New York State has entered a brand-new era of progressive governance, following a massive Democratic wave at the ballot box last year that finally ended Republican control over the state Senate and swept Democrats in with their largest majority in over a century. Newly empowered, Democrats have already passed significant new legislation to protect and expand the right to vote, including early voting, same-day voter registration, and campaign finance reform, but there's still much more we can do.
Below are a set of proposals New York lawmakers should consider and enact in order to further enhance voting rights, particularly at a time when they're under attack across the country.
- Automatically register eligible voters who interact with state agencies, with the opportunity to opt out.
Automatic voter registration is a no-brainer: It has both increased the number of registered voters and boosted turnout in the dozen states where it's been adopted. The good news is that legislators have already started considering such a plan.
New York should include as many state agencies as possible under the purview of any such law. Some automatic registration systems are limited to the department of motor vehicles, but in New York especially, where about a quarter of adults don’t have a driver’s license and therefore have minimal interaction with the DMV, it's important that there be as many opportunities to automatically register as possible.
In addition, the strongest automatic registration systems give voters the chance to opt out after they transact business with state agencies (known as a "back-end" opt-out) by sending them a mailer, rather than at the time they conduct business. New York should adopt such a "back-end" approach.
- End the disenfranchisement of those with felony convictions.
Denying the right to vote to those with felony convictions is a form of voter suppression that has a starkly racist impact, given the disproportionate number of people of color who are convicted of felonies. What's more, the U.S. stands almost alone in practicing felony disenfranchisement. Other modern democracies, as well as the states of Maine and Vermont, allow all citizens to vote, even those currently incarcerated.
- Move local election dates to coincide with state and federal elections.
Many local elections throughout New York (and in other states) are held at unusual times, including during odd-numbered years. Consolidating these elections with regularly scheduled midterm and presidential elections in even-numbered years, when turnout is higher, will boost voter participation in down-ballot contests. It will also save local jurisdictions money simply by having to conduct fewer elections.
- Allow easy removal of candidate names from ballots within a reasonable time prior to each election.
New York law is notorious for making candidates jump through absurd hoops to get their names off the ballot. Normally, the only way to do so is for a candidate to get nominated by local party officials for another position that they don't actually want to run for (in a race they expect to lose), which makes a mockery of democracy. And sometimes, even this option is unavailable.
The law should simply allow for candidates to notify election officials that they no longer wish to appear on the ballot in a reasonable amount of time before ballots have to be finalized and printed.
- Require the governor to schedule special elections for the U.S. House by a fixed deadline.
Under New York law, the governor is given unlimited latitude in deciding when to schedule a special election when a vacancy arises in a U.S. House seat. Unscrupulous political gamesmanship has led New York's governors to delay such special elections for long periods of time on many occasions. For instance, in 2010, Gov. David Paterson scheduled a special election in the 29th Congressional District for a date eight months after the seat became vacant, meaning residents were deprived of representation in Congress for almost 10 months in total.
The governor should instead be required to call a special election within a reasonable, fixed amount of time after a U.S. House seat becomes vacant.
- Require primaries for special elections to the U.S. House.
One of the most anti-democratic features of New York law is the fact that, in special elections, small groups of party insiders get to choose nominees. This is an even worse problem in districts that are safely Republican or Democratic, because in such seats, the nomination of the dominant party is everything—the special general election scarcely matters.
There is absolutely no reason that voters should not have the chance to pick their party's nominees.
- When U.S. Senate seats become vacant, require governors to appoint members of the same party as the vacating senator.
Vacancies in the U.S. Senate shouldn't provide an opportunity for governors to contradict the will of voters: If the people elect a Democrat, then a Democrat should be appointed to replace that person, and the same with Republicans. Voters will get the chance, if they choose, to elect someone from a different party at the next election.
Therefore, New York law should require that, whenever a U.S. Senate vacancy arises, the party of the vacating senator provide a list of possible successors to the governor, who must then choose a replacement from that list. That appointee will serve until the next regularly scheduled general election.
- When state legislative seats become vacant, require governors to appoint members of the same party as the vacating legislator, and disallow such appointees from running in the next regularly scheduled election.
Special elections are inevitably low-turnout affairs, but for vacant U.S. House seats, they're required by the Constitution. However, there's a better alternative for vacant seats in the state legislature: Whenever there's a legislative vacancy, county party organizations (with each getting a vote weighted by its share of the district's population) should provide a list of possible successors to the governor, who must then choose a replacement from that list.
