Court Opinion

ID: 2964126
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2015-09-21 21:20:57.466395+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T11:42:51.226361
License: Public Domain

USCA1 Opinion

	

                            UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                            UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT
                                FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT

                              _________________________

          No. 95-1982

                                 PAULA WERME, ET AL.,

                               Plaintiffs, Appellants,

                                          v.

                 STEPHEN MERRILL, GOVERNOR OF NEW HAMPSHIRE, ET AL.,

                                Defendants, Appellees.

                              _________________________

                     APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

                          FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

                 [Hon. Joseph A. DiClerico, Jr., U.S. District Judge]
                                                 ___________________

                              _________________________

                                        Before

                         Selya and Cummings,* Circuit Judges,
                                              ______________

                          and Coffin, Senior Circuit Judge.
                                      ____________________

                              _________________________

               Barnes, Bender  & Boehm, Martin Bender, and Paula Werme, pro
               _______________________  _____________      ___________
          se, on brief for appellants.
               Jeffrey  R.  Howard, Attorney  General,  and  Christopher P.
               ___________________                           ______________
          Reid, Assistant Attorney General, on brief for appellees.
          ____

                              _________________________

                                     May 23, 1996
                              _________________________

          __________
          *Of the Seventh Circuit, sitting by designation.

                    SELYA, Circuit Judge.  We must determine in the  course
                    SELYA, Circuit Judge.
                           _____________

          of this  appeal whether New Hampshire  overstepped constitutional

          bounds  by denying a recognized third party the right, enjoyed by

          the state's two  most popular political parties, to have election

          inspectors  and ballot clerks  present at  the polls  on Election

          Day.   We conclude, as  did the district court,  that the state's

          statutory scheme passes constitutional muster.

          I.  BACKGROUND
          I.  BACKGROUND

                    The  material facts are not in genuine dispute.  In New

          Hampshire, as elsewhere,  the Democratic  and Republican  parties

          dominate the  political scene.   Nevertheless, third  parties can

          make their mark.   In  the 1990 gubernatorial  election one  such

          group,  the Libertarian Party, garnered over 3% of the votes cast

          statewide.  This level of achievement earned it the right to hold

          party primaries  and to have its anointed candidates appear under

          the party label on the official ballot.  See N.H. Rev. Stat. Ann.
                                                   ___

             652:11 & 655:14  (1986).  The Libertarian Party  retained that

          status by virtue of  the number of votes its  candidates garnered

          in subsequent elections.

                    Despite  party  recognition  and  ballot   status,  the

          Libertarian Party claims that it has been hampered by a series of

          seemingly  unconnected  mishaps.1   Goaded  by  these  incidents,
                              
          ____________________

               1To  cite  a few  of the  more  bruited examples,  the party
          claims  that  one  town   neglected  to  forward  the  count   of
          Libertarian votes cast in the  1990 gubernatorial election to the
          Secretary of  State; that,  in another town,  election officials,
          contrary to then-existing state  law, see N.H. Rev. Stat.  Ann.  
                                                ___
          659:14 (1986), since  amended, see id.   659:14(I)  (1994 Supp.),
                                         ___ ___
          refused  to  permit a  registered  Democrat to  change  her party

                                          2

          Paula  Werme,  a  registered   Libertarian,  requested  that  the

          selectmen in Mont Vernon  appoint her to represent her party as a

          ballot clerk at the March 1994 municipal election.  The selectmen

          denied her request.   In rapid succession Werme then  brought her

          campaign  to  the  Secretary  of  State  and, failing  to  obtain

          redress, sought a judicial anodyne.

                    Invoking 42 U.S.C.   1983, Werme  sued the Governor and

          the Secretary of State in New Hampshire's federal district court.

