maneuverOppose99 of 184 reviewed · 11 via form letter
The most common objection is procedural: submitters argue the vaccine-advertising ban has nothing to do with the hospital real estate bill it was attached to, and object to reviving HB1616 (already tabled last session) through a non-germane amendment rather than its own hearing process.
“Tacking an anti-vaccine policy onto a bill about hospital real estate is a clear attempt to push an ideological agenda through the legislature without proper scrutiny.”
— Meg Cowan, Wilmot · #654997 — read full submission →
“I support the Senate version of SB 572. I oppose the non-germane amendment, which is the text of HB 1616.”
— Louise Moses, New London · #653655 — read full submission →
- Would silence public health communication about vaccinesOppose27 of 184 reviewed
Many submitters argue banning state and local agencies from advertising or promoting vaccines would prevent officials from notifying families about vaccine availability and clinics, especially during disease outbreaks, and would eliminate educational resources relied on by health care providers.
- Vaccines are safe, effective, and save livesOppose18 of 184 reviewed
Numerous submitters assert that vaccines are scientifically proven safe and effective and have saved countless lives, arguing there is no valid basis for restricting communication about them.
- Testimony grounded in healthcare professional experienceOppose14 of 184 reviewed
A number of nurses, physicians, and pediatricians testify from professional experience about the value of vaccines and their duty to provide patients accurate, evidence-based information, arguing the amendment would interfere with informed consent and patient communication.
- Reflects anti-science, politically motivated agendaOppose12 of 184 reviewed
Some submitters characterize the amendment as part of a broader anti-vaccine, anti-science political movement, often linking it rhetorically to national figures such as RFK Jr., rather than legitimate public health policy.
- Historical or personal accounts of vaccine-preventable diseaseOppose11 of 184 reviewed
Several submitters cite personal or family experiences with diseases like polio or measles to illustrate the stakes of reducing public vaccine communication.
- Decisions should rest with doctors and scientists, not politiciansOppose8 of 184 reviewed
Some submitters argue public health guidance on vaccines should be driven by medical and scientific expertise rather than legislative or political intervention.
- Amendment risks losing federal immunization fundingOppose5 of 184 reviewed
A few submitters warn that restricting public vaccine communication could jeopardize several million dollars in federal immunization funding if the state cannot meet federal public education requirements.
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.
Form-letter campaigns
11 of 194 written submissions (6%)11 submissions match a shared template; 183 are individually written.
- Opposition to HB 1616 AmendmentOppose11 submissions on this bill
The template argues against an amendment that would prohibit public funding for vaccine promotion, characterizing it as an anti-vaccine measure.
The letter · submitted 11 times I oppose the non-germane amendment, which is the text of HB 1616. This is a replace-all amendment to bring back HB 1616, which was tabled last session. HB 1616 is an anti-vaccine bill that would prohibit “any state agency or political subdivision from using public funds to advertise or otherwise promote vaccines."
Detected by text-similarity clustering; campaign names are AI-generated.
I oppose the non-germane amendment, which is the text of HB1616.
I oppose the non-germane amendment, which is in the text of HB1616.
: By prohibiting state agencies and local governments from advertising vaccines or spending any money on vaccine advertising, SB572 would limit families knowledge about access to vaccines. This silences the state's ability to communicate with families about vaccine-preventable diseases during outbreaks or to provide educational resources to health care providers. This bill could also jeopardize up to $3.5 million in federal immunization funding if the state cannot meet federal requirements for public education and communication. Families deserve to have up-to-date health information and should know when their children face health risks or accessible healthcare is available in their community.
"I oppose the non-germane amendment, which is the text of HB 1616." This is a replace-all amendment to bring back HB 1616, which was tabled last session. HB 1616 is an anti-vaccine bill that would prohibit “any state agency or political subdivision from using public funds to advertise or otherwise promote vaccines.”
I oppose the non-germane amendment, which is the text of HB 1616.
I oppose the non-germane amendment, which is the text of HB 1616
This non-germane amendment has NO business in this bill. Further, it promotes what would be a public health travesty. This language deserves quick removal from this legislation!
Testimony is for non-germane amendment. I am a member of the public who believes it is very important to have our vaccinations for children, adults and the elderly. It protects our public health for all. Please oppose HB 572. Thank you
"I oppose the non-germane amendment, which is the text of HB 1616." This is a replace-all amendment to bring back HB 1616, which was tabled last session. HB 1616 is an anti-vaccine bill that would prohibit “any state agency or political subdivision from using public funds to advertise or otherwise promote vaccines.”
I OPPOSE the Anti-Vaccine Amendment based on humanitarian interests.
I oppose the non-germane amendment to this bill.
I oppose replacing HB572 with HB1616. Changing the current bill with another that had been tabled/rejected is not the intent of HB572.. I support information and recommendations for childhood vaccines and adult vacci.nes
I oppose the non-germane amendment, which is the text of HB 1616. This is a replace-all amendment to bring back HB 1616, which was tabled last session. HB 1616 is an anti-vaccine bill that would prohibit “any state agency or political subdivision from using public funds to advertise or otherwise promote vaccines.
I oppose this non-germane amendment. It is the text of HB1616.
Vaccine education is crucial to New Hampshire. I have family in the state who are considered immunocompromised, so the risk of them becoming sick when vaccines could have been used as prevention is not one I am willing to take.
I oppose the non-germane amendment, which is the text of HB 1616. This bill would silence the state's ability to communicate with families about vaccine options and eliminate essential educational resources for public health.
As a finance professional and a parent, I know that vaccines are both cost effective and save lives by mitigating the health risks associated with preventable diseases. The widespread use of the Polio vaccine proved this over seventy years ago. I support free speech and educating health care providers and New Hampshire families on vaccines. Also, I’m concerned that up to $3.5 million in federal immunization funding might be jeopardized if the state cannot meet the federal requirements for public education and communication. Therefore I oppose this SB 572.
Using subterfuge to actively undermine children's protection from serious disease would be the plot of evil-doers in a way-out fictional novel! Vaccines and medical science have created a US world of child protection from infectious disease in which vaccine deniers can safely synthesize their cock-eyed theories. That is not fiction. Vaccines causing autism IS fiction. It is mind-bending that radicalized conspiracy collectors, trolls and personal haters of the elites of established science would apply their fevered political conviction to halt the promotion of the vaccines which have protected all of us for 70 years. Please restore sanity to our Statehouse.
I am writing in opposition to the addition of the Non Germane amendment that includes the language from HB 1616 which was tabled by the House. I encourage you to take the same action and table this harmful amendment
I oppose the non-germane amendment preventing doctors and other health care professionals from providing patients with relevant information regarding vaccines. Vaccines have been successful and critical in controlling diseases and preventing suffering. Please oppose SB527 with the HB1616 amendment.
I strongly oppose the non-germane amendment which has been added to HB 1616. Our state health department and local communities should not be prevented from communicating with families during an outbreak or informing families when vaccines are available . I am also opposed to the amendment's provision to eliminate educational resources for health care providers. New Hampshire and our public health system deserve better than this irresponsible bill
I strongly oppose the non-germane amendment tacked onto HB 1616. This is yet another harmful, repressive, and irresponsible anti public health bill. Our state health department and local communities should not be prevented from informing families when vaccines are available or communicating with them during an outbreak. I am also opposed to the amendment's provision to eliminate educational resources for health care providers. New Hampshire deserves better.
I oppose the non-germane amendment, which is the text of HB 1616.
Easy access to information about keeping families safe is essential! There's a reason NH families have been so healthy historically - they know how to protect their children because they've been taught how. Don't threaten the future health of NH.