The New Hampshire legislature starts the 2026 session on Wednesday, January 7. Families who educate their children at home deserve transparency, honesty, and clarity with respect to legislation that may impact their rights. They do not deserve uncertainty created by poorly or hastily drafted legislation.
Among experienced legislative advocates, there is a long-standing axiom:
You can’t fix a bad bill.
That axiom reflects how the legislative process actually works — and it explains why GSHE is opposing HB 1268 as it moves forward.
Early Engagement Did Not Lead to Collaboration
GSHE met with state representatives in late July to discuss several issues related to home education. At that time, GSHE had no information about how those remarks might be used if at all. The discussion was informal and exploratory.
The only follow-up GSHE received was a previously submitted “placeholder” version of the bill shared in mid-October; a version sponsors say is a draft.
GSHE provided specific, detailed written feedback in mid-October identifying multiple substantive problems with the bill’s structure, scope, and potential impact on independent home education. We encouraged sponsors to modify the language and offered to work with them further.
No revised language has been shared since.
Why GSHE Went Public
The decision to publish our analysis occurred only after the prime sponsor promoted HB 1268 publicly as a “homeschool freedom bill” in early December.
After the bill was promoted publicly, silence would reasonably have been interpreted as agreement. At that point, GSHE had an obligation to speak clearly, which we did in this article about HB 1268 (2026).
Transparency is not hostility. It is accountability.
Procedure Is Not a Substitute for Substance
Sponsors have said that the Office of Legislative Services (OLS) advised legislators not to formally submit amendments when a bill is assigned to their own committee, which is the case for HB 1268.
That procedural guidance does not prevent sponsors from developing amendment language, sharing draft fixes, or working with stakeholders before a public hearing. Nothing in OLS procedure requires affected families to wait until a hearing to learn whether a bill will be substantively changed.
Legislative workload does not eliminate the obligation to develop legislation transparently and with sufficient time for meaningful review before it advances.
Consultation Requires More Than Assurances
Sponsors have also said that they consulted GSHE, that concerns will be addressed through an amendment, and that GSHE and the broader community should trust their intentions.
No proposed or draft changes have been shared in nearly three months since GSHE provided specific feedback on the “placeholder bill.” Proceeding without developed amendment language places undue reliance on future committee control rather than on prior collaboration and vetting.
Absent meaningful changes — and absent any draft language to review — GSHE must reject the bill as written. Assurances that concerns will be addressed later are not sufficient.
Good intentions are not enough.
Why This Matters
When a bill has multiple structural problems, waiting for a last-minute amendment creates real risk. Amendments may never materialize, fixes may be incomplete, or new problems may be introduced under time pressure.
This is how bad bills move forward unfixed or poorly fixed — not because of bad intentions, but because of inadequate preparation, rushed process, and poor communication with the affected community — and families bear the consequences.
Experience Was Available — and Not Used
GSHE’s legislative team includes a cross-section of experienced homeschoolers and advocates with deep knowledge of how New Hampshire’s home education law works in practice. Other statewide organizations have extensive experience and expertise, as well.
Input and support were available early, declined, and later criticized once we were forced to go public with our concerns about HB 1268.
Good governance requires preparation, transparency, and time. Good intentions are not enough.
Heading into the 2026 Session
GSHE will continue to engage early, substantively, and in good faith.
But when a bill is fundamentally flawed, and when concerns raised months in advance are left unaddressed, waiting for fixes later is not a responsible strategy.
That is why advocates say:
You can’t fix a bad bill.
And it is why GSHE is opposing HB 1268 as written.