          She alleged  that the statutes governing  appointment of election

          inspectors and ballot  clerks abridged her constitutional  rights

          to  free  association, due  process,  and  equal protection;  she

          prayed that the court enjoin their enforcement; and she sought an

          order commanding the appointment of Libertarians to the indicated

          positions  on the  same basis  as members  of the  Democratic and

          Republican  parties.   The  Libertarian  Party  intervened as  an

          additional plaintiff.   The district court,  after mulling cross-

          motions  for  summary judgment,  concluded  that  the defendants'

          interest  in  the  efficient  management  of election  activities

          justified the  small restriction  on the plaintiffs'  rights that

          the  challenged  statutes entailed,  and  upheld New  Hampshire's

          statutory scheme.  This appeal followed.

          II.  STANDARD OF APPELLATE REVIEW
          II.  STANDARD OF APPELLATE REVIEW

                    The  summary  judgment  standard is  both  prosaic  and
                              
          ____________________

          registration and  affiliate with the Libertarian  Party; and that
          on occasion voters discovered  that unauthorized changes had been
          made  in their  listed  party affiliations.   No  complaints were
          filed with the Secretary of State in connection with any of these
          incidents.

                                          3

          familiar,  see, e.g.,  McCarthy v.  Northwest Airlines,  Inc., 56
                     ___  ____   ________     _________________________

          F.3d  313, 315 (1st Cir. 1995) (collecting  cases), and we see no

          need to rehearse it here.  We simply  restate two basic verities.

          First,  the district court may enter summary judgment only if the

          record reveals no genuine  issue of material fact and  the movant

          demonstrates an entitlement to judgment as a matter of  law.  See
                                                                        ___

          Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(c).  Second, the court of  appeals reviews the

          grant  of  summary judgment  de  novo,  applying  the same  legal

          principles that held sway in the  nisi prius court.  See Roche v.
                                                               ___ _____

          John Hancock Mutual  Life Ins. Co., ___  F.3d ___, ___  (1st Cir.
          __________________________________

          1996) [No. 95-1804, slip op. at 8].

          III.  THE STATUTORY SCHEME
          III.  THE STATUTORY SCHEME

                    New  Hampshire's electoral machinery is pretty standard

          stuff.   A  town moderator  supervises Election  Day activities.2

          See N.H. Rev. Stat. Ann.   659:9.  The moderator commands a cadre
          ___

          of other  election officials,  including inspectors  appointed by

          the  two political parties  that received "the  largest number of

          votes  [cast]  for governor  in the  state  at the  last previous

          general election. . . ."  Id.   658:2.  Each such political party
                                    ___

          may appoint two inspectors per  polling place, and one additional

          inspector for  every 1,500 qualified  voters in  excess of  2,000

          qualified voters registered at that polling place.  See id.  If a
                                                              ___ ___

          political party fails to appoint inspectors, the town's selectmen
                              
          ____________________

               2While procedures  are slightly different in  cities than in
          towns, the differences are irrelevant to  the disposition of this
          appeal.    Consequently,  we  refer throughout  to  the  election
          procedures  in  towns,  omitting  particularized   references  to
          counterpart procedures that apply in urban settings.

                                          4

          fill  the  lacuna by  naming inspectors  from  the ranks  of that

          party.   See id.  In turn,  the moderator designates two election
                   ___ ___

          inspectors, one from each of the two parties,  to serve as ballot

          clerks.  See id.   658:25.
                   ___ ___

                    Ballot  clerks exercise  no  discretion.   Their purely

          ministerial duties include distributing  ballots at the polls and

          keeping an official checklist containing the names of persons who

          in fact vote.  See id.    658:25 & 659:13.  In principle, a voter
                         ___ ___

          presents herself to the ballot clerk; if the voter's name appears

          on  an official  list  of  registered  voters, the  ballot  clerk

          provides her with a ballot.3  Ballot  clerks are not empowered to

          register voters, and do not have authority to modify the official

          voting  list.   While voters  may declare  or change  their party

          affiliation on Election Day under certain circumstances, see N.H.
                                                                   ___

