New Hampshire is proud to be the Live Free or Die state. We value independence, limited government and practical solutions. But those values do not mean we should ignore risks or rush legislation, especially when public safety is at stake. Reducing bureaucracy is important, but never at the cost of public trust. As legislators, our first responsibility is to do no harm, and that must guide every decision we make for the people who elected us.
That is why the results of a recent University of New Hampshire statewide survey should concern every member of the House. The Granite State Poll makes it clear that residents overwhelmingly oppose House Bill 349, which would allow optometrists, who are not medical doctors or surgically trained, to perform certain eye surgeries. Across the political spectrum and in every region of the state, Granite Staters say that surgical eye procedures should remain in the hands of licensed medical doctors who have the training and experience to perform them safely.
The UNH poll surveyed more than 1,400 New Hampshire residents. After respondents were shown the basic education and surgical training required of both optometrists and ophthalmologists, nearly 9 out of 10 said that having eye surgery performed by a medical doctor trained in surgery is more important than having it performed at a more convenient location. When explicitly asked about HB 349, the response was just as strong. Seventy-six percent of residents oppose allowing non-physicians to perform eye surgery, including 58% who strongly oppose it. Only a very small share, about 8% statewide, supported the idea at all.
The polling shows something else important: Granite Staters view this issue as a matter of trust in their elected leaders. Nearly 60% said they would be less likely to vote for a legislator who supported expanding surgery to non-physicians. That should give all of us a moment of reflection. Voters are not rejecting optometrists, who play a valuable role in providing exams, glasses, diagnoses and ongoing care. What they are rejecting is the idea that the government should redefine what counts as surgery without requiring medical education, clinical training and surgical experience that protect patients from harm.
Residents understand what is at stake. Ophthalmologists train for many years before performing surgery independently. They complete medical school, a hospital internship, three years of surgical residency, and extensive hands-on training on real patients. They must perform dozens, often hundreds, of supervised procedures before operating independently. Optometrists, although important members of our eye-care system, complete four years of optometry school that typically do not include live-patient surgical training. In fact, most optometry programs are in states where optometrists are not allowed to perform laser surgeries at all.
New Hampshire’s independent spirit should lead us to be even more cautious. Independence is not about lowering standards or taking shortcuts, it is about making informed, responsible decisions. We can work to improve access to care, but we must not do so at the expense of patient safety. The promise of quicker access cannot outweigh our obligation to protect patient safety and maintain the trust of the people we serve.
In the minority report filed with the Executive Departments and Administration Committee, supporters argued it was needed to improve access to eye care in the North Country. Since that time, however, ophthalmologists have stepped forward and partnered with Androscoggin Valley Hospital in Berlin to establish a fully functioning ophthalmology department, which is expected to open in January 2026. This development directly addresses the very concern that originally motivated the bill. The report makes clear that the procedures HB 349 seeks to add to optometrists’ scope of practice account for less than 2% of the eye-care services patients need. Even if HB 349 were to pass, it would do little to improve access while creating unnecessary risk for patients.
When public opinion, medical training, and legislative review all point in the same direction, the path is clear. HB 349 is premature, unnecessary and out of step with what New Hampshire residents expect from their leaders.
We urge our fellow House members to join us in voting no on HB 349 and in protecting the safety and trust of the people we serve.
Rep. Peter Schmidt is a Democrat who represents Dover. Rep. Bill Boyd is a Republican who represents Merrimack.