The National Grange - a New Century

The National Grange’s New Hampshire Presidential Primary Legislative Fly-In was held December 27th through December 30th, 2007 in Manchester, Concord and Hooksett, New Hampshire. Fifteen full time attendees (as well as another 15 part time attendees) braved the winter weather of New Hampshire on the weekend between Christmas and New Years Day in order to learn about, and participate in, the first-in-the-nation New Hampshire Presidential Primary. This event was co-hosted by the National Grange and the New Hampshire State Grange.

The Presidential Primary Fly-In officially opened with an informal get acquainted and orientation reception on the evening of Thursday December 27th. Members of the New Hampshire State Grange Executive Committee were also in attendance to show their appreciation and support that evening for the Fly-In attendees.

On Friday December 28th, the educational portion of the Presidential Primary Fly-In began. Fly-In attendees traveled to the New Hampshire State Capitol in Concord, NH. They received a special guided tour of the Capitol Building including the chambers of the New Hampshire House of Representatives, the Senate and the Executive Council.

The first speaker to address the Presidential primary Fly-In was the Hon. William Gardner, New Hampshire Secretary of State. Secretary Gardner related the fascinating history of the New Hampshire Presidential Primary, including the information that the original author of the legislation creating the presidential primary in 1913, Rep. Stephen Bullock, was a fifty year New Hampshire Grange member of Arlington Grange #139! Brother Bullock’s great granddaughter, Sister Sybil Dupuis, was also in attendance and brought with her the 50 year certificates her great grandfather had received from the National Grange in 1939 as well as a scrapbook of newspaper clippings related to her great grandfather’s career in the New Hampshire House of Representatives. In the newspaper clippings, Brother Bullock indicated that his support for democracy and his interest in politics was cemented at an early age when he personally saw President Abraham Lincoln at a political rally! Ironically enough during his lifetime, Brother Bullock didn’t apparently speak very often about his authorship of the presidential primary legislation with friends or family or seek recognition for his unique and singular legislative accomplishment in the political arena. He was a farmer/citizen legislator who simply appreciated the confidence of his friends and neighbors who elected him repeatedly to represent them in the New Hampshire House of Representatives far more than any award or other form of recognition for his efforts. It was only long after his death that political historians looking into the history of the New Hampshire Presidential Primary finally came back to his family asking for greater details about his life and his legislative work.

The next speaker was Mr. Fergus Cullen, Chairman of the Republican Party of New Hampshire. Mr. Cullen spoke about the role of the political parties in the New Hampshire Presidential Primary. Mr. Cullen explained that the role of the party organizations during the primary is to offer a “level playing field” for all of the interested candidates seeking the party’s nomination for president or vice president. This includes major candidates and minor candidates. New Hampshire law allows any individual to register with the Secretary of State’s office to get their name on their party’s primary ballot simply by paying a $1000.00 filing fee. There is no requirement that nominating petitions have to be filed with any number of signatures of registered New Hampshire voters. Therefore the New Hampshire Presidential Primary ballots for each party can have dozens of names on them and not just the major national candidates. The party organizations serve as resources for all of the registered candidates to assist and advise them on how the campaign laws in New Hampshire work. Unlike some other states where party leaders will sometimes offer their personal endorsements of particular candidates, state party officials in New Hampshire rarely endorse presidential candidates, so as to not give the appearance that the “party bosses” are trying to influence the election. New Hampshire Republican and Democratic Party officials also work closely with their respective national parties and the major candidates to assure that the New Hampshire presidential primary remains the first presidential primary in the nation.

The next speaker was Rep. Dan Eaton, Majority Floor Leader of the New Hampshire House of Representatives who spoke on the role of the Legislature in the New Hampshire Presidential Primary and the primary’s impact on the politics and culture of the state. Rep. Eaton noted that hosting the nation’s first presidential primary every four years is both a privilege and a responsibility for the people of New Hampshire. While the state does enjoy some tangible economic benefit from the long influx of campaign workers and spending in the lead up to the presidential primary, the individual citizens of New Hampshire also endure a much greater amount of intended and unintended contact with all of the candidate organizations and their volunteers over an extended period of time. The net result, Rep. Eaton argued, was still positive for the state of New Hampshire and the nation. With only about 1.5 million residents, New Hampshire is small enough that presidential candidates are still expected to participate in the “retail” aspects of politics by meeting individual voters at BBQs, town hall meetings, and even neighborhood gatherings in living rooms. The best funded national presidential candidates can’t simply “buy” the New Hampshire presidential primary election through extensive paid advertising or political endorsements. Presidential candidates that are less well known and less well funded still have a chance to win the primary in New Hampshire through organizing a good network of dedicated volunteers and making extensive personal appearances across the state. This direct contact with individual voters in New Hampshire, Rep. Eaton argues, makes for better presidential candidates and better Presidents.