          Stat.  Ann.       654:7-a   &  654:7-b  (Supp.   1994),  election

          supervisors or town clerks (who are themselves elected officials)

          handle such  matters.  See N.H. Stat. Ann.   654:8 (1986).  Every
                                 ___

          recognized  political  party,  regardless  of  size  or  previous

          electoral success, may  appoint a "challenger  of voters" at  any

          polling place who may stand within the guardrail to "see and hear

          each voter as he offers to vote."  Id.   666:4.
                                             ___
                              
          ____________________

               3In  primary elections, a ballot clerk must give a voter who
          has declared her party affiliation the ballot of that party.  See
                                                                        ___
          N.H.  Rev. Stat. Ann.    659:14(I) (1994 Supp.).   Exceptions are
          made only when a  declared voter wishes to  support a party  that
          did not have official existence when the voter declared her party
          loyalty  (and  then  only  in the  primary  election  immediately
          following the party's official recognition) or when the  voter is
          undeclared  and  the   party's  rules  allow  such  a   voter  to
          participate in its primary.  See id.
                                       ___ ___

                                          5

                    After the polls close,  the town moderator oversees the

          counting  of votes.   See id.     659:60 & 659:61.   Although the
                                ___ ___

          palsgrave  is  held in  public, see  id.    659:63,  only persons
                                          ___  ___

          holding  official positions  may take  part in  tallying ballots.

          See id.   659:60.   Election inspectors sometimes participate  in
          ___ ___

          this  process.  Once the  votes have been  tallied, the moderator

          announces  the  final results,  see id.     659:70, and  a formal
                                          ___ ___

          election  return is prepared by  the town clerk  and forwarded to

          the Secretary of State.  See id.     659:74 & 659:75.  Members of
                                   ___ ___

          the  public  may inspect  the return.    Candidates may  call for

          recounts, see id.     660:1-6 & 665:6(II), and the  New Hampshire
                    ___ ___

          Ballot Law Commission has jurisdiction to "hear and determine all

          disputes involving alleged  violations of New  Hampshire election

          laws  of a non-criminal  nature for  which no  specific statutory

          appeal  procedure  has  already been  provided."    Id.    665:7.
                                                              ___

          Moreover, election  officials are  subject to  criminal penalties

          for  ballot tampering,  falsifying returns,  or  the like.   See,
                                                                       ___

          e.g., id.   666:1-3.
          ____  ___

          IV.  ANALYSIS
          IV.  ANALYSIS

                    We subdivide our analysis into four segments.

                                          A
                                          A

                    It is apodictic that the right to  vote is a right that

          helps to preserve all other rights.  As Chief Justice Warren  put

          it:  "The right to vote  freely for the candidate of one's choice

          is of the essence  of a democratic society, and  any restrictions

          on  that right strike at the heart of representative government."

                                          6

          Reynolds v. Sims, 377 U.S. 533, 555 (1964); see also Wesberry  v.
          ________    ____                            ___ ____ ________

          Sanders,  376 U.S.  1, 17  (1964) ("Other  rights, even  the most
          _______

          basic, are  illusory  if  the  right to  vote  is  undermined.").

          Nonetheless, the right to  vote is not absolute.   See Burdick v.
                                                             ___ _______

          Takushi, 112 S. Ct. 2059, 2063 (1992).  "[A]s a practical matter,
          _______

          there must be a  substantial regulation of elections if  they are

          to  be fair  and honest and  if some  sort of  order, rather than

          chaos, is to accompany the democratic process."  Storer v. Brown,
                                                           ______    _____

          415 U.S.  724, 730 (1974).   To that end, each  state retains the

          authority to regulate state and local elections and to  prescribe

          the duties and qualifications  of persons who work at  the polls,

          and the manner  in which they will be selected.   See Sugarman v.
                                                            ___ ________

          Dougall, 413 U.S. 634, 647 (1973); see also U.S. Const. Art. I,  
          _______                            ___ ____

          4,  cl. 1 (directing  that states  shall prescribe  "[t]he Times,

          Places  and   Manner  of  holding  Elections   for  Senators  and

          Representatives").

