Lone Pine Policy II: Income tax boogalo (1972)

As New Hampshire entered 1972, the tax question loomed large over state politics. As the only state with neither an income or sales tax and a growing population to support, the state faced very real questions on how they planned to raise the revenue that they sorely needed. The question also weighed on the mind of Governor Walter Peterson who had changed his position on the taxation question, believing that an income tax was necessary to support the influx of new residents coming into the state. He also felt that an income tax would improve education in the state, since it would decrease the reliance on property taxes. He would convene a special session of the legislature in February to address the problem. There were two plans on the table. The governor's plan was relatively simple, it called for a 50/50 split between the state and its cities and towns. The other plan, devised by Dartmouth economic professor John Menge and Yankee Magazine publisher Rob Trowbridge, was slightly more complex. Their plan would give all income tax revenue to education and it would be spent on a per capita basis, equalizing its impact throughout the state. The legislature would consider both plans and adjoin without passing either one.

In 1970, Governor Peterson had directly challenged William Loeb and the anti-tax stance of his publication. In announcing his 1970 campaign, he had stated, "we must have the courage to withstand the destructive powers of the Loeb press and tell the public what it does not seem to understand - that our tax structure is, and has always been, a reflection of the wishes of the well to-do." The dynamic of the 1970 primary was again present in 1972 as Thomson, backed by Loeb and touting his anti-tax message, would once again take on Peterson. However, there was a slight difference. After his re-election in 1970, Peterson had directly tried to institute a new income tax, which may have served as a motivating factor for anti-tax forces to come out and vote.

The tax question would also loom large in the Democratic primary where Roger Crowley was trying again to be the nominee and was again running on an anti-tax platform. He was opposed by House Minority Leader Robert Raiche, who ran on an audaciously pro-tax platform. In his campaign announcement, Raiche even went as far to say that New Hampshire voters were tired of the "simplistic answer" of a pledge to veto all income and sales tax.

In his campaign, Raiche was the underdog. Crowley had the money, resources, and name recognition. He also had the endorsement of William Loeb and his Union Leader. However, Raiche attempted to use his underdog status as an asset. He regularly attacked Crowley as an agent of the rich, drawing on his own working class background to draw a distinction in the race. He frequently mentioned how he worked his way through school in the Manchester's mills and pledged to be a candidate for the people that he worked with in his youth. In a profile in the September 3, 1972 edition of The Boston Globe, he said "it's about goddamn time that poor people, the people I worked in the mills with, had somebody in the State House that they could talk to."

In the primary, the anti-tax message would prevail on both sides. Thomson would defeat the incumbent governor by almost 2,500 votes, his victory was buoyed by his support in New Hampshire's predominantly rural North Country and supplemented by his almost 3,000 vote victory in Manchester, the home of the Union Leader. Peterson's strongest showing came from towns and cities in the Upper Valley, the Concord area, and in the state's Seacoast region while Thomson did exceptionally well in the Lakes Region, North Country and in Manchester (and its suburbs). Thomson's strength came from the parts of the state that might be considered more rural (with Manchester as an obvious outlier).

On the Democratic side, Crowley would easily defeat Raiche, whose strengths came in the traditionally liberal strongholds of the state. He easily won the college towns of Hanover and Durham with 90% and 91.5% of the vote respectively. However, Raiche's strength in the state's liberal corners would only net him 33.8% of the vote.

The aftermath of the primary left New Hampshire liberals in an unenviable position. The conservative anti-tax message had won the day and liberals did not have a candidate to support in the general election. After all, there was little daylight between Crowley and Thomson on policy. In fact, William Loeb and the Union Leader were initially neutral, declining to endorse either candidate in the general election. Liberals pressed Peterson to leave the Republican Party and offer a third party alternative, an invite that he would ultimately decline.

However, it would not take long for a third party alternative to emerge. Within a week and a half of the primary, Concord mayor Malcolm McLane would throw his hat into the ring as the independent candidate for governor. In entering the race, McLane initially declined to take a firm position on the tax question, pledging only that he would not propose an income or sales tax in his first year in office. He stated that he entered the race so voters would have a choice and was careful to note that both Crowley and Thomson were conservative "Loeb-backed" candidates. In an interview with The Boston Globe in the October 2nd edition of the paper, McLane stated, "I'm sure they disagree with me ... but they probably don't disagree with each other and that's what this race is all about."

McLane entered the race with multiple disadvantages however. First of all, New Hampshire's relatively late primary, September, gave McLane just under two months to build name recognition and support among the general electorate. He figured however that he could win the election with just 35% of the vote. By late October however, that ambition had yet to materialize. A Dartmouth College poll had him at just 9% support with a mere two weeks until election day. Crowley had a slight lead over Thomson, 36-34 with 21% of the electorate still undecided. That same poll also found that McLane was pulling votes away from Crowley and boosting Thomson's campaign.

In the waning days of the campaign, Loeb would break his neutrality and ultimately endorse Thomson's campaign. That may have been enough to put him over the top. Thomson would ultimately win the election by just 7,595 votes or about 2 percentage points with 41% of the vote. While Crowley was able to carry the largest cities in the state (including beating Thomson by nearly 30 points in Manchester), Thomson was carried by his strength in the state's most rural communities. Thomson's strength in the Lakes Region and North Country would help him overcome whatever advantage Crowley had in the cities.

McLane finished a distant third with just 19.5% of the vote. His best performances came in the liberal strongholds in the state. He performed well in the Seacoast, Monadnock, and Upper Valley regions. He also did well in Concord and its surrounding towns. McLane's state political career was not over and he will factor into this story later on.

The 1972 election was a pivotal election for New Hampshire. It was an election where both parties, when faced with the question of whether or not to support a pro-income tax candidate opted not to do so. It was also the election that helped to solidify the influence of William Loeb and his Union Leader  newspaper. Both of Loeb's candidates won their respective party's nomination and the candidate that he ultimately endorsed won the election. The income tax question appeared to have been answered by the voters.

William Loeb had his man in Concord and the tax question appeared to have been put to bed. What would happen in the next 2 years? Next week, we will look at Thomson's first stand for re-election, 1974.