Relative to exempting veterans from certification fees for therapeutic cannabis.
The implementation of HB 205 is expected to have a direct fiscal impact on the revenues collected by the state through the therapeutic cannabis program. Based on an estimation of 1,500 veteran participants in the program, the state may see a decrease in revenue of approximately $75,000 over a three-year period, derived from the waived fees for these veterans. The bill does not create any funding or additional costs on its own, as it ties to existing structures within the state’s therapeutic cannabis program, which is mandated to be self-funding. Consequently, any reduction in application fee revenue could potentially lead to increased registration fees for Alternative Treatment Centers.
House Bill 205 aims to provide financial relief to veterans by exempting them from application and renewal fees associated with the therapeutic cannabis registry in New Hampshire. The bill recognizes the unique challenges that veterans face regarding access to medical marijuana for therapeutic purposes and seeks to alleviate some of the financial burden that may hinder their participation in this program. By exempting veterans from these fees, the legislation promotes access to therapeutic cannabis for those who have served in the U.S. armed forces.
The sentiment surrounding HB 205 is largely supportive, particularly among veteran advocacy groups and legislators who prioritize veteran affairs. The bill addresses the pressing need for accessible healthcare options for veterans, especially concerning mental health and condition management through cannabis. There is concern about the sustainability of the state program's funding model; however, overall, the bill is received positively as a step towards better support for veterans in health-related matters.
Despite the bill's positive reception, some contention exists regarding its fiscal implications and the potential effects on other participants in the therapeutic cannabis program. Critics may argue that waiving fees for veterans could lead to unfair financial burdens being shifted onto other patients or increase government costs in managing the program. The discussions around this aspect highlight the tension between providing essential services to veterans and maintaining a financially viable healthcare framework for all registered patients.