HB1797

I'd rather have my tax dollars feed the underemployed than give respite to the over-affluent. I oppose and strongly recommend ITL

People in other states like the ones from which the advocates for this bill come may think the best thing you can do with hungry people is to take food away from them. We in NH are better than that. This bill is just cruel and malicious.

Why make it harder to get SNAP benefits? The citizens of our state need help.

Adding additional restrictions to services that are intended for our most vulnerable residents is unnecessary and would require additional time and cost to administer. This additional drain on already limited resources will diminish the intended purpose of these very important social services.

This bill cuts eligiblity for SNAP, and that will result in many veterans, children, and older adults in our state losing access to essential food. I urge you to to Oppose HB 1797.

Children going hungry is a disgrace, and cruelty is not a good look for any legislator.

Written Testimony in Opposition to This SNAP Restriction Bill I strongly oppose this bill because it would harm vulnerable families and remove critical flexibility from a program designed to prevent hunger. First, directing the Department of Health and Human Services to seek a waiver from the United States Department of Agriculture to ban the purchase of candy and soft drinks with SNAP benefits ignores real medical and family realities. Some families are temporarily living out of state for long periods because their child is hospitalized for serious health conditions. These families still need to eat, often in hospitals or unfamiliar areas where food options are limited and expensive. Restricting allowable purchases would make an already stressful situation even harder. Second, for individuals with diabetes, access to sugary foods or drinks can be medically necessary during a crisis to prevent dangerous drops in blood sugar. In addition, for some people with autoimmune diseases, quick access to simple sugars or specific processed foods can help manage flares, medication side effects, or sudden physical stress. A blanket ban fails to account for these legitimate medical needs. Third, while healthier foods should be encouraged, the reality is that healthier options are often more expensive and less accessible. SNAP benefits are already stretched very thin for most people receiving benefits. Restricting lower-cost food and drink options without increasing benefit levels makes it harder for families to feed themselves, this is not how we encourage healthier choices. It is also important to note that SNAP recipients already have the option to withdraw cash from their EBT card and use it as they choose. Restricting specific food purchases does not eliminate access to these items—it simply adds bureaucracy and stigma. Cash withdrawals also increase the likelihood that funds are used for items SNAP benefits are not intended to cover, undermining the stated goal of these restrictions. Finally, strengthening work requirements, increasing data-sharing, targeting out-of-state purchases, and removing state discretion all add barriers and surveillance without addressing the root causes of food insecurity. States need flexibility to respond to real-life circumstances, not rigid rules that punish families for situations beyond their control. SNAP exists to reduce hunger and support families in crisis. This bill moves away from that purpose. I urge you to oppose it.

Please do not make it more difficult for people who are eligible and need services to get them.

This bill is a cruel attempt to stigmatize families who access SNAP benefits and unduly burdens grocers. It’s an attempt to police the contents of groceries purchased when the fact is, that unhorsed individuals and severely disabled rely on prepackaged foods due to inaccessibility of a kitchen for cooking, or the inability ability to cook. Stop weaponizing the poor! Start focusing on the real issues such as affordable housing. I oppose this bill.

I am a guardian of a person permanently disabled who cannot work now nor in the future. This person depend on Medicaid, and SNAP and other state administered services that are critical to keep them both alive and housed and independent as opposed to other much worse alternatives. There should always be a goal of choices for independence for our disabled loved ones. Removing the current exemptions for work will place terrible burdens and safety risks on our disabled loved ones, and in many cases people in their 60s 70s on up trying to take over the care. Please I urge you to reject this bill. It can only hurt people, many people, not help anyone.

Too many people in New Hampshire arestill dealing with hunger. I do not believe that anyone tries to cheat by getting SNAP benefits if they are not truly in need. It is not enough of a benefit to be worth the trouble. but please do not make it even more difficult for people who are truly in need.

Punishing kids for being poor?

I oppose this bill.

I am SICK of seeing my friends and neighbors struggle with the ridiculous bureaucratic maze to access FOOD and other public assistance. Try raising a family in the kind of conditions that a typical SNAP recipient has for a year and THEN MAYBE you'd have a glimpse of what it's like.

People need assistance and the sponsors of this bill are cruel. No No No to the requirement of this bill.

Hunger should not be a political football. Increasing red tape will discourage people who need assistance from seeking it. HB 1797 harms Granite Staters who need help. They are not the lazy, they are the needy. Every community has need people and communities help those in need.

Many people with a mental illness need assistance as they may not be able to work due to their mental illness. I am a health professional, and was guardian for a family member with a severe mental illness. I know firsthand professionally in personally how people with mental illness need help rather than judgment and discrimination. Please oppose this bill.

This bill cuts eligibility for SNAP, adds layers of bureaucracy, and will cause thousands of our neighbors — including children, older adults, and veterans — to lose access to essential food. This is immoral and I strongly oppose this bill.

Refugee resettlement is important! Preserve it!

As a physician, I see firsthand how access to adequate nutrition is not just a matter of comfort—it is a matter of health and survival. This bill’s proposed changes to SNAP eligibility and verification processes risk creating additional administrative barriers for patients who already face challenges in securing food. While I understand the intent to ensure program integrity, the measures in HB 1797 could inadvertently punish the most vulnerable, including those who are elderly, disabled, or working multiple jobs.

I

While I agree that sodas and candy should not be supported by SNAP, I think this bill would be impossible to enforce with all the requirements listed, It is not clear who would have the time to keep track of SNAP purchases and all the other aspects of this law which requires a great degree of oversight.

There are so many important issues to address, Why are you wasting time trying to impeach Karen Liott-Hill when the Attorney General has already ruled that she has done nothing wrong/unethical? This is an extreme example of government's ability to waste taxpayer dollars over non-issues.