The final presentation for the day was given by Brother Jim Tetreault and Brother Richard Patten. Brothers Tetreault and Patten spoke about the role of local officials in the primary election process. Brother Tetreault is Clerk of the town of Winchester, NH. His job involves registering citizens in his town to vote, certifying and sending out absentee ballots, maintaining the checklist, and maintaining the custody of the ballots until election day when they are distributed to the voters. Brother Patten, until recently, was a Supervisor of the Checklist in the city of Concord, NH. The duties of the Supervisor are to review the checklist for irregularities prior to the election, oversee the election process on the day of the elections, and assure that the ballots are accurately counted and reported to the city government officials and the Secretary of State’s office. One of the more interesting aspects of the voter registration process in New Hampshire is that voters may elect one of three partisan affiliations. They may choose to register as a Republican, as a Democrat, or as non-affiliated (Independent). On election day registered Republicans may only receive the Republican ballot and registered Democrats may only receive the Democratic ballot, but non-affiliated voters may choose which ballot, Republican or Democrat,
to take. The aspect of choice associated with being an Independent voter is apparently popular in the Granite State. Nearly 50% of all eligible voters in the New Hampshire Presidential Primary this year were registered Independents, with the remaining 50% of the voters about evenly split between Republicans and Democrats.

After a return to the headquarters hotel, the Presidential Primary participants had a fine dinner, reviewed what they had learned that day, and received their final assignments as volunteers for various presidential campaigns for the following day, Saturday, December 29th.

Prior to traveling to New Hampshire, each Presidential Primary Fly-In participant was asked to give three choices for presidential campaigns they would like to volunteer to help during the Fly-In. Then, the National Grange contacted the various campaigns and scheduled volunteer opportunities for each of the Presidential Primary Fly-In participants with one of the presidential campaigns of their choice. This year, every Presidential Primary Fly-In participant was able to work for their first choice campaign!

Grange Presidential Primary Fly-In participants were each dropped off at the campaign headquarters of his or her respective candidate. Over the course of the day, the Grange campaign volunteers were assigned numerous tasks associated with the operation of a campaign. Some Grange volunteers made telephone calls to their candidate’s supporters reminding them to vote in the primary election. Other Grange volunteers were given training in “canvassing” and then conducted door to door, face to face campaign work handing out campaign literature and answering voters’ questions about their candidates, still other Grange volunteers were assigned to update contact lists of their candidate’s likely supporters, and some even stood on a street corner and held up a large campaign sign for their candidate for passing motorists to “honk” at. Finally one Grange volunteer was assigned the critical task of finding a business supply store in the neighborhood where the campaign office was located to replenish staples, post-it notes and other basic campaign supplies.

In each campaign office they worked in, the Grange volunteers were the oldest people in the room. New Hampshire Presidential Primary campaigns, especially in the final days before an election, are overwhelmingly staffed by enthusiastic college age volunteers. However, every Grange volunteer reported that they were treated with respect and appreciation by their fellow volunteers and that their age differences made no difference in their assignments or responsibilities. All of the campaigns demonstrated a sense of urgency, dedication, and purpose for their respective candidates that was equally shared by the Grange volunteers.

At the end of the day, the volunteers were picked up in the Grange van and brought to the New Hampshire State Grange Headquarters in Hooksett, NH, for a delicious farewell dinner put on by Antrim Grange #98. Members of the New Hampshire State Grange officer corps also joined the Fly-In participants to learn about their experiences. Each Presidential Primary Fly-In participant was asked to share their perspective on their experience and whether or not it was a valuable experience. All of the participants agreed that it was an important and valuable experience in grassroots democracy and lamented the fact that more Grange members did not take advantage of the unique opportunity provided by the National Grange and the New Hampshire State Grange. One participant described the experience as “….the best National Grange sponsored program I have ever attended.”

In addition to the speakers who gave generously of their time and knowledge and the individual presidential campaigns who graciously welcomed each of the Grange volunteers, the National Grange would like to recognize the following individuals and organizations for their support and/or sponsorship of the National Grange New Hampshire Presidential Primary Fly-In: NH Rep. Bob Haefner, who arranged for our tour of the state capitol, our meeting room for our speakers, and our lunch in the state capitol cafeteria; Antrim Grange #98 for a delicious closing banquet; Brother George Lambert, who drove the transport van and arranged for souvenir T-shirts for each presidential primary participant; Amplify Public Affairs (formerly Issue Dynamics, Inc.) of Washington DC for their remote logistical coordination efforts; NH State Grange Legislative Director Jim Tetreault for helping arrange speakers; and Worthy Master Beth Merrill and her husband Arthur for strongly supporting and participating in this program and allowing us to visit New Hampshire on a cold, wet, snowy winter weekend to observe and participate in history-in-the-making as the nation began the process of selecting the next President of the United States.