                    To be sure, this authority to regulate elections is not

          unfettered.  At  a minimum, states cannot  wield their regulatory

          power in ways that contravene the First and Fourteenth  Amendment

          rights  of their citizens.   See Tashjian v.  Republican Party of
                                       ___ ________     ___________________

          Conn.,  479 U.S.  208,  217 (1986).    As courts  review  states'
          _____

          regulatory efforts and strive  to distinguish between permissible

          regulation and  impermissible abridgment  of voters'  rights, the

          level of scrutiny looms  large.  The plaintiffs insist that a law

          imposing  any burden (however modest)  upon the right  to vote is
                    ___

          always subject to strict scrutiny.  We do not agree.

                                          7

                    The Supreme  Court has  eschewed a  hard-and-fast rule,

          and  instead has  adopted a  flexible framework  for testing  the

          validity of election  regulations.   See Burdick, 112  S. Ct.  at
                                               ___ _______

          2063;  Anderson v. Celebrezze, 460  U.S. 780, 789 (1983); Storer,
                 ________    __________                             ______

          415 U.S. at 730. 

          Under  the prescribed  framework,  the level  of  scrutiny to  be

          applied corresponds roughly to  the degree to which  a challenged

          regulation  encumbers  First  and  Fourteenth  Amendment  rights.

          Consequently, a  court weighing a  challenge to a  state election

          law must start by  assessing "the character and magnitude  of the

          asserted  injury" to  the plaintiff's  constitutionally protected

          rights and  then "evaluate the  precise interests put  forward by

          the  State as justifications for the burden imposed by its rule."

          Anderson, 460 U.S.  at 789;  accord Libertarian Party  of Me.  v.
          ________                     ______ _________________________

          Diamond, 992 F.2d 365,  370 (1st Cir. 1993) (explaining  that the
          _______

          court  must   attempt  to  achieve  a   sort  of  "constitutional

          equilibrium").  In this process the court must take into account,

          among  other things, "the extent to which those interests make it

          necessary  to burden the plaintiff's  rights."  Id.   The Burdick
                                                          ___       _______

          Court crystallized the applicable standard of inquiry:

                    Under  this  standard,  the  rigorousness  of
                    [the]  inquiry into the  propriety of a state
                    election law depends upon the extent to which
                    a  challenged  regulation  burdens First  and
                    Fourteenth Amendment  rights.   Thus,  as  we
                    have recognized when those rights are subject
                    to severe restrictions,  the regulation  must
                    be narrowly drawn to advance a state interest
                    of  compelling importance.   But when a state
                    election    law   provision    imposes   only
                    reasonable,   nondiscriminatory  restrictions
                    upon  the  First  and   Fourteenth  Amendment

                                          8

                    rights  of  voters,  the   State's  important
                    regulatory interests are generally sufficient
                    to justify the restrictions.

          Burdick, 112 S. Ct. at 2063-64 (citations and  internal quotation
          _______

          marks omitted).

                                          B
                                          B

                    Against this  backdrop,  we  proceed  to  consider  the

          specifics  of  the plaintiffs'  challenge.    In performing  this

          tamisage, we are cognizant that their claim is not that the state

          misapplied New  Hampshire law,  but, rather,  that the  method of

          staffing   the   polls   dictated   by   that   law   is   itself

          constitutionally  infirm.    Thus,  we  regard   the  plaintiffs'

          challenge as  a  facial  attack  on the  statutory  scheme  (and,

          indeed, they have conceded this point).

                    The  plaintiffs'  facial  challenge  is  susceptible to

          further  refinement.   They  do not  contend  that the  statutory

          scheme  directly prevents  members of  less successful  political

          parties,  like the  Libertarians,  from ballot  access either  as

          candidates  or as  voters.   Instead, their  claim  is on  a more

          sophisticated  level;  they say  that  restricting  the right  to

          appoint election  inspectors and  ballot clerks  to the  two most

          popular parties  deprives members of recognized  third parties of

          their  right  to  free  political  association,  and  invidiously

          discriminates  against  them  on  the basis  of  their  political

          affiliation.  Stripped of its rhetorical trappings, this argument

          amounts to nothing less than a declaration that Libertarians have

          a constitutional right to be represented at the polls by election

                                          9

          inspectors  and ballot clerks of  their own party  to ensure that

          Libertarian  votes  are  counted.     In  the  plaintiffs'  view,

          Democrats  and Republicans are not  to be trusted  in this regard

          because they  are unconcerned with the  protection of Libertarian

          interests  and,   if  left  alone,  they   will  likely  overlook

          Libertarian ballots through lassitude, misfeasance, incompetence,

          and the like.

