Senate Finance hears testimony on HB 517 amendment to cut marketing for New Hampshire paid family and medical leave

Representative Brian Seaworth, a House cosponsor, told the Senate Finance Committee that House Bill 517 was narrowed by the House to repeal only the marketing and outreach portion of the Granite State Paid Family Leave plan.

Seaworth said the House recommended the change as a budget saving and that a financial note had been added; he estimated a larger savings but acknowledged the committee packet contained a different figure. He asked senators to pass the amendment.

Public commenters urged the committee to retain outreach funding. Taylor Weiss of Sutton described learning about the program from a town flyer and said she and her family would use the benefit when her child is born. Mackenzie Nicholson, senior director of MomsRising in New Hampshire, said more than 23,000 Granite Staters have enrolled in the plan and warned that removing dedicated public outreach would reduce participation and harm families and employers.

Officials from the New Hampshire Insurance Department and the Department of Employment Security described the current program structure and enrollment. Insurance Commissioner D.J. Bettencourt said eliminating the marketing budget would not end the program and that his department was in talks with the insurer, MetLife, about whether the company could assume some outreach responsibilities. Rich Labors, deputy commissioner at the Department of Employment Security, said about 300 employers have purchased coverage for roughly 13,000 workers and that about 1,900 individuals are enrolled in the individual-purchase portion of the program.

Labors gave demographic and usage details for the individual pool: about 75% of enrollees are female, two-thirds are under 45, and roughly 80% of paid leave taken by that group has been for bonding with a newborn. Bettencourt and Labors also described program safeguards: the individual premium is capped (the transcript cites a $5-per-pay-period cap), and revenue is placed into a premium stabilization account to preserve the cap. Officials noted insurance-premium taxes are collected on the product and described ambiguity in federal tax guidance for some benefit payments.

Senators debated the trade-offs between short-term budget savings and longer-term outreach. Some members said marketing now may be more a "maintenance" expense than the upfront build phase, and others urged caution because the program has been in place only two years. Committee members asked the insurance department to identify nonstate outreach steps and to report back about what MetLife would pick up if the state removed marketing funds.

The committee recorded a motion to advance the bill as "ought to pass." The transcript shows senators moved and seconded a motion to pass HB 517; the motion carried and the bill was placed on consent. The transcript does not record a formal roll-call tally for that final vote in the hearing record provided.

Notes on competing financial figures and enrollment: Representative Seaworth referred to a financial note not in the printed packet and said the amendment represented about $1.5 million in savings; the committee packet contains a financial statement marked in the record that lists an annual savings of $717,000. Mackenzie Nicholson stated more than 23,000 people had enrolled statewide; Department of Employment Security figures provided in the hearing record cite roughly 13,000 workers covered through employer plans and about 1,900 individuals in the individual-purchase pool. The article reports these numbers as stated to the committee and attributes them to speakers in the hearing.

The committee closed public testimony and proceeded to executive and committee business on other items.