Citizen in a RepublicNH House Testimony

HB666

House · 2025 sessionRepublicanKilled in Senate

Library record privacy penalties

AI-generated

Adds restitution payments and penalties for violations of the confidentiality of library use records and expands the confidentiality protections to include library cards and membership status.

relative to adding restitution payment for violations of the confidentiality of the library use records and adding library cards and membership status to the list of confidential matters.Official record

State GovernmentRight to KnowCrimes, Crim.Proc. & Corr.AI-generated

Division of testimonyComputed by this site

15 submissions
Neutral 0

All 5 written submissions were individually written — no organized campaign detected.

Status

Killed in the Senate — Inexpedient to Legislate · May 8, 2025
  1. Introduced
  2. House
  3. Senate
  4. Governor
  5. Law
Sponsors, hearings & roll-call votes

The record · every submission as filed

15 submissions
Expand
Karin Laura
for Myself
Gilmanton Ironworks

I oppose this bill.

Oppose
Mary Jenkins
for Myself
Goffstown

This is no public good associated with this bill. It's an unwarranted and unnecessary attack on public libraries.

Oppose
Jacqueline Bennett
for Myself
Windham

I oppose this Bill

Oppose
Michael Berry
for Myself
Epping

What public trust does this bill serve? Someone pointing out that a library card is nonexistent, or invalid, and then being punished to pay $500 restitution, along with a notarized letter of apology does not seem like a fair restitution. Should the person fail to comply, would this legislation then make that person guilty of a class B Misdemeanor and subjected to a criminal record simply for pointing out the status of a library card? Are there other laws of similar consequence (hunting and fishing licenses, driver’s license, seasonal passes, membership to the NRA)? The libraries would be the ones forced to arrange for compliance. Would libraries be forced to spend additional tax payer funds to have a consultation area similar to pharmacies to discuss the status of a library card and be compliant? Does the cost of providing this area, for when such conversations have to be had, justify the additional resources needed to be compliant? This bill and the penalty required of it serves no purpose to the public. If anyone used a library, especially in New Hampshire, patrons are often known to each other. Such a bill only introduces unnecessary penalties, further division, and is yet another senseless attack on librarians in our state. Thank you for your time. Respectfully Submitted, Michael R. Berry

Oppose
Jennifer Suitter
for Myself
Merrimack

This is a waste of time. No. Please find something else to work on. Never in the history of librarians have they been interested enough to leak who's checking out books. It's a library.

Oppose
Jean Brown
for Myself
Hanover

Position recorded without written comment.

Oppose
Adam Paquette
for Myself
Keene

Position recorded without written comment.

Oppose
Sheila Seidel
for Myself & my constituents
Goffstown

Position recorded without written comment.

Support
Virginia Turner
for Myself
Windham

Position recorded without written comment.

Oppose
Julie Clough
for Myself
Durham

Position recorded without written comment.

Oppose
Melissa Penson-mesa
for Myself
Merrimack

Position recorded without written comment.

Oppose
Eric Pauer
for Myself
Brookline

Position recorded without written comment.

Support
Janet Lucas
for Myself
Campton

Position recorded without written comment.

Oppose
Daniel Richardson
for Myself
Nashua

Position recorded without written comment.

Support
Keith Murphy
for Myself
Manchester

Position recorded without written comment.

Support