                    In  addressing this claim we  must first set  to rest a

          straw man.  There  is simply no abstract constitutional  right to

          be appointed to serve  as an election inspector or  ballot clerk.

          See, e.g., Rhode  Island Minority Caucus, Inc.,  v. Baronian, 590
          ___  ____  ___________________________________      ________

          F.3d 372,  376  (1st Cir.  1979).   Although  the  right to  vote

          certainly  includes the  right to  have one's  vote  counted, see
                                                                        ___

          United States v. Mosley, 238 U.S. 383, 386 (1915), nothing on the
          _____________    ______

          face  of the  New Hampshire  statutes deprives  Libertarian Party

          members of that right.  

                    We  turn next to an  assessment of the  extent to which

          the challenged statutes burden the First and Fourteenth Amendment

          rights of Libertarians.4  We find the burden to be slight.

                    In the  first  place,  New  Hampshire's  regulation  is

          nondiscriminatory,  that is,  it  does  not  differentiate  among
                              
          ____________________

               4In conducting our evaluation, we do not distinguish between
          the burdens placed  on the  rights of the  Libertarian Party  and
          those  placed on  the rights  of voters  who  wish to  cast their
          ballots  for  that  party's candidates.    As  a  general matter,
          political  parties purport  to represent  the interests  of their
          supporters,  and  "the  rights  of  voters   and  the  rights  of
          candidates do not lend themselves to neat separation."   Burdick,
                                                                   _______
          112 S. Ct. at  2065-66 (quoting Bullock v. Carter,  405 U.S. 132,
                                          _______    ______
          143 (1972)).

                                          10

          Republicans,   Democrats,   and  Libertarians.      Instead,  the

          regulation conditions  the right  to appoint  election inspectors

          and  ballot clerks on  a certain degree of  success at the polls.

          Distinguishing between recognized political parties based on past

          electoral    accomplishment   is    not   per    se   invidiously

          discriminatory.  See, e.g., American Party of Texas v. White, 415
                           ___  ____  _______________________    _____

          U.S.  767,  781  (1974)   (holding  that  it  is   not  invidious

          discrimination  for  a  state  to grant  minor  parties  official

          recognition,  but deny  them  the right  to  hold primaries  even

          though the main  political parties  are so entitled).   So  here:

          the Libertarian Party has exactly the same opportunity to qualify

          as  a source of election  inspectors and ballot  clerks under New

          Hampshire law as does  any other party.  Equality  of opportunity

          exists,  and equality of opportunity   not equality of outcomes  

          is the linchpin of what the Constitution requires in this type of

          situation.  As the Court explained:

                    The   fact   is   that   there   are  obvious
                    differences  in  kind between  the  needs and
                    potentials   of   a   political  party   with
                    historically  established  broad support,  on
                    the one  hand, and  a new or  small political
                    organization on  the other . . . .  Sometimes
                    the  grossest  discrimination   can  lie   in
                    treating  things that are different as though
                    they were exactly alike.

          Jenness v. Fortson, 403 U.S. 431, 441-42 (1971).
          _______    _______

                    In the  second  place, the  New  Hampshire law  has  no

          direct impact on  ballot access, on the right to  vote, or on the

          right to have one's vote  tallied.  It is generally thought  that

          indirect effects are less  burdensome than direct restraints, cf.
                                                                        ___

                                          11

          Dole  v. South Dakota, 483  U.S. 203, 210  (1987) (discussing, in
          ____     ____________

          connection   with  Congress'   spending  powers,   "the  indirect

          achievement  of objectives  which  Congress is  not empowered  to

          achieve directly"), and that generalization holds true here.

