HB1671

I'm an employee of the DHHS, asking you to *oppose this bill.

I'm an NH voter asking that you please *oppose* this bill. Thank you.

I oppose this bill on the grounds that stripping medicaid payments to facilities for their internal policies around vaccination is a gross overreach of authority and an attempt to end-run around those institutions' rights to set their own standards to protect their staff and patients. In essence you punish those who would rely on those facilities to try to control the facility itself, when in fact the legislature has no business telling hospitals what's medically necessary to keep patients and staff safe from disease. I urge you to reject this bill.

You continue to ignore the science.

This is a link to a map of confirmed measles cases in the United States, Canada, and Mexico prepared by Johns Hopkin s Center for Health Security. https://www.arcgis.com/apps/dashboards/dd314001921f4d2eac160f89ded0b49a, States like Maine with mandatory vaccines immunization coverage of 95-100 percent have few cases of measles (with the exception of California). Texas is interesting, The areas with 95-100 percent immunization coverage have no cases. The other areas with lower immunization coverage have measles cases. NH is lucky that it is in the 90-95 percent immunization coverage range and it does not have any reported cases of measles. Approval of this bill will lower our immunization coverage percentage. A vote for this bill is a political choice not a health choice for NH.

Poor people need to have good and sufficient food.

A terrible bill! sincerely, Mark Meess, MD

Vaccines are an important part of public health!

Dear Representatives, I am absolutely against using Medicaid payments as punishment to facilities who are serving our most vulnerable citizens regarding a policy designed to protect those very vulnerable people.. The rules regarding vaccination for employees is for the benefit of all clients and patients served, as well as staff. It is proven science that vaccination saves lives. Withdrawing Medicaid payments would cause some of these facilities to close - clearly not the direction we want to go in NH when nursing home demand exceeds availability right now. Jane Shapiro

I strongly oppose this bill. Immunizations have been proven to work. Please don’t cause undo harm to this most vulnerable in our society.

This bill would have devastating consequences for the most vulnerable among us. We should be able to trust that health care workers who are in close contact with immunocompromised patients have taken every reasonable measure to protect themselves and their patients against preventable and potentially devastating diseases. The science supports vaccination, particularly in health care settings.

Once again, here is a bill that's a solution seeking a problem. In the unlikely event that a facility discriminates against employees, students, or trainees for exercising lawful medical or religious vaccine exemptions, the entire population of that facility should not be punished by ending Medicaid payments to that facility. There are other ways to sanction the facility without hurting vulnerable elders, low-income people, etc. who had no role in the facility's decisions and may depend on its services.

I OPPOSE this bill (1671) as it is contrary to the public well-being.

This bill could collapse facilities that rely on Medicaid payments, such as nursing homes. Vaccines keep everyone safe, it’s basic public health. If such a facility were to lose its Medicaid payments that would raise taxes for the public (taxes which are already outrageous and hurting people). This bill opens up ridiculous lawsuits that are a complete waste of time and do nothing but hurt the facility and hurt the people desperately seeking care. If someone is stupid enough to go against medical advice to choose to not be vaccinated, they are a dangerous threat to the health of those in any facility. The facility should not have to endanger everyone else for the sake of someone’s ignorance and selfishness. Vaccines save lives.

I am a retired Pediatrician who worked for Dartmouth Health for 25 years. I cannot state strongly enough how dangerous it would be to repeal statutory immunization requirements for children! We are already seeing the damage inflicted by decreasing vaccine rates in the Measles outbreaks happening around the country. Please contact me with questions. Thank you!

I oppose HB1671 because it risks undermining patient safety standards and interferes with healthcare providers’ ability to implement evidence-based infection control policies. Public health decisions should prioritize patient protection rather than impose funding penalties tied to exemption policies

I strongly oppose this absurd bill. So many bad ideas piled on each other.

I oppose this bill. Vaccines keep the public safe. It is not inappropriate for facilities open to the public to “discriminate” against unvaccinated people because they make it unsafe for the rest of the public.

It is critical that we ensure our health care providers are able to require that anybody who is involved in treating patients be vaccinated against certain illnesses. It should be a caretaker's number one priority to ensure the safety of their patients, and a health care provider cannot ensure this immunization statuses are not up to date. A caretaker can always find another place of employment, but a patient often has no choice but to receive care at certain facilities.

I oppose HB 1671. My mother, who has alzheimer's, receives good care at the Merrimack County Nursing Home with the support of Medicaid. If Medicaid no longer paid the bill, and multiply this by the number of residents who depend on Medicaid, I fear that MCNH would either have to close, or the state would have to increase taxes previously covered by the federal government. My voice is just one of hundreds of people who have loved ones in a county nursing home. Please vote no on HB 1671.

Please do not pass this bill that removes protections for many citizens.