PORTSMOUTH HERALD EDITORIAL

THIRD-PARTY CANDIDATES BATTLE UNLEVEL PLAYING FIELDS

You wouldn't know it by listening to your radio, watching television or even reading your daily newspaper, but there are more than two candidates running for most major offices - and even some of the more minor ones - this election year.

In the race for U.S. Senate, Bow Libertarian Ken Blevens will be on the ballot with Democrat Jeanne Shaheen and Republican John Sununu. Grafton Libertarian John Babiarz will be up against Republican Craig Benson and Democrat Mark Fernald for governor, and Portsmouth's own Dan Belforti, also a Libertarian, will face Democrat Martha Fuller Clark and Republican Jeb Bradley for the 1st Congressional District seat.

Also, both Belforti and fellow Libertarian Joseph Carringer, also of Portsmouth, will appear as candidates for state representative from District 86, which encompasses Portsmouth and Newington.

The are two reasons most voters have not heard these names before: First, these individuals are not privy to the same financial resources that the Democratic and Republican candidates are - they are, therefore, unable to mount the same kind of media campaigns. The second reason is that the public is focused on the big names involved in all these races, and that has overshadowed others who are running.

Both of these situations are the result of the realities of the political system and cannot be helped. However, when the political strength of the two major parties creates a playing field that is not level, we feel we must speak out.

Blevens recently asked Secretary of State Bill Gardner to disqualify Shaheen and Sununu from the Senate race in accordance with Article 11 of the state constitution. That article says, in essence, that if a candidate is convicted of violating campaign laws, action by the state Supreme Court is required to reinstate their privilege to run for office.

Blevens correctly points out that both Shaheen and Sununu were guilty of violating the campaign finance laws by spending more than their voluntary limits in the primary. As a result, they both paid finds in excess of $10,000. The Libertarian contends these violations trigger the need for action by the Supreme Court.

However, Gardner refused to remove Shaheen and Sununu from the ballot, claiming in a letter to Blevens issued last week that the two were not technically "convicted" of a violation, so there was no need for court action.

The Libertarian pointed out that if anyone gets a speeding ticket and pays a fine, a conviction appears on his or her motor vehicle record. The payment of the fine is tantamount to pleading guilty to the charges and is dealt with just as if the individual had been convicted of the violation by a court, Blevens said. The Libertarian contends that if he were in violation of the campaign spending laws the full weight of state government would surely come down on him.

We believe the Libertarian's analysis of the situation is right on. The power of the Democratic and Republican parties in this state allows their candidates to slip through the narrowest of interpretive loopholes in the campaign laws and the constitution.

While we certainly don't expect Gardner to remove Shaheen and Sununu from the ballot based on these violations, there is no reason why they can't be brought before the Supreme Court to state their case for being allowed to continue in the campaign. It would bring to light the realities that third parties in this state are held to standards the major parties are not and that violations of election laws that are meant to ensure level playing fields are often treated lightly by those charged with the power to enforce them.