In addition to the standard political contests, this year ballot will also allow voters to weigh in on 2 proposed constitutional changes.
The first seeks to clarify government's power to take property by eminent domain.
The second would aims restore the Constitutional mandate that every town or ward with sufficient population get it's legislator in Concord.
Passing any constitutional amendment requires 2/3rds support from voters who choose to vote on the questions, and the more complicated the issue, the less likely it is to pass.
New Hampshire Public Radio's Josh Rogers has more.
The first ballot question is in direct response to the US Supreme court ruling in the case of Kelo V. City of New London…..At issue in that case was New London Connecticut's power to use eminent domain take some private homes to facilitate a private development…..In its decision the court essentially said there was nothing in the US Constitution to prohibit such takings if allowed by state law and Constitution…..The court further said that states can act to set their own eminent domain polices……And many state's have -- about half have added laws to their books, and about a dozen have questions on the ballot this year to deal with property protections…..New Hampshire's proposed amendment says no part of any person's property shall be taken by eminent domain and transferred to another person for the purpose of private development or other private use……To the amendment's champions, it's simplicity is a key selling point.
"I think 9 out of 10 voters if they read it and say, 'I get it,' are more likely to say yes than no."
That's former US Congressman and State Supreme court Justice Chuck Douglas. He's leading a campaign to publicize the measure to ensure voters do read and get the question…..That effort includes the formation of a political action committee -- the property protection alliance -- op-eds in state newspapers……and about 25,000 dollars worth of television ads.
"The us supreme court recently decided that any home can be seized by eminent domain, and bulldozed to build a shopping mall a condo development or a casino. This election day you have the opportunity to make NH homes sacred again....."
There is no similarly organized opposition to the measure, which swept through the legislature with overwhelming bipartisan support. But even so, that doesn’t mean everybody thinks it's a great idea.…….The NH Municipal Association, which represents city and town governments, thinks the amendment is at best unneeded…… Municipal association lawyer Cordell Johnston says NH statute and court precedent already prohibit eminent domain takings for private use……Johnston further warns that regardless of how people vote on the amendment, contested takings will still be subject to a good deal of judicial discretion.
"Even if you do believe the laws need to be strengthened, this amendment doesn't do it. All it says is you can't take for a private use and, again, it's going to go back to the court to define what is a private use."
Ballot question 2 -- which deals with legislative districts in the NH house-- is likely to get far less attention than question one……But that's not for any lack of passion from backers like Republican State Representative Neal Kurk.
"I would ask only that you stand and broadcast this story from the highest spire on the highest hill in NH, so as many people as possible hear it. And repeat it every 15 minutes for the next three weeks."
And what Kurk wants people to hear is a simple message: a yes vote on 2 will mean that any town that meets the population requirement to have its own representative will get one….. If that sounds simple, the amendment's plain text, which stretches 181 words isn't….……Key to the amendment, is its express endorsement of using what are known as floterial districts to account for populations not cleanly divisible by 3100, which is the number of citizens ideally represented by each house member….For those in need of further explanation, representative Kurk offers this primer.
"So if the town has 7000 the town would get 2 full representatives -- 2 times 3100 is 6200. So how do those other 800 people get representation? The answer is the share a representative with other districts who are in a similar situation. And those other districts come together, they are normally neighboring districts, neighboring towns, and the 3 or 4 towns together that cumulatively have the 3100 people would then vote on the district. It's very much like the system we had prior to 2002 before it was changed by the Supreme Court."
The court action Kurk mentions came after the republican legislative majority, house democrats, and then Governor Jeanne Shaheen could not agree on a redistricting plan…….The complaint from democrats was that the GOP favored approach -- which relied on floterials -- created unconstitutional deviations in the number of citizens served by each representative. After weeks of impasse, the court eventually imposed a plan of its own….. That scheme eliminated floterials; instead, it relied heavily on large multi-member districts for which candidates would run at-large ……The lead plaintiff in the democratic lawsuit that ultimately prompted that plan was current state senator Peter Burling, who was then the house's top democrat. Burling argues that floterials denigrate the equality of the vote, and adds that ensuring every vote carries the same weight, should be prized above the state's history of trying to maximize the number of towns with their own representatives.
"People talk about this nice legislature where Joe and Jane and Harry and Dick came from Claremont and they represented Claremont --and we didn't worry about that their votes weren't counted the same as in Lebanon. Well, now we recognize one person one vote. And if you are committed to that Constitutional principle, than we ought to recognize that this Constitutional amendment in defense of nostalgia may not be the best approach."
The proposed amendments will appear on the bottom of state ballots. According to the Secretary of State's office, voter participation for ballot questions is typically about 75 percent of those voting in that election…….No questions have appeared on any state ballots since 2000…..The last one to win the needed 2/3rds support was in 1990. That amendment dedicated all lottery revenue to state school funding.
Delicious
Digg
Reddit
Facebook
Google
Yahoo