Portsmouth Herald

Sunday, April 3rd 2005

Undeclared not welcome at party?

By Joe Adler

PORTSMOUTH — Fraternal organizations, like the Elks Lodge, don’t appeal to Tony Catalino. He’s never belonged to one, and he favors his independence. More importantly, he’s never joined a political party.

But Catalino, a 57-year-old independent from Greenland, is fearing how a proposal in the Legislature this session will affect his role in the political process.

Current law allows independents to declare a party affiliation the day of a primary and then remove that affiliation as soon as they leave the ballot box. The system is less flexible for Democrats and Republicans who may want to change their party affiliation temporarily to vote in the other party’s primary.

The state legislation, House Bill 154, would require all who temporarily declare a party to vote in state and presidential primaries to then wait 90 days before removing the affiliation.

The bill would also require independents, who outnumber both Democrats and Republicans in the state, to re-register in their local clerk’s office after a primary if they want to return to being independent — similar to the procedures followed by members of the two major parties.

Catalino, who consistently votes in primaries but has been an independent all his adult life, says the law would place an “unnecessary burden” on independent voters who now are included in party primaries “automatically.”

“I don’t want to be a member of any organization other than my family,” said Catalino, who works as a chef at the Edgewood Centre retirement living community in Portsmouth.

“I want to make my own independent decisions.”

But supporters of the bill view political primaries as functions run by and for members of the two major political parties. Warren Henderson, an Exeter resident and chairman of the state Republican Party, believes they have a point.

Henderson, who said he sees both sides of the debate, believes changing the system won’t make the state’s landmark political event — the “first-in-the nation primary” — any less open to independents.

“There are members of my party, and I know for a fact that there are also Democrats, who believe it should only be members of our respective parties who are choosing our nominees,” Henderson said.

The original legislation was introduced on behalf of Tricia Wynne, supervisor of checklists in Goffstown, said bill co-sponsor, Rep. Pamela Manney, R-Goffstown.

While working on recent elections, Wynne noted the relative disadvantage Republicans, for example, would have had in the 2004 presidential primary if they wanted to vote in the Democratic primary, Manney said. Independents, on the other hand, could flip back and forth immediately.

“She didn’t think it was fair that the independents could change the very same day and the other parties could not,” Manney said.

While the original legislation extended the waiting period for only independents, it changed in committee to lengthening the window to 90 days after a primary for all parties, to the consternation of its original sponsors, Manney said.

Kathleen Sullivan, chairwoman of the state Democratic Party, said she opposes the bill. If it becomes law, she added, she will suggest Democrats hold open primaries to include independents.

“I think we have a system that works very well, and there’s no reason to change it,” Sullivan said.

Henderson called the bill “an awkward attempt” to address the issue of independents participating in partisan elections.

“It’s important that we make (the presidential primary) as inclusive as possible,” Henderson said. “I don’t believe this bill is an impediment to that.”

The bill passed the House with most Republicans voting in support of the measure, and Democrats generally opposed. It is now before a Senate committee.

Portsmouth currently has 6,544 voters registered as “undeclared.” The city has 6,325 registered Democrats, and 3,473 Republicans.

Jerome Holden, of the New Hampshire Committee for an Independent Voice, believes the bill has greater ramifications. The group that supports the causes of independent voters plans to attend a Senate committee hearing on the bill scheduled for this Wednesday.

“I think it’s an arm-twisting by the parties to try to drive membership,” said Holden, who lives in Wolfeboro. “They’re upset that independents outnumber both parties in the state.”

Holden believes the duration of the waiting period in the bill and the inconvenience of independents having to re-register at their town clerk’s office are aimed at keeping them away from the polls.

“They think that we’ll then partake in not voting in their primary,” Holden said. “The voting system is supposed to be about competition and freedom of choice. They want to limit that choice. They’ve stacked the deck against independents.”

Mark Greenway, a 45-year-old North Hampton resident and member of NHCIV, said independents add a needed voice to the political process that must be maintained.

“They’re active, they’re informed and they’re participatory, said Greenway, who works as a salesman. “As such, they’re driven by the issues and the candidates and not necessarily by political affiliations.”