That replacement would then serve until the next regularly scheduled election, when turnout would be higher. But in order to prevent that appointee from getting an unfair leg up, replacement candidates would serve as caretakers and would be barred from running in the next election. The Constitution wouldn't allow this restriction for U.S. Senate vacancies (and U.S. House vacancies must be filled by special election, not appointment), but there's no reason New York couldn't adopt such a system for legislative vacancies.
- When the office of lieutenant governor becomes vacant, allow the governor to name a replacement, subject to a majority vote of the legislature.
After Gov. Eliot Spitzer resigned in 2008, Lt. Gov. David Paterson was elevated to the governorship. However, the New York Constitution and New York law in general were vague about how the position of lieutenant governor should be filled. That left the post open, meaning that if Paterson had become unable to serve while governor, the head of the state Senate—at the time Republican Joe Bruno—would have become governor.
That outcome was plausible: Paterson was embroiled in scandal for much of his tenure and faced many calls to resign. It also would have been directly contrary to what the people of New York, who'd elected a Democratic governor, would have wanted.
Paterson eventually sought to appoint a new lieutenant governor, but the move was challenged in the courts. The state's highest court, in a divided decision, ultimately agreed Paterson had the power to name a new lieutenant governor, but the authority to establish a proper line of succession shouldn't rest on a judicial opinion that could be overturned by a future court.
What's more, Paterson was able to appoint a lieutenant governor without any sort of confirmation vote by the legislature, even though vacancies in other statewide posts require such confirmation. State law should therefore be changed (including by means of a constitutional amendment, if need be) to allow governors to name replacement lieutenant governors in the event of a vacancy, subject to a majority vote of both houses of the legislature sitting together.
- Have candidates for governor and lieutenant governor run together on a single ticket.
Currently, New York requires separate primaries for governor and lieutenant governor. That creates the prospect of a general election ticket whose members aren't keen on working together—and may have even attacked one another during the course of their campaigns. There's no reason to force the political equivalent of a shotgun wedding on candidates or voters. We instead advocate either of the two approaches below:
(1) Gubernatorial candidates should be required to pick running mates by a reasonable, fixed deadline prior to party primaries; primary voters then would choose a two-person ticket that would appear on the ballot in the general election;
or
(2) Gubernatorial nominees should, by a reasonable, fixed deadline after winning their primaries, be required to pick running mates who then appear with them on a single ticket in the general election.
- Move the deadline for voters to change their party registration and be able to participate in a primary from six months before to no more than four weeks before the day of the primary.
New York imposes an unusually early deadline of six months before the date of the election for registered voters to change their party affiliation in order to be able to participate in primaries. This deadline is unduly burdensome and should be shortened considerably, to one of no more than four weeks before the day of the primary. This would give voters the chance to change their affiliation at a time when awareness of upcoming elections is greater, while also preserving New York's system of closed primaries.
- For voters who have newly registered since the last general election but declined to choose a party, send them a reminder that they must choose a party if they want to participate in the upcoming primary.
Many voters do not register with a political party, something that is particularly likely for those who would be registered automatically, should New York adopt such a system. Many of those registered automatically are likely to be young first-time voters who may not realize the importance of primaries until they begin to gain publicity closer to Election Day, and they may not be aware they cannot participate in them unless they affiliate with a political party.
Therefore, the state should send a follow-up notification several weeks before the primary (and before the start of early voting) to all newly registered voters who lack a party affiliation. This notification should alert these voters that they will be unable to participate in the primaries if they don’t update their voter registration, which they should have the option to easily do either online or by mail (with an included response card).
- Change the voter registration forms so that voters don’t get misled into signing up as members of the Independence Party under the belief that they are enrolling as "independent" or unaffiliated.
New York's third-largest political party, based on registration numbers alone, is known as the Independence Party, but it scarcely resembles a normal political party. It largely exists to give its ballot line to whichever candidates ply it with the biggest donations.
And its voter rolls are inflated because, when New Yorkers register to vote, many think that signing up for the Independence Party means they're registering as independents. (A similar phenomenon exists in California, where many register to join the American Independent Party, not realizing it's a far-right, racist organization.)
New York should therefore update its voter registration forms to make it much clearer to voters how to register as independents.
If you have further ideas, please share them in comments!
This post was written with Stephen Wolf.