Vote Stealing 101, Circa 2007

Here is how in 2007, when finally in control, Democrats used their short window of opportunity to create a two tier caste system for New Hampshire voters, where non-residents are unlawfully permitted to steal a NH resident’s vote. The last sentence is the kicker.

This Democrat bill was an excuse to let non-residents keep out of state driver licenses and dual domiciles, one for voting and another for other “legal purposes.” Isn’t that a laugh!

A non-emancipated college student, while paying out of state tuition to a NH college, rather than file an absentee ballot in his home state, could stay domiciled in his parents home AND for “voting purposes” pick and choose which election his vote would make more of a difference in. Sounds fair?

That student could then go back home and vote there like he never left or run for office in that state. But not here according to RSA 654:2?

It was this bill which exposed non-resident voters for what they are and what liberal Democrats think of your NH vote.

So much for “One man one vote.”  Your NH vote means NOTHING if an out of state transient takes it.







AN ACT relative to domicile for voting purposes.

SPONSORS: Rep. Pierce, Graf 9; Rep. C. Chase, Hills 2

COMMITTEE: Election Law


This bill states that a person’s claim of domicile in this state for voting purposes shall not be conclusive of the person’s residence for any other legal purpose.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Explanation: Matter added to current law appears in bold italics.

Matter removed from current law appears [in brackets and struckthrough.]

Matter which is either (a) all new or (b) repealed and reenacted appears in regular type.




In the Year of Our Lord Two Thousand Seven

AN ACT relative to domicile for voting purposes.

Be it Enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives in General Court convened:

9:1 Eligibility; Voter; Domicile. Amend RSA 654:1, I to read as follows:

I. Every inhabitant of the state, having a single established domicile for voting purposes, being a citizen of the United States, of the age provided for in Article 11 of Part First of the Constitution of New Hampshire, shall have a right at any meeting or election, to vote in the town, ward, or unincorporated place in which he or she is domiciled. An inhabitant's domicile for voting purposes is that one place where a person, more than any other place, has established a physical presence and manifests an intent to maintain a single continuous presence for domestic, social, and civil purposes relevant to participating in democratic self-government. A person has the right to change domicile at any time, however a mere intention to change domicile in the future does not, of itself, terminate an established domicile before the person actually moves. A person’s claim of domicile for voting purposes shall not be conclusive of the person’s residence for any other legal purpose.

9:2 Effective Date. This act shall take effect 60 days after its passage.

Approved: May 2, 2007

Effective Date: July 1, 2007

 Rep. David Pierce is now the Senate District #5 candidate. He garnered 1,037 Hanover votes to his Democrat opponent’s 154, similar to the Republican Primary opponent Rep. Osgood’s results in Hanover.

This means the college students will probably choose who the next State Senator from Senate District #5 will be.

A good deal for the liberal, well healed Democrats in Hanover, not so good for the local residents of the surrounding towns.