New Hampshire Ballot Access Reform Bill Takes Shape

New Hampshire HB 48, the ballot access bill, is being redrafted. The original bill lowered the number of votes needed for a group to meet the definition of “political party” from 4% to 2%.

The amended bill retains that idea, but provides that a party that polled 2% but under 4% would nominate by convention, not by primary. Sixteen other states have a somewhat similar system, in which there are two tiers of qualified party, big ones that nominate by primary and smaller ones that nominate by convention.

The amended bill also eliminates the distribution requirement that is now in the law for statewide candidate petitions. The existing law requires 3,000 signatures, but 1,500 must be from each of the state’s two U.S. House districts. The bill will eliminate the distribution requirement. In 2004, the New Hampshire Libertarian candidate for U.S. Senate, Ken Blevins, submitted over 3,000 valid signatures. He was still kept off the ballot because he didn’t have 1,500 valid from each of the two districts.

Finally, the amended bill will lower the number of signatures needed for a group to gain the ability to nominate a full slate of candidates by convention, from 3% of the last gubernatorial vote, to something smaller, such as 5,000 or 6,000 signatures.


Comments

New Hampshire Ballot Access Reform Bill Takes Shape — No Comments

  1. ANY distribution requirement blatantly violates the Equal Protection Clause – See Moore v. Ogilvie, 394 U.S. 814 (1969). The Moore case was brought up in the now famous / infamous Bush v. Gore, 531 U.S. 98, 107 (2000).

    Reason – NO local area has an EQUAL number of electors obviously — due to new, moving and/or dead electors.

  2. Nevertheless, when the Libertarian Party sued Missouri and Virginia over this, it lost both cases. Both cases were filed in 1984. Fortunately the state legislatures of both states repealed the distribution requirements some years later. Moore v Ogilvie dealt with county distribution requirements, not congressional district distribution requirements.

  3. Ohio has similar distribution requirements for some petitions and, I believe, for Governor.

  4. Ohio has no distribution requirement for any petition for new parties or for independent candidates.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.