The Legislature Holds the Pen
First, it's important to know who draws the maps to begin with. In the Granite State, that power belongs to the state legislature. A special legislative committee drafts new boundaries for the state's two congressional districts, as well as for state-level offices, based on new census data. This process is inherently political, as the party in control of the legislature has the first crack at creating districts that could favor their candidates in future elections. The proposed maps are then voted on and passed through the State House and State Senate, just like any other piece of legislation. This makes the composition of the legislature itself the single most important factor in how the maps are initially drawn.
The Governor’s Ultimate Weapon: The Veto
Once the legislature passes
a new set of congressional maps, the bill lands on the governor’s desk. This is where the governor’s most significant power comes into play: The veto. The governor can sign the bill, making the maps law, or they can reject it entirely. A governor can veto a map for any number of reasons, but it often comes down to fairness. For example, in the most recent redistricting cycle, Governor Chris Sununu, a Republican, twice vetoed congressional maps drawn by his own party. He argued the proposed maps were an unfair partisan gerrymander that would create one safe Republican district and one safe Democratic district, instead of preserving the state's historically competitive races. This move highlights that the governor’s veto is a powerful check on a legislature that might otherwise push through a heavily biased map.
What Happens After a Veto?
A gubernatorial veto doesn't automatically kill a proposed map, but it creates a significant roadblock. The legislature can attempt to override the veto, but this requires a supermajority in both chambers, a high bar that is often difficult to clear, especially if the governor’s party has members who support his position. More commonly, a veto forces the legislature and the governor into negotiations. Lawmakers can go back to the drawing board to create a new, more agreeable map that the governor is willing to sign. This back-and-forth can be a tense political drama, with the fate of the state's congressional representation hanging in the balance.
When Politicians Fail, the Courts Step In
If the legislature and the governor remain at an impasse and cannot agree on a map, the final decision often falls to the courts. If a deadline passes without new maps in place, lawsuits can prompt the New Hampshire Supreme Court to take over the process. This is precisely what happened in 2022. After the governor's vetoes and the subsequent legislative stalemate, the state's Supreme Court assumed jurisdiction, appointed a neutral third-party expert known as a "special master," and ultimately adopted a map with minimal changes to the existing districts. This judicial backstop serves as a last resort to ensure that new, constitutionally sound districts are established, taking the power out of the hands of the gridlocked political branches.
The Power of the Bully Pulpit
Beyond the formal power of the veto, the governor also wields significant informal influence through the "bully pulpit." By speaking out publicly, holding press conferences, and using social media, a governor can shape public opinion and apply pressure on the legislature. By labeling a map a "partisan gerrymander" and threatening a veto early in the process, a governor can rally citizens and advocacy groups, forcing lawmakers to defend their map in the court of public opinion. This public pressure can be a powerful tool to encourage the legislature to produce a fairer map from the outset, potentially avoiding a veto and court battle altogether. However, it's worth noting that this same power can be used to reject bipartisan reform efforts. Governor Sununu also vetoed bills in 2019 and 2020 that would have created an independent redistricting commission.
