Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Primary Election Reform topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Representative Coker urges single‑ballot primary to reduce polarization
Summary
Rep. Matt Coker told the Election Law Committee HB 16-27 would replace party‑split primaries with a single primary ballot (presidential primary exempt) to force candidates to appeal broadly; supporters cited citizen assemblies and examples in other states, while members pressed on costs and implementation.
Representative Matt Coker opened the public hearing for HB 16-27, telling the Election Law Committee he proposes a single primary ballot so candidates would “have to appeal to the whole town” rather than only to a low‑turnout partisan primary base. He said the change, exempting the presidential primary, would reduce partisan incentives that reward extreme messaging and produce candidates more like the average New Hampshire voter.
Why it matters: Coker and witnesses argued the current primary system concentrates power in lower‑turnout contests and narrowly selected nominating electorates, especially where districts are safe for one party. Werner Horn of 1 People Inc. described a deliberative‑democracy assembly that overwhelmingly recommended a single ballot as a way to reduce polarization; Open Democracy’s Sarah Ortiz told the committee that the measure would give “Granite Staters more say over their elections” because every voter would see the same pool of candidates.
Committee concerns and mechanics: Members repeatedly asked about costs and voter education. Coker said the fiscal note for statewide rollout was substantial—an estimate “two and a half to three and a half million” dollars—and that implementation would need a sustained education and marketing effort from the Secretary of State’s office, roadshows, and local outreach. Representatives also compared the reform to alternative approaches, including more aggressive anti‑gerrymandering measures or independent redistricting; Coker said those could help but argued the single ballot addresses incentives at the candidate‑campaign level.
Supporters and examples: Committee members cited other states that use nonpartisan or top‑two ballot systems (witnesses named Alaska, Washington, California and cited variants in Nebraska). Public testimony emphasized that the reform would encourage candidates to speak across partisan divides: “they’re not going to be just talking to the right hand corner or the left hand corner,” Werner Horn said.
What’s next: The public hearing closed after supporters and committee members questioned the sponsor and recorded public submissions. The committee will weigh fiscal impacts and draft language on implementation (including whether to exempt certain contests) before advancing any recommendation.