                    In the third place, even these indirect effects are not

          discernible  here.    The record  evidence  offers  no  reason to

          believe  that  minority  parties are  at  special  or undue  risk

          because they  have no  right to appoint  election inspectors  and

          ballot clerks.  The law affords a panoply of other safeguards for

          minority parties  (e.g., appointing  a challenger of  voters, see
                                                                        ___

          N.H. Rev. Stat. Ann.    666:4), and ultimate control  over voting

          places  rests with elected officials.  To cinch matters, there is

          no  showing of systematic discrimination against minority parties

          in  the  casting and  tallying of  votes,  and mere  suspicion or

          paranoia is too  flimsy a foundation on which to  rest a claim of

          incipient fraud or mistake.5

                    In  fine, the "burden" to which the plaintiffs allude  

          that Libertarian  ballots will not be  counted unless Libertarian

          election  inspectors  and ballot  clerks are  on  the prowl    is

          purely  conjectural.   To  hold  otherwise  would require  us  to

          conclude, without  a shred  of competent evidence,  that election

          officials in New Hampshire  are unscrupulous individuals who will

          breach the  public trust  in order to  serve the  interests of  a
                              
          ____________________

               5The plaintiffs conceded  below that none of  the mishaps to
          which  they alluded, see  supra note 1, were  part of a concerted
                               ___  _____
          plan to deprive  Libertarians of the  right to vote.   There  is,
          moreover,  no  showing that  similar  gaffes  have not  afflicted
          Republican and/or Democratic voters from time to time.

                                          12

          political party,  and, moreover,  that Democrats  and Republicans

          will  put aside their historic enmity so that, together, they may

          repress third parties.  We refuse to indulge so cynical a view of

          the electoral process.

                                          C
                                          C

                    Having analyzed  the nature of the  burdens imposed, we

          now  proceed  to ascertain  the level  of  scrutiny that  we must

          apply.   See Burdick, 112 S.  Ct. at 2064; Anderson,  460 U.S. at
                   ___ _______                       ________

          789.    We  recognize, of  course,  that  every  provision of  an

          election  code,  even those  that  govern the  voting  process as

          opposed  to those  that govern  ballot access  or eligibility  of

          candidates, "inevitably affects    at least to some degree    the

          individual's right to vote and his right to associate with others

          for political ends."  Anderson,  460 U.S. at 788.  But  different
                                ________

          provisions of an election  code may burden rights unequally,  and

          we believe that the impediment which New Hampshire law imposes in

          respect to the selection of election inspectors and ballot clerks

          is relatively minor.  Given the character and magnitude (or, more

          aptly  put, lack  of  magnitude) of  the  alleged injury  to  the

          plaintiffs'  First and  Fourteenth Amendment rights,  we conclude

          that  the defendants  need only  show that  the enactment  of the

          regulation had  a  rational  basis.   See,  e.g.,  Coalition  for
                                                ___   ____   ______________

          Sensible and Humane Solutions  v. Wamser, 771 F.2d 395,  399 (8th
          _____________________________     ______

          Cir. 1985); Baer  v. Meyer,  728 F.2d 471,  476 (10th Cir.  1984)
                      ____     _____

          (per curiam); Piricin v. Board of Elections, 368  F. Supp. 64, 71
                        _______    __________________

                                          13

          (N.D.  Ohio)  (three-judge  court),  aff'd  mem.,  414  U.S.  990
                                               _____  ____

          (1973).6

                    Our decision in Rhode  Island Minority Caucus, 590 F.2d
                                    _____________________________

