Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Long Covid topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Lawmakers hear bill to form New Hampshire committee on long COVID impacts and accommodations
Summary
A bill to establish a state committee to study protections, accommodations and economic impacts for people with long COVID drew testimony citing a fiscal report estimating tens of thousands in New Hampshire have experienced long COVID and several thousand face employment impacts.
The House Committee on Health and Human Services and Elderly Affairs held a public hearing on House Bill 58, which would establish a committee to study legislative protections and accommodations for individuals with long COVID.
Prime sponsor Representative Wendy Thomas, who represents Merrimack, told the committee the New Hampshire Fiscal Policy Institute report mailed to members estimates about 22,400 people in the state have reported long COVID and that roughly 4,000 working‑age residents have been pushed out of the workforce because of lingering symptoms. “Long COVID is defined as a chronic condition that occurs after SARS‑CoV‑2 infection and is present for at least three months,” Thomas said, explaining the committee’s charter would study the condition’s health and economic effects and recommend coordinated solutions across health, employment, education and social services.
Thomas stressed long COVID’s potential economic effects: “This significant percentage demonstrates the potential for long term economic disruptions, including individuals with long COVID who often experience debilitating symptoms making it difficult or impossible to maintain consistent employment,” she said. She also said long COVID disproportionately affects marginalized communities and urged a multi‑sector response.
Members asked about scope and overlap with existing clinical efforts. Representative Woods asked whether Dartmouth’s long‑COVID clinic and existing interdisciplinary research could overlap with the proposed study. Thomas and other members agreed the committee could coordinate with clinical programs and public‑health entities rather than duplicate work.
Committee members raised procedural questions about forming new study bodies. Representative McKe asked whether there were alternatives to another study commission because of staffing burdens; Thomas said the committee’s purpose is to propose practical ways the Legislature can help and to identify gaps in current service delivery.
No committee vote was taken during the hearing; the public hearing was closed with the committee to consider next steps in future business.
