Good Lord. What a waste of time regarding the bill to leave the union. I realize it’s a protest bill. But, ugh. So done.
— Candace Skurnik
In supporting a constitutional amendment concurrent resolution that would give voters a chance to decide whether New Hampshire should secede from the United States and become a sovereign country, Matthew Santonastaso of Rindge said the right to secede is embedded in the New Hampshire Constitution. Indeed, Article 10 states, in part, “[W]henever the ends of government are perverted, and public liberty manifestly endangered, and all other means of redress are ineffectual, the people may, and of right ought to reform the old, or establish a new government.”
Bradford Cook, chair of the New Hampshire Ballot Law Commission, said Santonastaso’s interpretation is incorrect. Establishing a new government is the last resort, after “all other means of redress are ineffectual.” Nevertheless, the Ballot Law Commission dismissed a request to disqualify Santonastaso and 13 others who supported the secession bill for lack of jurisdiction over federal authority.
Karen Steele of Atkinson had petitioned to have the representatives declared unsuitable for candidacy in New Hampshire based on the 14th amendment to the United States Constitution, which disqualifies anyone who has taken an oath to support the country and subsequently engages in insurrection, rebellion, or aiding the enemy.
The New Hampshire Attorney-General’s Office issued the opinion that sponsoring legislation does not rise to the level of rebellion.
Representative Michael Sylvia of Belmont, lead sponsor of CACR32, described the bill as “a non-violent avenue to peaceful reform” and said it would be the voters of the state who ultimately would decide whether to secede.
Given the odds of success, why would anyone risk their political careers by sponsoring a constitutional amendment? To pass in New Hampshire, a constitutional amendment would have to meet a three-fifths majority in both the House and Senate. It then would go to the governor for approval, and a governor is not likely to take such a stance. If the governor did sign the bill, the question would go to a ballot vote by the citizens of New Hampshire, where a two-third majority would be required. Even if passed by all those groups, secession still would have to be approved by the other states.
With Wednesday’s decision by the Ballot Law Commission, supporters of CACR32 are free to run for office, but they face a backlash from voters who view them as political extremists. The ballot box, after all, is how voters are supposed to express their beliefs. If they disagree with their representatives’ stances, rather than disqualifying them, they can simply vote them out.
On the other hand, polls show that, on secession, those representatives are in good company. A survey of 2,750 Americans by Bright Line Watch found that 37 percent of Americans and 34 percent of those in the Northeast were willing to have their state secede from the United States and join a new union of nearby states. More telling for New Hampshire is a poll of 625 Granite Staters, conducted by SurveyUSA, in which 29 percent of respondents strongly agreed or somewhat agreed that they would prefer New Hampshire to govern as an independent country.
In coming to that decision, 79% agreed: “The federal government’s financial decisions and economic regulations hurt our livelihoods and could lead to inflation and bankruptcy.” 69% agreed: “Politicians in Washington, DC violate our rights more than they protect our rights.” 64% agreed: “Laws, regulations, and court rulings coming out of Washington, DC are incompatible with New Hampshire’s culture of freedom.” 63% agreed: “I trust my state government more than I trust the federal government.” Only 29% of New Hampshire respondents think the federal government has “my best interests in mind when passing legislation.”
As to the likelihood of other states objecting to a bid for secession, in the eight Northeastern states polled by SurveyUSA, only 6% of respondents would support military intervention to stop a state from seceding. 37% would support some form of “economic sanctions.” 57% said the state should simply be allowed to leave.
Still, secession is an unlikely outcome, which brings us back to the question of why promote such a proposition. CACR32 failed at the first step in the process when the House defeated the bill, 323-13.
Free State activist Christopher Waid, who attended Wednesday’s hearing, offered a clue when he thanked Steele “for bringing attention to the New Hampshire independence movement.”
Constitutional amendments rarely make it though the legislature, but that does not stop elected officials from proposing them for the publicity it brings to issues they consider important.
Consider the proposed constitutional amendment that would have embedded a rights-based ordinance in the State Constitution. Aimed at giving residents the right to decide what industries are allowed to operate in their communities, and specifically targeting wind farms which many people feel are blights on the landscape, that constitutional amendment was shot down in Concord, but some communities, including Alexandria, adopted their own RBOs. Without the state’s backing, the rights-based ordinance held questionable legal authority, but it was enough to convince the company backing an Alexandria wind farm to take the project elsewhere.
The effort had the desired effect.
Support Our Efforts
The News Café is a virtual meeting place where we discuss the news of the day: local, statewide, national, and international.
An offering by the Liberty Independent Media Project, the News Café does not rely on advertising, as most media outlets do, freeing us to provide an independent focus on events and cultural issues. The project instead relies on direct monetary support from donors and subscribers, as well as providing news to other media outlets.
If you like what we’re doing, and want to see more local news you will not find elsewhere, please give what you can.
Subscriptions to this newsletter are available for as little as $5 per month. Subscribers can share their knowledge, thoughts, and questions about any topic, and we may select some of those subjects for more in-depth analysis.
If you’re unable to pay but still want to receive all of the free public posts in your in-box, click the Subscribe button and select a free subscription.
Thanks for the quote. I am sure that you remember that some in Mass. wanted to succeed from the union after being the only state that voted for McGovern in the 1972 landslide for Nixon. (D.C, also voted for McGovern) turns out Mass and D,C, were prophetic. You might also remember that Nixon threatened to take the U.S. Constitution out of Boston Harbor. I feel like it’s become a game. There is no actual way to do this. And, the blithe indifference to how entangled each and every state is to federal and interstate laws are laughable. I thought we had strange and violent times during the Vietnam war protests. Nope.