Pay to Play: Ballot Access Censorship
NH HB116 proposes to dramatically increase the barrier to entry to statewide politics in New Hampshire. How will this impact the democratic process?
Ballot access restrictions refer to the rules and regulations that govern who can get on the ballot and run for office. These restrictions can vary from state to state and can include requirements such as collecting a certain number of signatures, paying a fee, or meeting certain qualifications. These rules can have a significant impact on who runs for office, and ultimately, who is elected. Recently, the New Hampshire House Bill 116 has been proposed to increase the ballot access requirements for primary candidates significantly. This legislation has sparked a heated debate over the issue of ballot access and its impact on democracy. In this discussion, we will delve into the complex issue of ballot access restrictions and examine the arguments for and against increasing these requirements. about the potential consequences of this legislation, and the broader implications of ballot access restrictions on the democratic process.
Currently, there is a segregated system of ballot access in New Hampshire, with different rules for party primaries and independent candidates in the General Election. For Party Primaries, a candidate must simply be registered to vote as a member of the party for whom they seek the nomination, and pay an insignificant filing fee to the state in order to participate in the election. Independent and third-party candidates who seek to have their name placed on the general election ballot, must not only pay the same filing fee as candidates in the major party but also need to collect a large number of nomination petitions from registered voters as well.
Anyone with any experience in Libertarian 3rd-party politics has been around to help with or bear witness to a petition drive for ballot access. Whether someone is running for local office, statewide office, or President, if they want to do so not as a Republican or Democrat, petitions are a necessary evil due to existing ballot access laws.
However, it’s the access to the major party primary ballots being threatened by HB116. Under the current law, a candidate seeking a statewide office in New Hampshire must pay an administrative filing fee of $100 or submit 200 petitions in order to have their name printed on the primary ballot. House Bill 116 seeks to increase these thresholds to $10,000 or 25,000 petitions to exercise one’s right to run for office.
Subversive #99: Pay to Play
Watch on YouTube | Watch on Odysee | Listen on Spotify | Listen on Apple Podcasts | Check out other platforms!
Summary
Are you tired of seeing the same old politicians getting elected? Do you feel like your voice is not being heard in the political process? Then you won't want to miss this episode of our podcast! We dive deep into the complex issue of ballot access restrictions and examine the arguments for and against increasing these requirements.
In this episode, we'll explore the potential consequences of the New Hampshire House Bill 116, which aims to increase ballot access requirements for primary candidates, and the broader implications of ballot access restrictions on the democratic process.
Don't miss out on this informative and engaging discussion on the crucial topic of ballot access laws, tune in now to gain a better understanding of how these laws can affect our political process and our democracy as a whole.
Ballot access laws can make or break a candidate's chance to run for office. But do you ever stop to think about why some states make it easier or harder for certain people to run for office? These laws determine who can officially be on the ballot for an election and it can have a major impact on the outcome of elections.
I may be alone in trying to spark the debate over New Hampshire House Bill 116 which aims to increase the requirements for primary candidates. But have you ever considered the overall impact these laws can have on our political process?
In this discussion, we're going to explore the arguments in favor of making ballot access laws easier. We will cover how it can lead to increased competition and diversity in the political process and how it could provide more people an equal opportunity to run for office, regardless of their background or resources.
We will dive into the real implications of these laws, and how it can shape the future of our democracy. Whether you're a student of politics, a concerned citizen, or considering running for office, this discussion will help you understand the significance of ballot access laws.
Increased Competition
Making it easier for candidates to get on the ballot can lead to a more representative, engaged, and progressive political process through increased competition. With more candidates on the ballot, voters have more options to choose from, leading to greater voter engagement and a more informed electorate. Additionally, candidates will have to appeal to a wider range of voters in order to win, leading to better representation of the electorate as a whole. Furthermore, increased competition can lead to more innovative ideas and policies, better quality candidates and greater accountability for elected officials. Additionally, competition can provide a platform for alternative voices, parties and ideologies to be heard, and giving them an opportunity to win.
Greater Diversity
An argument for eliminating ballot access restrictions is that it can lead to greater diversity in politics, which in turn can bring new perspectives and solutions to issues, lead to more inclusive and representative government, act as role models and inspire more people from marginalized communities to get involved in politics, improve the quality of decision-making, bring fresh perspective on the current political scene, and increase representation of society. Candidates from marginalized communities may not have the resources or connections to meet the requirements, so by making it easier for them to get on the ballot, the pool of candidates may become more diverse and this is beneficial for the whole society.
More Voices
The argument for allowing more candidates to participate in elections is that it can give voters a wider range of options and amplify the voices of groups that are underrepresented in the political process. This can lead to more representative and inclusive government, more diverse and progressive policies, foster a more informed and engaged electorate, increase voter turnout and civic engagement, foster civil and productive political discourse, provide new and alternative solutions, diversify the political scene, and provide fair representation of society. The idea is that having more voices and choice on the ballot, can lead to a more representative and diverse government that serves the needs of the entire population, and encourages more civic engagement, and fair representation of all groups.
