"Why New Hampshire?" Primary Fight Revisited
Always First, Always Right. The unofficial slogan of the New Hampshire Presidential Primary expired in 1992, when Democratic voters chose Paul Tsongas over Bill Clinton and Clinton marched onward to the White House. The same anomaly occurred in 2000, when Republican voters chose John McCain over George W. Bush and Bush went on to win.
But "Always First" remains, however tenuous a pole position.
With the filing period for the New Hampshire Primary closing Friday, I reached for my bookshelf to read what the late Hugh Gregg had to say about New Hampshire’s primary importance, in the book he co-wrote with New Hampshire Secretary of State Bill Gardner, "Why New Hampshire?" The former governor was the great steward of the first-in-the-nation primary. Cay Gregg, his widow, autographed my copy when the book was released at the New Hampshire Political Library. Cay wrote: "Hugh’s Last Hurrah."
Is 2008 the New Hampshire Primary’s Last Hurrah?
The shake, rattle and roll of this year’s presidential nominating process has Republicans and Democrats at the national level targeting New Hampshire. It’s not a new fight, but the number of states jockeying for early voting ensures a rough ride for another four years – let alone the final two months until the New Hampshire Primary (when Gardner picks a date, that is; most likely Jan. 8).
Critics, like Sen. Carl Levin of Michigan, argue New Hampshire is undeserving of the privileged role. He argues New Hampshire is not representative of the nation.
How did Gregg and Gardner see the Primary as a national asset?
"Citizens are constantly in an election mode. They are forever voting about something, whether it be at town meetings or on the municipal affairs of cities," the primary duo wrote.
They point out that New Hampshire holds elections with greater frequency than any other state. It’s not just the importance on local control. New Hampshire has the largest Legislature of any state and the 424 members are elected every two years. The governor also has a two-year term.
Beyond the politically savvy nature of the electorate, Gregg and Gardner tout the fertile ground here for retail politics, where there are more opportunities to meet the presidential candidates and candidates without Fort Knox campaign coffers can have more of an equal playing surface.
Why New Hampshire?
The first primary, held in 1916, was actually a week later than Indiana's and on the same day as Minnesota's. Four years later, New Hampshire assumed the lead-off position, with voters choosing just delegates. It wasn't until 1952 that voters cast ballots for presidential candidates.
It's become like a birthright in New Hampshire, Gregg and Gardner put it. But let the record show, it is much more than a "first come, first served" position.
Part II tomorrow: Carl Levin is right -- New Hampshire's not like the rest of the nation. (JFK dogsledding photo/ source: NH Political Library)












