The Concord Monitor (N.H.), May 27:

The first New Hampshire primary was held on March 14, 1916. As explained on NHprimary100.org, the state wasn’t the “first in the nation” that inaugural year: Minnesota also held its primary on March 14, and both states were behind Indiana, which had held its election the previous week.

It wasn’t until 1952 that New Hampshire took on its true primary importance, and in that time there have been many challenges to the state’s supremacy. This summer, when Republicans and Democrats hold their conventions, we expect critics of New Hampshire’s status to roar louder than ever before. In fact, it’s already started.

On Wednesday, the New York Times reported that national Republican Party leaders are working on changes to the process of choosing presidential nominees, including an end to the “cherished place” of the four early voting states – New Hampshire, Iowa, Nevada and South Carolina. One plan Republican National Committee members have floated, the Times reported, is that the early “carve-out states” would each “be paired with a nearby state that would vote on the same day.” Under that plan, New Hampshire would still technically hold the first primary, but it would happen on the same day as Massachusetts in 2020 and Maine in 2024.

Another change under consideration by the RNC is to restrict primary voting to registered Republicans, meaning New Hampshire independents would be locked out.

The Democratic Party, meanwhile, is expected to reconsider a superdelegate system that has drawn the ire of supporters of Bernie Sanders.

While some reforms may be in order for both parties, we can say with certainty that pairing New Hampshire with a neighboring state would damage the way the nation chooses its presidential nominees.

Critics of the state’s first-in-thenation status often point to New Hampshire’s lack of cultural diversity and how unfair it is that one small state has such an outsized role on the national political stage. Both complaints are legitimate to a point, but they ignore the real value of this long-standing political tradition.

In an age when candidates have many digital options for reaching voters, retail politics is becoming a lost art. And that’s truly a shame. Those seeking the presidency should be reminded at every turn to whom they are truly accountable. That happens more effectively here than anywhere else because voters have decades of experience vetting presidential candidates. To pair New Hampshire with another state on primary day wouldn’t just dilute an honored tradition, it would add significantly to the growing barrier between politicians and those they wish to represent.