Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Recounts topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Bill would let state parties request recounts when write-ins win primaries and no candidate filed

2528102 · March 5, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Rep. Timothy Horrigan introduced HB 492 after a Strafford County primary where a write-in gained ballot placement; the bill would give state party committees standing to request recounts in similar situations and require the party to pay customary recount costs.

Representative Timothy Horrigan described HB 492 as a targeted response to a primary election situation in Strafford County on Sept. 10, 2024. In that race, no one had filed for the Republican slot for a county commissioner seat; long-time commissioner George Maglaras received 35 write-in votes in the primary and later appeared on the general-election ballot as the Republican nominee.

Horrigan said the Strafford County Republican Committee sought a recount but was told by the secretary of state and the ballot-law commission that the committee lacked standing because it had not nominated a candidate during the filing period. “They were turned down both by the secretary of state and the ballot law commission on the grounds that she had no standing to ask for such a recount since she did not run for county commissioner as a write-in candidate,” Horrigan said.

HB 492 would allow state party committees to request recounts in situations like that and require the requesting committee to pay the usual estimated costs for the recount, following existing statutory procedures for cost estimation and collection.

Committee members asked whether the bill would cover independents or how fees and thresholds work under existing law; Horrigan cited RSA provisions governing post-election procedures and fee schedules but deferred detailed legal questions to the deputy secretary of state. The hearing closed with the bill’s sponsor urging passage and noting the measure’s bipartisan intent.