          372, is not to  the contrary.  There the  plaintiffs alleged that

          the   Board   of   Canvassers   of   the   City   of   Providence

          unconstitutionally conditioned  appointment as a  voter registrar

          upon membership in  or affiliation  with one  of three  political

          organizations.   See id. at 376.   The district court  denied the
                           ___ ___

          plaintiffs'  motion for  a preliminary  injunction mainly  on the

          ground that the plaintiffs  had no probability of success  on the

          merits.  See id. at 373-74.  We affirmed on a different ground   
                   ___ ___

          that there was  no showing of irreparable harm, see  id. at 374  
                                                          ___  ___

          and added:

                         [The state] may not  abridge fundamental
                    First   Amendment   rights   of  speech   and
                    association without establishing that such an
                    infringement is necessary to achieve  a vital
                    state interest . . . .
                         So  viewed,  but without  prejudging the
                    issue, it  appears  that plaintiffs  raise  a
                    substantial first amendment question.

          Id. at  376-77.  The panel  made clear, however, that  it was for
          ___

          the district  court to determine "the extent to which plaintiffs'

                              
          ____________________

               6We note that  one district court apparently disagrees.   In
          Iowa  Socialist Party  v. Slockett,  604 F.  Supp. 1391  (D. Iowa
          _____________________     ________
          1985), a handful of minor third parties contended that appointing
          mobile  deputy registrars  solely from  persons nominated  by the
          county chairmen of the two major political parties violated their
          constitutional rights.   See  id. at  1392.  As  we do  here, the
                                   ___  ___
          district  court   concluded  that  the  burden   imposed  by  the
          regulation  was  "relatively minor."   Id.  at  1397.   The court
                                                 ___
          nonetheless proceeded  to apply  strict scrutiny  and invalidated
          the law.  See id. at 1396-98.  We find this aspect of the court's
                    ___ ___
          reasoning unpersuasive.

                                          14

          associational rights have been abridged, the burden, if any,  the

          Board must  bear in  justifying that  abridgment, and  whether in

          fact the Board can meet that burden."  Id. at 377.   Fairly read,
                                                 ___

          Rhode Island Minority Caucus is not inconsistent with our holding
          ____________________________

          today.

                                          D
                                          D

                    Using rationality review we conclude that the state has

          justified the regulation.  The defendants rely principally on New

          Hampshire's interest in limiting the number of election officials

          to  manageable  proportions in  order  to  enhance administrative

          efficiency and thereby safeguard against mistakes and fraud.  Too

          many  cooks, the  defendants  say, will  spoil  the broth.    The

          assertion makes good sense.

                    The  state  has  a  valid interest  in  preserving  the

          integrity and reliability of  the electoral process.  See,  e.g.,
                                                                ___   ____

          American  Party, 415 U.S. at 782 n.14; Coalition for Sensible and
          _______________                        __________________________

          Humane Solutions, 771 F.2d at 399.  It is certainly reasonable to
          ________________

          assume that, at some point, "more" is not "better."  Common sense

          suggests that if election inspectors and ballot clerks become too

          numerous,  they  will merely  get in  each  other's way  and thus

          frustrate the moderator's ability  to afford close  supervision.7
                              
          ____________________

               7A  fair parallel  can be  drawn to  ballot access  cases in
          which  the  Court  has  acknowledged that  the  "important  state
          interest  .  .  .  in  avoiding  confusion,  deception,  and even
          frustration of  the democratic process" can be served by limiting
          ballot access based on "some preliminary showing of a significant
          modicum of support."  Jenness, 403 U.S. at 442.   We believe that
                                _______
          this  reasoning  extends  to  the state's  strivings  to  promote
          efficiency and  orderliness at  the polls through  limitations on
          the number of persons who are permitted to work inside the rail.

                                          15

          Cf. Rudyard Kipling, Rewards & Fairies 73 (1910) (suggesting that
          ___                  _________________

          one should  keep no more cats than will catch mice).  Within wide

          margins the place at which to draw the line   in other words, the

          ideal size  of the complement    is for  the state to  determine.

          See, e.g., Anderson, 460  U.S. at 788 n.9 (observing  that states
          ___  ____  ________

          have broad discretion to set minimum requirements restricting the

          number of candidates appearing on the ballot).

