WeVote
Log In

Bill

Bill

SB 44

relative to hand counts of ballots in elections.

2026 Regular Session Introduced by Kevin Avard

The bill would establish or modify procedures for hand counting ballots in New Hampshire elections to increase transparency and auditability.

Inexpedient to Legislate: MA VV 01/07/2026 HJ 1 P. 50
0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · SB 44

Bill Summary: SB 44 (New Hampshire) — Relative to Hand Counts of Ballots in Elections

Note: This summary covers the bill as reflected in the provided action history and title. It focuses on purpose, provisions, affected parties, and procedural timeline.

Overview

  • Jurisdiction: New Hampshire
  • Session: 2026
  • Short Title: Relative to hand counts of ballots in elections
  • Primary Objective: Establish or modify requirements related to hand counting ballots in elections (the exact text is not provided here, but the title indicates emphasis on hand counts).

Purpose and Intent

  • The bill appears to address how ballots are counted in elections, with a focus on implementing, regulating, or formalizing hand counts as part of the vote tally process.
  • It may aim to specify when hand counts are required, under what circumstances, and by whom, as an alternative to machine/tabulation counts.
  • The measure could be motivated by concerns about transparency, auditability, or voter confidence in the counting process.

Key Provisions (as suggested by title and related action history)

  • Hand Count Mandates or Procedures: The bill likely prescribes procedures for conducting hand counts of ballots, including eligibility of ballots for hand counting and the steps to perform the count.
  • Auditability and Transparency Provisions: Provisions may address how hand counts are documented, how results are reported, and how discrepancies are handled.
  • Scope and Applicability: It may define which elections (general, primary, local, statewide) are subject to hand counting requirements and whether the rule applies to paper ballots only or to certain ballot types (e.g., paper ballots, optically scanned ballots with hand verification).
  • Training and Standards: The bill could require standardized processes, training for staff, and certification or oversight mechanisms for those conducting hand counts.
  • Resource and Cost Implications: There may be language concerning staffing, time, and budget implications to support hand counting activities.

Because the bill text is not provided, the above provisions are inferred from the title and typical features of related election-law measures.

Affected Parties and Impacts

  • Election Officials and Local Clerks: Responsibilities for organizing, supervising, and reporting hand-count results; potential training or certification requirements.
  • Voters: Impact on the visibility and perceived integrity of the vote-counting process; potential changes in reporting timelines.
  • Political Subdivisions: Counties or municipalities that administer elections may need to adjust procedures and allocate resources.
  • Elections Administration Stakeholders: Could influence audit processes, post-election hand count audits, and controversy resolution pathways.

Procedural History and Timeline

  • Introduced: March 9, 2025; referred to Election Law and Municipal Affairs.
  • Committee Actions:
    • January 16, 2025 – Hearing planned (noted in dates)
    • March 7, 2025 – Committee Report: Ought to Pass with Amendment #2025-0730s (Vote 5-0)
    • March 13, 2025 – Committee Amendment #2025-0730s; OT3rdg consideration
    • April 8, 2025 – Public Hearing held (April 22, 2025) and subsequent executive session
    • May 14, 2025 – Executive Session
    • May 27, 2025 – Retained in Committee
    • August 25, 2025 – Executive Session
    • November 18, 2025 – Committee Report: Inexpedient to Legislate (vote 17-0)
    • January 7, 2026 – Not pursued; listed as Inexpedient to Legislate in HJ 1 P. 50
  • Current Status (as of action history): Inexpedient to Legislate (recommended by committee and subsequently not enacted).

Significance

  • The bill underwent a standard legislative process with initial support in committee but ultimately was deemed inexpedient to legislate by the committee and did not advance to enactment.
  • The trend suggests concerns or differing views among policymakers about requiring or formalizing hand counts, potential cost, or practicality issues.

Practical Takeaways

  • If you are a voter or election observer, the bill signals a legislative interest in emphasizing hand-count methods, but as of the latest action, New Hampshire did not adopt new hand-count requirements through this bill.
  • For election officials, the measures proposed could have entailed new procedures or training, but these provisions did not become law in this session.

If you’d like, I can attempt to locate the full text of SB 44 or related fiscal notes to provide a more detailed breakdown of the amendments proposed and their specific legal language.

Compiled from official sources — confirm details with the bill’s official record.

Sign in to ask a question.