Voter Choice
The argument for allowing more candidates to participate in elections is that it can give voters a wider range of options, amplifying the voices of groups that are underrepresented in the political process and increase voter choice. This can lead to more representative and accountable government, more engaged electorate, increased fairness in the political process, foster a more competitive political process, more efficient allocation of political power, increased representation of diverse communities and ideas, and a more democratic process. The idea is that allowing more candidates on the ballot can provide voters with more choices, increasing the representation of different perspectives and ideas in the political process and improve the overall democratic process.
Cost
The argument for allowing more candidates to participate in elections is that it can give voters a wider range of options, amplifying the voices of groups that are underrepresented in the political process and reducing the costs for candidates. Reducing the financial burden on candidates can make the political process more accessible to a wider range of individuals, increase competition and representation, help small and new parties and independent candidates to participate, lead to more effective use of resources, reduce the role of big money in politics, increase representation of new and underrepresented voices, and make the electoral process fairer by removing the financial barrier. The idea is that making it easier and less expensive for candidates to get on the ballot can increase competition, representation, and make the political process more inclusive, accessible and fair to a wider range of individuals.
Fairness
The argument for allowing more candidates to participate in elections is that it can give voters a wider range of options, amplify the voices of groups that are underrepresented in the political process and make the electoral process more fair. Making it easier for candidates to get on the ballot can ensure a more fair political process by removing barriers to entry, leading to more competitive elections, increase voter choice, help candidates not supported by the established parties to participate in the political process, promote fairness by giving equal opportunity to all qualified candidates, increase representation of underrepresented groups and voices, and result in a more fair and efficient allocation of political power. The idea is that making it easier for candidates to access the ballot can ensure a more inclusive, fair, and representative political process that is open to all candidates regardless of their resources and connections.
Frivolity
It's important to note that, while many people support making ballot access easier, there are also some concerns about the potential for frivolous candidates and "sore loser" candidacies that can harm the political process.
One argument in favor of allowing frivolous candidates to have the same ballot access as other candidates is that it upholds the principle of free speech. Allowing all individuals to run for office, regardless of their chances of winning, is seen as a way to ensure that everyone's voice is heard and that the political process remains open and inclusive.
Another argument is that frivolous candidates can serve as a form of protest or satire, and they can draw attention to issues that might otherwise be ignored. They can also encourage more voter engagement, by providing something fresh to talk about and possibly satire on the current political scene.
Additionally, it can be hard to define what is a frivolous candidate, as this is a subjective evaluation, and some candidates that were considered frivolous in the past ended up impacting the elections or drawing attention to important issues.
It's also worth noting that, in a democratic system, the right to vote and stand for office are closely linked, and limiting the right to stand for office can be seen as an infringement of the right to vote, as it limits the choices available to voters.
A Call to Action
The issue of ballot access is about making sure that everyone has a fair and equal opportunity to participate in the political process, regardless of their background or resources. It's about creating a political process that is open, inclusive, and truly representative of the population.
However, as we've seen with the proposed New Hampshire House Bill 116, not all laws regarding ballot access are created equal. Laws that make it harder for certain groups of people to run for office are discriminatory, and it's up to us as citizens to stand up against them.
It's important to remember that ballot access is not just about who gets to run for office, it's also about who gets to have their voices heard in the political process. And that's why protecting free speech in elections is crucial. We must ensure that all voices have the opportunity to be heard and that no one's free speech is suppressed.
So let's stay informed, stay engaged, and stand up for fair and accessible ballot access laws. Let's make sure that our political process truly represents the diversity and interests of our entire population.
Live Free and Thrive!
My latest book is now available on Amazon in both Kindle and Paperback versions! It actually debuted as a #1 Bestseller in the relevant categories! Head on over to amazon today to grab your copy of Live Free and Thrive!: 101 Reasons that Liberty Lives in New Hampshire, and So Should You!
New Merch and Swag!
None other than show sponsor SnekSwag.com has a new full collection of official Subversive Swag where you can show off your rebel side by wearing your principles literally on your sleeves. Check out the collection today to grab your Swag now!
Join the Insurgency!
That’s right, You too can join the insurgency, and help support everything I’m doing here, from the podcast to the newsletter, to real-world activism and legislative lobbying work in New Hampshire.
Join us on Patreon, at Patreon.com/ODonnell for as little as $3 a month to help support the show financially and get some sweet perks as well!
You can also join our community Discord Channel to help grow the community around the show, and chat with other fans at any time! This requires participation, and it will be what we make of it, so join today and let’s grow it from the ground up together!
Copyright Justin O’Donnell, 2022
For Inquiries, contact, and booking: contact@anarchy.email
https://linktr.ee/subversivepod