Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Election Absentee topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
New Hampshire hearing draws wide testimony for and against no‑excuse absentee ballot constitutional amendment
Summary
Lawmakers held a lengthy public hearing on CACR 5, a proposed constitutional amendment to allow no‑excuse absentee voting. Supporters said it would expand access and match most other states; the secretary of state and some residents warned it raises trade‑offs for election security. No committee vote was recorded in the transcript.
Representative Connie Lane opened the committee hearing on CACR 5, a proposal to amend the state constitution so that a voter would not need a reason to receive an absentee ballot.
Supporters across the political spectrum urged the committee to let voters decide the amendment at the ballot box. Representative Connie Lane (sponsor) framed the change as bringing New Hampshire in line with “37 states” that allow no‑excuse absentee ballots and cited studies that show very low rates of absentee fraud. Kaylee Estradio of Open Democracy and Kristen Evans of ABLE New Hampshire said the change would make voting more accessible for working families, students and people with disabilities. Henry Klimentowicz of the ACLU of New Hampshire told the committee earlier expanded absentee use in 2020 did not meaningfully change turnout patterns and that “the ballots are counted in public” under current law.
Secretary of State David Scanlon testified that the state’s traditional single‑mode, in‑person system historically gave New Hampshire a reputation for transparent vote counting. Scanlon said the committee should consider security tradeoffs if the legislature broadens access for convenience and noted that states with broad vote‑by‑mail systems use different administrative models (for example, centralized counting centers) that New Hampshire does not use now. He recommended any constitutional change be accompanied by measures that maintain public confidence in the process.
Supporters offered data and academic citations in favor. David Trumbull and other public commenters cited reports ranking New Hampshire low on ease‑of‑voting and argued barriers disenfranchise voters. Jean Barnes, a Concord moderator, described the practical burden of processing hundreds of absentee ballots during the COVID period and said local clerks manage them carefully. Opponents, including a speaker identified as Richard, warned the proposal could produce conflicts with federal election law and statutory processes for examining absentee affidavits.
Committee members asked the secretary and other witnesses about examples from vote‑by‑mail states, how often absentee ballots are rejected, and how New Hampshire’s public‑counting model would interact with expanded absentee use. Scanlon said rejected absentee counts could be provided later if requested and that state practices vary.
The committee did not record a final vote on CACR 5 in the transcript provided; testimony was left as part of the public record.
