It’s very simple.  New Hampshire is relevant, has influence, because it comes first.  Small states don’t appreciate the bigger states determining the presidency!  That’s why Iowa and New Hampshire, even South Carolina try to jump the gun.  Candidates are forced to come courting, spend money, and most important, LISTEN to the folks of Middle America.

However, in 2012, everyone seems to want to get into the act!  Florida is threatening to move up its Primary, other states already have.  It means a nightmare schedule for the GOP presidential candidates, and much unrest in the Party.  New Hampshire law REQUIRES the state to be first.  REQUIRES it.  With Florida planning a January 31st State Primary, New Hampshire must move up its date for certain to comply with its own laws.  Why is it ALL SO IMPORTANT?  Here’s what the Secretary of State of New Hampshire, Bill Gardner,  has to say:

For nearly 100 years, the New Hampshire First-In-The-Nation Presidential Primary has had meaning and relevance to American politics. It has allowed for candidates regardless of national standing or financial capability to begin their launch into presidential politics by winning or doing well here. Several aspiring Americans likely would not have become president if they weren’t first able to make their case door-to-door, face-to-face, eye-to-eye with New Hampshire voters who meet them at our homes, in our backyards, and on our sidewalks away from the microphones and cameras that create a barrier between human beings.
NEW HAMSHIRE IS FIRST FOR A REASON. While New Hampshire has had a presidential primary since 1916, and has been first since 1920, it wasn’t until 1975 that our status was put into state law. The law now requires that our primary is 7 days or more before similar elections that would challenge our traditional position.
What that law requires is that I look at the nominating events of other states where presidential candidates run, and then set our primary a week ahead of them. Since New Hampshire citizens pay for our primary, we can hold it whenever we wish.
It is up to the candidates themselves to decide whether to campaign here. Ours is
the first event where voters go into the privacy of the voting booth to make a
choice for a candidate on the ballot. It tells the nation something about their
support.
CONSIDER THE ALTERNATIVES. It used to be that delegates for national

National Candidates Must Earn New Hampshire's Endorsement

political conventions were chosen in secret mainly by party leaders, out of view of
the public. Would we tolerate that kind of process now? And without having
caucuses and primaries in smaller states, larger states would have the exclusive
major role in the nominating process.
Worse yet, if a national primary was held, or if the role of small states was
eliminated, only the very rich or famous candidates would be able to put on the
major campaigns needed for victory or to exceed expectations. In a state like New
Hampshire, candidates can run without a large staff or heavy advertising and
consulting budgets if they have a message, meet directly with voters, and explain
why they should be president. Examples abound.

OPTIONS FOR NEW HAMPSHIRE’S PRIMARY DATE. With Florida moving its primary earlier than originally planned to January 31st, and South Carolina making a move to set its primary ten days earlier to January 21st, that began to limit options for setting our date in January. When officials in Nevada set their caucus for Saturday, January 14th, that left Tuesday, January 3rd as a possibility for us, but Iowa officials tentatively decided that their caucus would be on that day.  My job as NH Secretary of State is to follow our law, which mandates that I set our  election 7 days or more before any event that would threaten our traditional lead-off  status. So if Nevada does not adjust its caucus date to a later time, I cannot rule  out the possibility of a December primary.

   Follow @TKC_US    

 

Filed under: Featured, Inside The KC, Politics, Uncategorized by Sonja Eddings Brown, Oct 13, 2011