As previously reported by Infosecurity, the New Hampshire legislature was considering a bill that would put severe restrictions on the use of biometric IDs within the state’s borders, limiting such use to employee identification. Rejection of the proposed measure was recommended by the committee that heard the bill’s testimony, and the New Hampshire House killed the proposed legislation by a vote of 267–39, according to the chamber’s assistant clerk.
The move came last Thursday, and the results hardly shocked the bill’s co-sponsor, New Hampshire state representative Neal Kurk. “I was disappointed but not surprised,” Kurk told Infosecurity via e-mail, adding that “it took several years to implement our existing statutory ban on biometrics in connection with motor vehicle registrations and licenses.”
But the New Hampshire lawmaker seems undaunted by this setback, espousing the “live free or die” motto the state is so famous for. “It will take several years to extend it to other areas of government in New Hampshire”, Kurk said of the effort to restrict the use of biometric IDs, “but it will happen.”
Kurk would go on to clarify the intent of the rejected bill, noting that it did not seek a wholesale ban on the use of biometric information for identification purposes. “Rather, it's to allow biometrics in any area of state and local government where they make sense and do not unreasonably invade personal privacy, as determined by the legislature,” asserted Kurk. “In other words, a decision to allow biometrics in New Hampshire should be made by the legislature, not administrative officials in Concord or Washington, D.C.”