Democrats exhult and key Republicans fume over ruling says state the can't give top billing on election ballots to candidates whose party won the previous election. The ruling also also barred the practice of alphabetizing names of candidates of the same party running for the same office. The secretary of state, meanwhile, says the order could make it hard to maintain the current election calendar.
New Hampshire Public Radio's Josh Rogers has more.
The plaintiffs in the case -- and they included Democrats, libertarians and some republicans -- argued that the law that favors the majority party violates of part one article 11 of the state constitution. That provision holds that every qualified inhabitant of the state shall have equal right to be elected to office. The court agreed -- ruling that candidates whose names appear first on ballots have an advantage, and that giving the majority party candidates precedence over candidates from other parties is not necessary to make ballots manageable…..In a statement, New Hampshire democratic party Chair Kathy Sullivan said the ruling should guarantee a level playing field for all candidates…….Cornish state senate democrat Peter Burling, also touted the ruling as being a win for fair elections. He used his own sports analogy.
"This is a bases-loaded home run right out of the park."
Top Republican lawmakers, meanwhile, were quick to call the ballot decision a foul ball.
"What the court has done is thrown some stuff up in the air and see how it lands."
Senate majority leader Bob Clegg says ballot decisions should be the province of the legislature and that the court should respect as much…….Clegg says he has his reasons for being unsurprised they the justices didn't.
"They are lawyers and they don't understand. They don't understand this. They don't understand that when people are going into the ballot box they are looking for candidates. And what they have done is make it extremely confusing for people to vote."
Clegg added that the best way to deal with the ruling may be to simply ignore it until after election day.
"The right thing to do is leave the election alone and when the legislature comes back let's address it. Let's see how a ballot should be constructed."
"I think it is just mindless palaver."
Again Democratic State Senator Peter Burling.
"The constitution of the state of New Hampshire -- which the last time I read it still has higher political force than Bob Clegg's imagination -- requires that every person running for office has an equal chance of election. That applies to the 06' elections, and it's done."
But not done easily…….That's according to secretary of state Bill Gardner…Gardner say the attorney general's office is trying to determine whether the ruling, which was prompted by a suit over a general election ballot, requires tearing up the already printed primary ballots that list candidates in alphabetical order.…..If that's the case, Gardner says it will cost time and money…..and could force the primary to be postponed……..Gardner he's like to read the ruling as applying only to general elections, but he says that may be wishful thinking.
"Well, they clearly said that secretary of state alphabetizing the names is uncostional…That's what they said. So how do you deal with the primary -- somebody who loses saying the ballot is unconstitutional. How would you deal with that.
Gardner says he'll be spending the next few days weighing that and other issues posed by the ruling…..Those include as whether he'll need to call the legislature into emergency session to secure funds to defray increased election costs…..Gardner says he'll also be working on ways to ensure the general election ballots meet the court's requirements……Under the court order any new ballots would be subject to superior court review…..In the meantime, the primary is -- for now at least - scheduled to take place on September 12th.
