“Live Free Or Die” is the New Hampshire state motto. In a state where independence is a matter of state pride, it is fitting that registered independents outnumber Democrats or Republicans. This trend has been accelerating in recent years, with 85% of new voters choosing to register as independent.

Now the two-party establishment is panicking in the face of this rising tide of independent voters. The two parties are attempting to rig the system to preserve their hold on power.

Today, the New Hampshire State Senate will hold hearings on a bill that would dis-empower independent voters and artificially pad the rolls of party members. Already passed by the State House of Representatives, Bill 154 requires independent voters to register with a party during the primary and then remain a registered member of that party for no less than 90 days, after which time independent voters would need to walk down to their county clerk’s office and actively re-register as independent. This is an outright attempt to place bureaucratic stumbling blocks in front of independent voters to dilute their increasing impact.

The essence of election reform is increasing open competition and voter participation. This bill moves intentionally in the opposite direction under the cover of “party building.” Moreover, it attempts to undercut a longstanding New Hampshire state tradition.

Since 1910, New Hampshire’s open primary system has allowed independents to vote for the candidate of their choice in the primary regardless of party. The presence of these swing voters has resulted in such memorable upsets as Senator McCain’s 19-point defeat of then-Governor George W. Bush in the 2000 Republican presidential primary.

This predictably infuriates professional partisans. Other critics contend that many states across the nation do not have open primaries, New York among them, and New Hampshire’s exception is a curiosity that does not deserve to be preserved.

Assaults on open primaries by the party establishment have happened before. In the 1960s, the Democratic California State Assembly speaker, Jesse Marvin “Big Daddy” Unruh, conspired with Republican Party leaders to end the progressive-era open primary system of “crossfiling” that had led to nonpartisan governors like the reform Republican Earl Warren, who later shepherded desegregation through the Supreme Court as chief justice. As a rule, party leaders hate the unpredictability that comes from open primaries and independent voters.

But recent political trends are moving in the other direction. Across the nation, the ranks of independent registered voters are rising dramatically in reaction to the polarization of the two parties. Calls for nonpartisan redistricting are being pursued in 11 different states, and Oregon and Washington State are examining ballot initiatives that would bring open primary elections to the Pacific Northwest.

But because of New Hampshire’s pivotal position early in the presidential primaries, it is hard not to look at this attempted power grab as an attempt to restack the deck in favor of ideological purists in advance of the 2008 presidential primaries. As in 2000 – and in 1992, when the Granite State gave Paul Tsongas and Bill Clinton the no.1 and 2 spots in the Democratic primary – the presence of independent voters in the New Hampshire primary has benefited more centrist and independent-minded candidates. This would bode well for the possible presidential candidacies of Mayor Giuliani and Mr. McCain, which some of the far-right wing of the Republican Party would like to block. This early skirmish in the New Hampshire state Legislature might prove to be one of the first battles in the larger war for the soul of both parties that is likely to occur in 2008.

There are signs that the grassroots are fighting back in the “Live Free or Die” state. Petitions are circulating, local talk radio is abuzz, and protests are scheduled to be held today at the state Capitol. It is significant that two of the local leaders against the bill are Michael Dennehy, who ran Mr. McCain’s 2000 campaign in New Hampshire and Jeff Frost, who was co-chair of Independents for McCain in that same campaign. Mr. McCain himself is considering whether to weigh in on this fight personally.

But even in a state where independents make up 42% of the voters – dwarfing the Democrats’ 27% and the Republicans’ 31% – it is unclear whether these voices will carry their proportional weight. After all, the legislative body making the decision is made up of Republicans and Democrats.

Tomorrow’s hearing at the New Hampshire state capital is not just a matter of a bureaucratic re-jigging of local election law, it is an attempt to rig the system and cook the books. As the two parties try to alternately distort and ignore the rising tide of independent voters, New Hampshire’s open primary tradition provides an important check on the current polarization of American politics. It gives expression to common-sense wisdom that we don’t elect a president for Democrats or a president for Republicans but a president for all the United States of America.