Subcommittee adopts amendment, then approves optometrists’ limited authority to perform ophthalmologic lasers after heated debate; bill heads to floor 12–3

The House Executive Departments and Administration full subcommittee voted to adopt Amendment 2025-2969h to House Bill 349 and then approved the bill as amended by a roll-call vote of 12–3. The measure would allow doctors of optometry to perform certain in-office ophthalmologic laser procedures after meeting certification and proctoring requirements defined in the amendment and statute.

The hearing included lengthy testimony from optometrists who said defined proctoring pathways and minimum supervised cases will allow qualified optometrists to provide care in underserved areas. Dr. Angelique Sawyer, a practice owner in northern New Hampshire, told the committee the amendment adds proctoring language and ‘‘there are now 14 states in the country that do allow these privileges.’’ She said the amendment specifies live supervised experience and processes for licensure by endorsement for practitioners already performing these procedures in other states.

Ophthalmologists and specialists testified in opposition, citing patient safety and training differences between surgical residency and proctoring models. Dr. Shakhli Maida, president of the New Hampshire Society of Eye Physicians and Surgeons, said, ‘‘Lasers are not simple and that can be complications.’’ Ophthalmology witnesses presented data and arguments that residency-based training provides broader procedural competence and that some peer-reviewed studies show higher repeat-procedure rates when lasers were performed by non‑ophthalmologists.

Supporters said the amendment imposes explicit minimums and permits board rulemaking within defined floors; opponents urged caution, questioned whether the state’s boards can develop appropriate oversight quickly, and pushed for a subcommittee review. The chair framed the amendment as providing a clearer baseline for subsequent board rulemaking.

The clerk recorded the roll on adoption of the amendment as unanimous (15–0). When the committee later voted to pass HB 349 as amended, the roll-call result was 12 in favor, 3 opposed; the chair said the bill will go on the regular calendar for floor consideration and that a minority report would be filed.

Action recorded: adoption of amendment 2025-2969h (15–0); final committee passage as amended recorded 12–3, bill advanced to regular calendar.