SB 657 New Hampshire Senate · 2026 Regular Session

relative to the use of information technology and artificial intelligence systems by state agencies.

SB 657 creates an AI Analyst position within New Hampshire's Attorney General's office to monitor AI development and investigate deceptive uses, with $150,000 annually allocated for this role. It also establishes an AI Oversight Commission to study AI's impact on labor, health, education, and political campaigns, and to recommend policies. The bill adds civil penalties for businesses or entities using AI deceptively - such as generating misleading content without disclosure - allowing victims to seek damages of $1,000-$25,000 per violation. This directly affects consumers (protected from deceptive AI marketing), workers (monitored for wage or discrimination risks), and businesses (required to disclose AI use in commercial or political contexts).
Bill status passed both 4 of 5 stages cleared
Introduction
Feb 2026
Committee Review
May 2026
Senate Passage
Mar 2026
House Passage
May 2026
Governor
Introduced Feb 4, 2026 Last action May 21, 2026
Maddy AI version diff · 2 comparisons

What changed between versions

As Amended by the Senate As Amended by the House · 6 edits
MODERATE
The House completely restructured the bill, replacing the Senate's standalone AI study commission with a framework that integrates AI oversight into existing state IT governance structures. Instead of creating a new commission to broadly study AI's effects on society, the House version requires the Department of Information Technology to maintain an inventory of all AI systems used by state agencies and submit annual reports to the legislature and governor. This shifts the bill from a broad policy study to a concrete accountability and transparency mechanism focused specifically on state government AI use.
SCOPE

The entire standalone Artificial Intelligence Oversight Commission (RSA 21-M:20) was eliminated, including its membership structure (legislative appointees, attorney general, secretary of state, various commissioners, public members), its mandate to study AI's effects on workforce, wages, education, healthcare, consumer protections, and political communications, and its recommendation-making authority.

The bill's scope narrowed from studying AI's broad commercial and political effects across the state (including campaign communications and microtargeting) to specifically governing how state agencies use AI systems, with accountability mechanisms built into existing IT governance structures rather than a new standalone body.

REQUIREMENT

The existing Information Technology Council (RSA 21-R:6) now has an explicit advisory role on the development, procurement, deployment, and use of AI systems by state agencies, including compliance with RSA 5-D, opportunities to improve government efficiency, and effects on the state workforce.

A new section (RSA 21-R:9-b) requires the IT commissioner to maintain a public inventory of all AI systems deployed by executive branch agencies, listing the name, vendor, using agencies, purpose, whether it makes decisions affecting individuals' rights or benefits, and deployment date. The inventory must be posted on the department's website and updated at least annually.

A new annual report requirement (due October 1 each year) mandates the IT commissioner to submit a report to the legislature, governor, and state library covering: changes in the AI inventory, agency compliance with RSA 5-D, efficiency gains or cost savings from AI, incidents involving unauthorized use or disclosure of personal information by AI systems, workforce effects, and recommendations for legislation or policy changes.

TECHNICAL

Technical committees under RSA 21-R:7 now explicitly include artificial intelligence technologies (generative AI, automated decision systems, and machine learning) among the topics they may advise on, with a requirement that personnel from all three branches of state government be represented.

Floor votes

How they voted

No floor votes recorded yet.
Full legislative history

Actions timeline

Total actions
21
Key actions
10
Committee
11
Amendments
2
May 21, 2026
Introduced
Sen. Gannon Moved Nonconcur with the House Amendment, MA, VV; 05/21/2026; SJ 13
upper
May 14, 2026
Lower · Passed
Ought to Pass: MA VV 05/14/2026 HJ 13 P. 25
lower
May 6, 2026
Lower · Passed
Committee Report: Ought to Pass 05/05/2026 (Vote 23-0; CC) HC 19 P. 14
lower
Apr 23, 2026
Committee
Referred to Finance 04/23/2026 HJ 11 P. 15
lower
Apr 23, 2026
Lower · Passed
Ought to Pass with Amendment 2026-1491h: MA VV 04/23/2026 HJ 11 P. 4
lower
Apr 23, 2026
Introduced
Amendment # 2026-1491h: AA VV 04/23/2026 HJ 11 P. 4
lower
Apr 16, 2026
Lower · Passed
Committee Report: Ought to Pass with Amendment # 2026-1491h (NT) 04/15/2026 (Vote 18-0; CC)
lower
Apr 8, 2026
Lower · Passed
Subcommittee Work Session: 04/14/2026 10:00 am GP 229
lower
Apr 1, 2026
Lower · Passed
Subcommittee Work Session: 04/08/2026 10:00 am GP 229
lower
Mar 27, 2026
Introduced
Introduced (in recess of) 03/26/2026 and referred to Commerce and Consumer Affairs HJ 9 P. 55
lower
Mar 26, 2026
Upper · Passed
Ought to Pass with Amendment #2026-1060s, MA, VV; OT3rdg; 03/26/2026; SJ 7
upper
Mar 26, 2026
Upper · Passed
Committee Amendment # 2026-1060s, AA, VV; 03/26/2026; SJ 7
upper
Mar 12, 2026
Upper · Passed
Committee Report: Ought to Pass with Amendment # 2026-1060s, 03/26/2026, Vote 3-1; SC 11
upper
Mar 9, 2026
Upper · Passed
Committee Report: Ought to Pass with Amendment # 2026-1060s, 03/12/2026, Vote 3-1; SC 9
upper
Feb 4, 2026
Introduced
Introduced 01/29/2026 and Referred to Judiciary; SJ 3
upper
1 primary · 5 co-sponsors

Sponsors