Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

realnrh t1_iwncrqv wrote

Hmm... Interesting. I'm looking at the statutes and NH Constitution regarding how ties are handled. For Senator, Governor, and Executive Councilor, there's explicit language specifying what to do. But I'm not seeing the exact language for handling ties in the House.

660:24 State Offices in State General Elections. – If the candidates having the highest number of votes for the office of governor, councilor, state senator, or state representative shall have an equal number, the choice shall be made as provided in the state constitution. Such candidate chosen shall then be declared duly elected. (http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/rsa/html/LXIII/660/660-24.htm)

So that says "look at the state constitution." But I'm not seeing where the state constitution says that ties in House races get thrown to the legislature to be resolved, only for the other offices. https://www.nh.gov/glance/house.htm

Can anyone point me to the section of the constitution that specifies how ties in the House are handled, if one exists? "As provided in the state constitution" implies that one should, but I don't see it unless it's meant to indicate 'using the same process as the others,' but that's not the plain reading of the language.

Could be that they throw it back for a special election, which would be a very, very interesting situation.

18

agent_tits t1_iwo0sag wrote

One thing to keep in mind is that it’s exceedingly rare for every house member to be in attendance for any given vote.

I’ve read quotes over the last week from conservative lawmakers saying that no partisan bills are likely to hit the floor, as the outcome will be decided pretty much by whichever party had less people stay home that day.

5

realnrh t1_iwo3cet wrote

Yeah, I will not be too surprised if they come to some kind of power-sharing agreement so that every day doesn't start with a motion to vacate the chair based on who attended that day. The Republicans wouldn't want to risk being shut out themselves if they tried to shut out Democrats at the start, or at least might not so a "we both agree to joint control" thing might happen.

1

Qbncgr t1_iwo2t7g wrote

They still have some challenged ballots to go over. If it’s still tied after that, iirc the House decides the winner.

5

realnrh t1_iwo3r1s wrote

Yes, that's what the news articles were saying. But I went to go look up the exact law about how to handle ties for a House seat, and couldn't find language saying that ties for House seats go to a joint session of the House and Senate the way Senate, EC, and Governor ties would. I thought I'd toss it out here and see if someone could find the correct statute or section of the constitution that governs House ties.

3

Qbncgr t1_iwpwyqx wrote

Part 2, Art 5 reads in part: “provide by fixed laws for the naming and settling, all civil officers within this state, such officers excepted, the election and appointment of whom are hereafter in this form of government otherwise provided for;…”

And then the best I can find is RSA 660.24 https://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/rsa/search/default.aspx

So it looks like 660.24 points to the constitution and P2Art5 gives them the authority.

It’s weird because a Senate tie is clearly spelled out in the constitution: [Art.] 34. [Vacancies in Senate, How Filled.] And in case there shall not appear to be a senator elected, by a plurality of votes, for any district, the deficiency shall be supplied in the following manner, viz. The members of the house of representatives, and such senators as shall be declared elected, shall take the names of the two persons having the highest number of votes in the district, and out of them shall elect, by joint ballot, the senator wanted for such district; and in this manner all such vacancies shall be filled up

3

realnrh t1_iwq2gul wrote

That's exactly the point I got to. It's very specific about Senate ties, but not about what the procedure is for ties in the House. I agree that it's weird, and that was why I wondered if I was just overlooking some relevant section.

3

ssj2killergoten t1_iwpkhhw wrote

In the constitution it just says the house will have the right to decide who is seated. If you search for the word “elect” you’ll find it. It’s just one line. I assume there is case laws that builds out from there.

1

NH_Matt t1_iwpfolv wrote

I believe if you look at the rules of the House, it says they have ultimate decisions about its membership ….. or something like that. I know the language is more specific than what I quoted.

2