Governor rejects four New Hampshire political reform measures
Political reform advocates in New Hampshire hit a wall last week when Republican Gov. Chris Sununu vetoed four election transparency bills.
All moved smoothly through the Democrat-controlled legislature, although only one of the vetoed bills cleared with bipartisan support.
Sununu did sign one minor campaign finance bill backed by Republicans in Concord; it will set limits on giving to elected state officials' inaugural committees and compel such groups to disclose more about their spending.
The four rejected measures would have:
- Prevented doctors, attorneys and other principals of limited liability companies from evading campaign donation limits by making their donations in the names of their LLCs. The governor said changing the current law, which permits these people to donate as individuals and anonymously as business proprietors, would have infringed on their speech rights.
- Expanded the definition of a political advocacy organization, which would have subjected more of them to disclose their election spending activity. This was the measure that got GOP votes, but Sununu said it too would have restricted free speech.
- Called on Congress to propose a constitutional amendment allowing campaign finance restrictions, notwithstanding the Supreme Court's ruling creating wide latitude for money in politics under the First Amendment. New Hampshire would have been the 20th state calling for a so-called 28th Amendment.
- Allowed the limited release of personal voter information in cases alleging the infringement of voting rights.
Molineaux is the co-founder and executive director of Bridge Alliance, a coalition of more than 90 civic reform groups. (Disclosure: The Bridge Alliance Education Fund is a funder of The Fulcrum.)
I grew up watching reruns of "The Andy Griffith Show" in the late 1970s. It always felt to me a little nostalgic for its lessons that simple living was best. I enjoyed the show and still appreciate the values the show exemplifies.
A few years ago, as I was watching our societal divisions widen, I explored the idea of having Sheriff Andy meet Captain Picard of "Star Trek: the Next Generation." I researched and talked with people about how to help these two fictional characters meet and converse. Eventually I abandoned the idea as a fun thought experiment without a conclusion.
Maybe I was pursuing the wrong goal — and seeking something else could help improve our civil discourse.
Efforts to fend off election hackers in 2020 and beyond have revolved around protecting ballot equipment and the databases of registered voters. Little attention has been focused on the vendors and their employees.
But the nonpartisan Brennan Center for Justice is proposing that the vendors who make election equipment and related systems be subjected to heightened oversight and vetting, much like defense contractors or others involved in national security.
"There is almost no federal regulation of the vendors that design and maintain the systems that allow us to determine who can vote, how they vote, or how their votes are counted and reported," according to a new report from the nonpartisan policy institute.