Home » State Budget » Recent Articles:

The Senate’s FY 2012-2013 Budget Proposal

June 6, 2011 State Budget
NH flag

For the most part, the Senate followed the path laid by the House in its version of the budget, imposing substantial spending reductions across a wide array of vital public services. In broad terms, the budget supported by the Senate would lower General and Education Fund expenditures roughly $240 million or approximately 5 percent. Like the House, the Senate would cut payments for uncompensated care, reduce local aid and curtail support for higher education.

... Continue Reading

Medicaid: A Key Source of Insurance in New Hampshire

April 20, 2011 Health Policy, State Budget

Medicaid serves about one in 10 people in N.H. A look at the families and individuals it serves, its funding structure and the potential consequences of significant reductions to the program.

... Continue Reading

House Finance Committee’s FY 2012-2013 Budget Proposal

March 29, 2011 State Budget
NH flag

Under the Committee’s recommendations, the state would spend approximately $4.4 billion from its General and Education Funds over the course of the FY 2012-2013 biennium, close to $300 million below Governor Lynch’s proposed budget for the same period and approximately 10 percent less than the $4.9 billion the state expects to spend from those funds and in federal stimulus monies by the close of the current FY 2010-2011 biennium. Accordingly, the Committee’s recommendations, if enacted, would entail either the outright elimination of, or exceptionally sharp reductions to, a wide range of vital public services and programs.

... Continue Reading

Connect with NHFPI

Common Cents Blog

State Delays Implementation of Medicaid Work Requirements, Citing Potential Coverage Losses

11 Jul 2019

tree with coins

Earlier this week, New Hampshire state officials suspended the implementation of the work and community engagement requirements for expanded Medicaid beneficiaries until September 30. The Department of Health and Human Services had no information on the compliance of approximately 17,000 individuals, which would have meant up to that many individuals would have lost their health coverage starting in early August if they did not provide information and fulfill their required hours by the end of July. With this suspension, coverage losses due to noncompliance with the work requirements would not take place until early December, barring any other intervening policy changes from the state or federal governments or the pending results of legal action.