New Hampshire Could Give Taxpayers the Right to Sue State & Local Gov’t for Improper Use of Public Funds
Vote to see how others feel about this issue
What the Referendum Does
Question 1 would amend the New Hampshire Constitution to give taxpayers the right to take legal action against the state or local government where they resident to declare that the government spent, or has approved spending, public funds in violation of a law. Such legal actions would begin in the New Hampshire Superior Courts.
In Favor
Taxpayers have a fundamental right to sue the government to redress their grievances that was wrongfully overturned by the courts, it should be reinstated.
Opposed
Giving taxpayers the right to sue the government over misuse of public funds could bring forth a flood of litigation, burdening already-stretched courts.
In-Depth
Granite State Taxpayers and the Coalition of New Hampshire Taxpayers (CNHT) are leading the campaign in support of Question 1. State Reps. Joseph Hagan (R-Rockingham 4), Claire Rouillard (R-Hillsborough 6), Robert Backus (D-Hillsborough 19), and Paul Berch (D-Cheshire 1) sponsored this amendment in the New Hampshire General Court. David McConville, vice chairman of the Granite State Taxpayers Board of Directors, wrote in a New Hampshire Union Leader Column supporting Question 1:
“[Question 1] is key to keep our government in check. For well over a hundred years, the New Hampshire Supreme Court allowed taxpayers to sue the state government to redress their grievances until a case in 2010 reversed that right. A constitutional amendment is necessary because the Supreme Court has denied our rights several times since 2010 by denying standing to people who have brought cases before it, even when the Legislature had specifically passed laws upholding those rights. Without [Question 1], provisions of the New Hampshire Constitution Bill of Rights are now unclear. Public funds for religious schools and articles restricting the use of such funds will not be enforceable in the future. [Question 1] allows citizens certainty in seeking protection from political institutions. What good is a legal right without the ability to go to court to enforce it?”
As of October 23, 2018, no organizations have gone on the record in opposition to Question 1. However, opponents of Question 1 have argued that this change could burden courts with a flood of litigation. Attorney Chuck Douglas, a former state Supreme Court justice who is leading efforts to urgen people to vote “yes” on Question 1, points out that that scenario has never happened before, so “there’s no reason to think suddenly now every taxpayer is going to file a lawsuit.”
Question 1 was referred to voters by the New Hampshire legislature after votes of 309-9 in the House and 22-2 in the Senate, with Democrats the sole opponents.
Summary by Lorelei Yang
(Photo Credit: iStockphoto.com / Michal Chodyra)
The Latest
-
The Latest: Israel Attacks Gaza’s Largest Medical FacilityUpdated Mar. 18, 2024, 10:20 a.m. EST Israel's military issued a raid on Gaza's Al-Shifa Hospital , the largest medical facility read more... Israel
-
Utah Bill Encourages Teachers To Carry FirearmsWhat’s the story? This week, Utah’s Gov. Spencer Cox signed a bill that encourages teachers to carry a gun in their classrooms. read more... Public Safety
-
Trump and Biden Win 2024 Presidential NominationsUpdated March 13, 2024, 10:30 a.m. EST President Biden and former President Trump have secured the required delegates to be read more... Advocacy
-
Super Tuesday 2024 ResultsUpdated March 6, 2024, 10:15 a.m. EST As expected, the Super Tuesday results were dominated by Trump and Biden, increasing the read more... States