Grange Opposes Natural Gas Exploration Restrictions

The National Grange and the West Virginia State Grange joined the Agriculture Energy Alliance (AEA) in opposing provisions of the Renewable Energy and Energy Conservation Tax Act of 2007 (H.R.-3221) that would have restricted the exploration and production of natural gas, especially on private property in states like West Virginia. The natural gas exploration restrictions that passed the U.S. House of Representatives were removed from the legislation before final passage as H.R. 6.

James Foster, President of the West Virginia State Grange, expressed in the letter to Congress that family farmers in West Virginia and around the country are continuously impeded by government policies restricting access to natural gas supply sources while creating additional demands for natural gas. Foster pointed out that abundant new supplies of clean burning natural gas are still accessible in states like West Virginia and can be produced in an environmentally sound manner. He also noted that royalties from natural gas production on private property are an important source of financial stability for family farmers and rural landowners who face volatile agricultural markets. New supplies of natural gas are critically needed, he asserted, for the economic well-being of rural America.

Grange Endorses Farm Bill Payment Limitations

The National Grange and 75 other organizations wrote to the U.S. Senate urging them to support the bi-partisan payment limitation amendment being offered by Senators Byron L. Dorgan (DN. D.) and Charles E. Grassley (R-IA).

The Coalition stated that the time has come for real reform that closes loopholes and caps mega-farm subsidies. The Senate Agriculture Committee Farm Bill legislation did not impose any reductions in payments on the vast majority of the nation’s mega-farms. As drafted, only single, unmarried farmers would face a payment limitation reduction in years of high crop prices. In years of low crop prices, mega-farms – married and single – would still get unlimited subsidies to drive smaller operations out of business.

The Dorgan-Grassley amendment would place a hard cap of $250,000 on annual payments and close the loopholes. Megafarms would no longer be able to get unlimited payment by creating a complex web of legal entities. All payments would count toward the limits, including the generic certificates created as a mechanism to avoid the limitations. Finally, the amendment would ensure that all payments fl ow to working farmers. Consistent with the recommendations of the USDA Payment Limit Commission and the Government Accountability Offi ce, the amendment would create measurable and objective standards for participation in on-farm labor or management.

National Grange and the SPCC Writes to EPA on Proposed Amendments

The Agriculture Coalition on the Spill Prevention, Control and Countermeasure (SPCC), which includes the National Grange, submitted comments on the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s proposed amendments to the SPCC rule. For many years, this coalition has been working with EPA to ensure that any agency action regulating oil spill prevention and response takes into account the uniqueness of the agricultural industry. While the Coalition still has concerns with the proposed rule, the new proposed amendments do contain improved options for agriculture.

The Coalition urged EPA to set up a toll free telephone hotline for producers seeking information and clarity on the rule and how it applies to their operation. The Coalition also urged the creation of a website dedicated specifi cally to SPCC requirements, offering information on rules, clearly stating deadlines, providing templates, and making clear the formal review, appeal, and mitigation process.

In conclusion, the Coalition stated its appreciation of options for agriculture that EPA has included in this proposal. However, they do not believe that EPA fully understands or appreciates the unique nature of the agricultural industry and our history of responsible fuel storage management. They strongly urged EPA to reconsider the threshold triggers for regulation and increase it to 20,000 gallons.

National Grange Writes to Federal Energy Regulatory Commission on Liquefied Natural Gas Facility

The National Grange recently urged the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) to develop and strengthen regulations regarding the location of Liquefi ed Natural Gas (LNG) terminals and to consider weigh safety issues, river traffi c concerns, potential pollution, habitat impacts, and the comments and recommendations of the Coast Guard about the potential problems associated with the additional traffi c when approving any LNG terminal facilities. This policy is also supported by the Washington State Grange, which adopted similar statewide policy urging FERC to deny the Northern Star Natural Gas application to construct a LNG terminal at Bradwood Landing and an associated 34 mile highpressure pipeline through a portion of Washington State.

The primary concern of the Washington State Grange and the National Grange with the Bradwood Landing option is the danger associated with the movement of large LNG vessels through the bar at the mouth of the Columbia River and the narrow channels upstream to the site. The potential hazards and disruption caused by this traffic to other shipping on the river are great, particularly the movement of agricultural commodities from existing facilities further upstream. Additionally, the proposed terminal and pipeline threatens public safety and security in the Lower Columbia River area for local citizens. Finally, the proposed terminal creates a threat to the critical salmon habitat in the Columbia River Estuary.

For more stories in this issue Click here for a FREE subscription!

top