New
Hampshire’s rank in the study
dropped for the second year in a row and
its disclosure program is still among the
bottom ten in the nation, with poor performance
in the areas of electronic filing, data
accessibility, and web site usability.
New
Hampshire performs best in the area of
the law, and it received a B- in the
Campaign Disclosure Law category. Candidates
are required to report details about contributors
giving $25 or more, including occupation
and employer for those contributing more
than $100. Disclosure of loan details,
however, is minimal, and expenditure reports
do not include subvendor details or accrued
expenses. Last-minute contributions and
independent expenditures both must be reported
prior to Election Day. The Secretary
of State’s office previously stated
it offered candidates the option of filing
electronically, but clarified in 2005 that
what it actually offers is downloadable
forms that candidates must print, complete
and return via traditional filing methods
(i.e. mail or in-person delivery).
Access
to campaign filings in New Hampshire
is poor, as reflected in the state’s
F for Disclosure Content Accessibility.
Disclosure reports are still scanned
and posted online as TIFF images, a format
that allows for higher image quality,
but presents a barrier for site visitors
who do not have the software required
to view them. None of the
records on the site can be searched, sorted
or downloaded, and reports for state House of
Representatives candidates are not online
at all.
Though
the state no longer ranks last in the
Online Contextual and Technical Usability
category, its F and rank at 47th indicate
there is still plenty of room for improvement
in this area. The
state’s disclosure web site again
received the lowest possible score in the
usability test, with testers reporting
a lack of confidence in the information
on the site, confusion over site terminology,
and general dissatisfaction with their
experience using the site. There is
still no quick-access overview information
comparing candidates’ campaign finance
activity, nor is there a good explanation
of which disclosure records are available
online. On the bright side, the Secretary
of State’s office did add language
to its web site indicating that some candidates’ reports
are in the political committee section,
rather than the “candidate” section.
→ Quick
Fix: Begin offering
scanned images of disclosure reports
online in PDF, rather than TIFF,
which is less universal and presents
problems for some site visitors.
♦ Editor’s
Pick: Chart
showing spending limits and
penalties for exceeding those limits. View image
