HB1605

Testimony on HB 1605: Establishing a State Office for Intelligence and Counterintelligence I oppose HB 1605 due to its underpinnings that raise profound concerns regarding civil liberties and the potential for overreach in the establishment of a state intelligence and counterintelligence office. While the bill claims to address growing threats from foreign entities, it risks creating a surveillance infrastructure that could infringe on the rights of individuals without sufficient justification. By focusing on intelligence gathering without clear definitions and oversight, the bill opens the door for profiling and discrimination, particularly against marginalized communities who might be unfairly targeted under the guise of national security. Furthermore, the proposed funding of $6 million for the office raises questions about fiscal responsibility and prioritization. Given the significant investments required for equipment and operational costs, it is vital to ensure that this funding is used effectively to promote public safety without compromising civil rights. The lack of an established oversight mechanism to monitor the office’s activities increases the risk of misuse of funds and potential abuses of power. Legislative safeguards must be in place to ensure that any intelligence activities remain transparent and accountable to the public. Finally, any structure established by this bill must incorporate an inclusive intersectional framework that considers the diverse implications of intelligence work on various communities. Engaging with community representatives, civil rights advocates, and other stakeholders is essential to ensure that the agency’s efforts do not disproportionately, and unjustly, impact marginalized individuals. As we navigate concerns around safety and security, we must prioritize principles of equity and justice to uphold the democratic values that define our society. Rejecting HB 1605 is crucial to preventing the establishment of an invasive surveillance system that jeopardizes civil liberties in pursuit of questionable security aims.

Republicans sponsoring this bill should be ashamed. Privacy in our state is critical and this isn't supporting small government. I do not want my tax dollars going to further surveillance.

We absolutely don't need to spend all that money on something like this. We have the DOJ and local police forces to do this work in legitimate institutions . This would be entirely political and is wrong for democracy.

We do not need this. We do not need a state agency spying on NH citizens. I oppose this gross overreach.

Unnecessary expenditures that would increase militarization of our small state. Social concerns should be addressed at the route; not through large, expensive, and intrusive government oversight. Money best spent elsewhere.

What are these new offices for? Who would they investigate?

This act proposes to spend money (that the state doesn't have) to purportedly fight terrorism. But instead it would would likely result only in intrusive surveillance of NH residents. Please do not approve this bill.

I oppose this bill, because I think Intelligence and Counterintelligence should should be managed by the federal government, Those issues require a level of training, education and oversight which is beyond state government. The state of NH should focus on the programs and services which relate to the needs and maintenance of NH. Thank you for your work in the legislature, Joanna Andros

Too expensive for the state for a need that's not really been made evident and necessary.