← Back to All Bills

HB1557 Modifying the state average expenditure per pupil relative to students in special education.

Education Dead Auto-scored

Modifying the state average expenditure per pupil relative to students in special education.

Impact Score — How Does This Bill Affect You?

6

Overall Impact Score

Mixed

Scale: 1 (harmful) to 10 (beneficial)

7
💰

Your Wallet

Would have shifted more special education costs to the state, potentially reducing the property tax burden on local taxpayers who currently bear most of these costs.

7
🏘️

Your Community

Better state funding for special education would help districts provide required services without cutting other programs.

5
⚖️

Your Freedom

A funding formula change with no direct impact on individual freedoms.

Status

Inexpedient to Legislate: Motion Adopted Regular Calendar 184-157 02/19/2026 House Journal 5 P. 39

Voted Yes

0 R

Voted No

0 R

R Yes D Yes R No D No

Sponsor

Mary Wallner (D)

The Short Version

Would have modified how the state calculates per-pupil spending for special education students, likely increasing the state's share of special education funding. Killed on a party-line division vote (184-157).

Who's Behind This Bill?

Who Benefits

  • ▲ School districts struggling with special education costs
  • ▲ Property taxpayers in districts with high special education needs
  • ▲ Students with disabilities who benefit from better-funded services

Who Pays the Price

  • ▼ State budget which would bear increased education costs

Roll Call Detail (1 vote)

Every recorded floor vote on this bill, with each legislator's individual vote. Click a name to see that rep's full record.

Who actually supports this bill?

Across the 1 recorded vote on this bill — counting each legislator's net direction and treating kill motions as opposing the bill — Republicans opposed it ( 1 for , 184 against ) , and Democrats supported it ( 156 for ) .

"Supporting" means voting for passage OR voting against a kill motion. "Opposing" is the inverse. Concurs and amendment-only votes don't count.

Inexpedient to Legislate (kill motion) 2026-02-19
Passed

YES = Kill the bill. NO = Keep the bill alive.

184R
Voted to Kill the Bill (184)
1R + 156D
Voted to Keep It Alive (157)
31
Absent
21
Not voting
Show all 393 individual votes

Voted Yea (184)

Republicans (184)

Voted Nay (157)

Republicans (1)
Democrats (156)
Absent (31)

Alicia Gregg (D) , Andrew Prout (R) , Anita Burroughs (D) , Barbara Comtois (R) , Beth Richards (D) , Brian Cole (R) , Catherine Sofikitis (D) , Cathryn Harvey (D) , Charles McMahon (R) , Claudine Burnham (R) , Daniel Popovici-Muller (R) , Eleana Colby (D) , Ellen Read (D) , Gaby Grossman (D) , Jack Flanagan (R) , James Tierney (R) , Jay Markell (R) , John Leavitt (R) , John Suiter (R) , Karen Hegner (D) , Kimberly Rice (R) , Laurel Stavis (D) , Michael Murphy (R) , Mike Belcher (R) , Pamela Brown (R) , Richard Brown (R) , Samantha Jacobs (D) , Terry Roy (R) , Tim Mannion (R) , Timothy Soucy (D) , Wayne Pearson (D)

Read the Actual Bill → See All Bills

Bill statuses as of May 2026. Check LegiScan or NH General Court for the latest.

This bill was auto-scored using AI analysis of the bill text and legislative data. Scores may be refined as we review more bills.