Nearly 90% of NH votes are counted IN SECRET by a private corporation with a criminal history, criminal personnel, and partisan ties. The State of NH has approved the outsourcing of our elections, in clear violation of the NH Constitution, which states that vote counting must be observable, and in violation of the concept of "non-delegable governmental functions. This legally binding principle is outlined in the Office of Budget and Management Policy Letter 92-1, as quoted below the video at bottom of this article.
The State, and other defenders of these violations, makes the claim that privatizing the vote count on election night is okay because NH allows for manual recounts of its paper ballots. This argument is flawed on so many levels it would take a policy paper to lay it out for you. Suffice to say that the NH Constitution mandates open vote counting for elections. Period. It makes no reference to recounts. And the principle of non-delegable governmental functions similarly offers no loophole for privatization of critical functions as long as you have a public back up plan.
And lastly, and most importantly, NH has virtually no secure and publicly observable chain of ballot custody to guarantee the integrity of the vote count in a recount. So a fraudulent privatized vote count on election day can easily be backed up by a fraudulent vote count in a recount. In fact, the NH recount is so flawed that the Department of State takes measures to intimidate citizen observers and to ensure the chain of ballot custody is kept under the cover of darkness using police dogs to keep the public at bay.
Why do NH citizens put up with this?
Take a look at the 2008 NH recount, replete with police dogs:
OMB POLICY LETTER 92-1
Purpose. This policy letter establishes Executive Branch policy relating to service contracting and inherently governmental functions. Its purpose is to assist Executive Branch officers and employees in avoiding an unacceptable transfer of official responsibility to Government contractors.
Definition. As a matter of policy, an "inherently governmental function" is a function that is so intimately related to the public interest as to mandate performance by Government employees. These functions include those activities that require either the exercise of discretion in applying Government authority or the making of value judgments in making decisions for the Government. Governmental functions normally fall into two categories: (1) the act of governing, i.e., the discretionary exercise of Government authority, and (2) monetary transactions and entitlements.
An inherently governmental function involves, among other things, the interpretation and execution of the laws of the United States so as to:
(a) bind the United States to take or not to take some action by contract, policy, regulation, authorization, order, or otherwise;
(b) determine, protect, and advance its economic, political, territorial, property, or other interests by military or diplomatic action, civil or criminal judicial proceedings, contract management, or otherwise;
(c) significantly affect the life, liberty, or property of private persons;
(d) commission, appoint, direct, or control officers of employees of the United States; or
(e) exert ultimate control over the acquisition, use, or disposition of the property, real or personal, tangible or intangible, of the United States, including the collection, control, or disbursement of appropriated and other Federal funds.