                    The  plaintiffs'   riposte  is  to  suggest   that  New

          Hampshire must  demonstrate that adding Libertarians  as election

          inspectors and ballot clerks  would actually cause confusion, or,
                                              ________

          put  another way,  that this  increment would  be the  straw that

          broke the back of the dromedary of administrative efficacy.  That

          suggestion  vastly exaggerates the state's  burden.  See Munro v.
                                                               ___ _____

          Socialist Workers Party, 479 U.S. 189, 195-96 (1986) (rejecting a
          _______________________

          similar  claim on  the  basis that  "[s]uch  a requirement  would

          necessitate that a State's political system sustain some level of

          damage  before  the legislature  could take  corrective action").

          States are free to  head off potential problems in  the electoral

          system before they materialize, as long as the solutions that the

          state devises are reasonable and  do not significantly intrude on

          constitutionally  protected rights.    See id.   New  Hampshire's
                                                 ___ ___

          solution     which involves  restricting  the  number of  persons

          behind  the rail at  polling places, and  puts the responsibility

          for  appointing those persons in  the hands of  the two political

          parties  that have proven most  successful in the  recent past at

          earning the electorate's trust    is a reasonable response  to an

                                          16

          authentic problem.

                    We  hold  that  New  Hampshire's  method  of  selecting

          election  inspectors and  ballot  clerks is  a rational  means of

          advancing  the state's interest  in dispelling confusion, warding

          off fraud,  and ensuring administrative efficiency  at the polls.

          See Baer, 728  F.2d at  476 (applying rational  basis review  and
          ___ ____

          upholding regulation  that did not uniformly  allow all political

          parties to appoint poll  observers); Piricin, 368 F. Supp.  at 71
                                               _______

          (applying   rational  basis   review  and   upholding  regulation

          permitting membership  of boards of elections to  be drawn solely

          from parties  garnering the  two highest  vote totals);  see also
                                                                   ___ ____

          Bishop  v. Lomenzo,  350  F. Supp.  576,  588-89 (E.D.N.Y.  1972)
          ______     _______

          (three-judge   court)   (suggesting  that   regulation  requiring

          volunteer  deputy  registrars  to  be  enrolled  members  of  the

          Republican  or Democratic  parties  merited  only rational  basis

          review, but concluding that law survived strict scrutiny on basis

          that regulation reduced risk of "fraud or irregularity that might

          exist  if registration by [only]  one party or  by an independent

          were  permitted").    While  other  methods  of  selecting  these

          officials, or a somewhat  different numerical formula, might also

          serve, the  state is  free to choose  from among the  universe of

          constitutionally acceptable alternatives.

          IV.  CONCLUSION
          IV.  CONCLUSION

                    We need  go no further.8   Since New  Hampshire's grant
                              
          ____________________

               8The plaintiffs'  Equal Protection  argument is  unworthy of
          separate  discussion.  This argument does not rest on a challenge
          to   New  Hampshire's   requirements   for   achieving   official
          recognition as a political party, but, rather, on the thesis that
          once a party attains  official status under state law,  the state
          may  not  draw  distinctions  between  it  and  other  recognized

                                          17

          of  a monopoly  over the appointment  of election  inspectors and

          ballot  clerks  to the  two  most  popular political  parties  is

          justified by legitimate state interests and imposes only a modest

          burden on the plaintiffs'  First and Fourteenth Amendment rights,

          it  is constitutional.   Nothing succeeds  like success,  and the

          Libertarian Party  has the  same opportunity as  its better-known

          competitors to attract voters  to its standard, finish in  one of

          the top  two spots  in a gubernatorial  election, and  thereafter

          play  a  more  active role  in  the  mechanics  of the  electoral

          process.   But under New Hampshire law  that success is to be won

          at the polls rather than in a federal court.

          Affirmed.
          Affirmed.
          ________

                              
          ____________________

          political parties.  The thesis is untenable.  See American Party,
                                                        ___ ______________
          415 U.S. at 781.

                                          18