LSR Day 2: Health Care Costs, Fentanyl Penalties, and Energy Codes Dominate New Filings

CONCORD, NH — Day 2 of Legislative Service Request filings for the 2026 session brought a wave of measures centered on health care costs, drug enforcement, and energy policy, alongside some familiar cultural flashpoints. Republicans continued to drive filings on affordability and accountability, while Democrats leaned toward regulation and symbolic measures. And among the serious proposals, one eyebrow-raising bill from yesterday — the so-called “greased pig” LSR — stands out as one of the stranger entries so far.

Health care and prescription drug transparency

Several new filings zero in on health care costs. LSR 2026-2035, titled “relative to consumer health care cost transparency” (Prime sponsor: Tim McGough), and LSR 2026-2037, “relative to strengthening prescription drug affordability and transparency” (Prime sponsor: Tim McGough), suggest new disclosure requirements that could force hospitals, insurers, or drug companies to make pricing more public.

Adding to that trend, LSR 2026-2036 — “relative to increasing transparency in the 340B Drug Pricing Program” (Prime sponsor: Tim McGough) — hints at oversight of a federal discount program that has been controversial nationwide. Supporters of similar measures have argued the 340B program is too opaque, while critics worry about federal overreach into local health systems.

Fentanyl penalties and public safety

LSR 2026-2028, “relative to the penalty for certain fentanyl-related offenses” (Prime sponsor: Bill Gannon), puts drug enforcement back on the agenda. With fentanyl tied to a surge in overdose deaths, lawmakers are likely to argue over whether tougher penalties or treatment expansion is the right path forward. Republicans have typically pushed enforcement-first measures, while Democrats have leaned toward public health strategies.

Energy codes and environmental regulation

LSR 2026-2025, “relative to the adoption of energy efficient and clean energy building codes” (Prime sponsor: Daniel Innis), suggests a push toward more stringent construction standards. Environmental groups often champion such measures, while business groups warn they drive up costs for builders and homeowners. The filing points to another likely clash between regulatory goals and affordability concerns.

Schools and animal testing

Education surfaced with LSR 2026-2007, “requiring all schools to start the school year after Labor Day” (Prime sponsor: Bill Gannon). Similar proposals have drawn support from tourism industries and families who prefer a longer summer break, but face resistance from school boards and educators who favor calendar flexibility.

On a different front, LSR 2026-2010, “prohibiting the use of animal testing when other comparable methods are available” (Prime sponsor: Daniel Innis), appears aimed at tightening restrictions on research and consumer product testing. That sets up a debate between animal rights advocates and medical researchers.

Catching what we missed: the greased pig bill

From Day 1, one filing escaped notice but deserves mention: LSR 2026-2021, “prohibiting municipalities from requiring licenses for the exhibition of a greased pig contest or other similar contests” (Prime sponsor: Victoria Sullivan). While unlikely to dominate floor debate, the filing underscores the breadth of bills legislators bring forward — from weighty policy battles to hometown traditions.

What Day 2 reveals

With two days of filings now in the books, the contours of the 2026 session are taking shape:

• Republicans are pushing affordability and accountability measures, from health care transparency to fentanyl penalties.

• Democrats are leaning into regulatory approaches on energy, school mandates, and symbolic measures like tariff relief.

• And every session still brings its share of quirky proposals, with the “greased pig” bill already earning its place as a curiosity.

The coming weeks will bring still more filings, but Day 2 reinforced the partisan themes that surfaced on Day 1: Republicans grounding their agenda in cost-of-living and safety, while Democrats lean toward rules and cultural signals that critics say are out of step with Granite Staters’ concerns.