Moreland Update: Reflections on Election Day

Reflections on Election Day

Tuesday’s elections marked another successful run for New York City’s public financing system. Of the 312 candidates reviewed so far by the Campaign Finance Board more than three-quarters participated in the system, in which candidates accept expenditure limits in order to receive public matching of small donations. All of the major-party candidates for citywide office took part. Participation rates were likely higher in the more competitive primary elections, as has been the pattern in the past. This year, the public financing system was widely credited with reducing the influence of potentially corrupting levels of outside spending.

Nevertheless, independent spending continues to increase, and moneyed interests use outside spending or the threat of it to try to change policy in their favor. This year, a new Super PAC challenged New York’s aggregate contribution limits in court, in an attempt to increase the influence of the richest individuals over our elections. The group, which supported Joe Lhota’s bid for mayor, won a preliminary injunction that freed its donors from New York State’s limit of $150,000 per individual per year. Billionaire industrialist David Koch took the opportunity to give $200,000 to the group in late October. Koch and his wife had already each given $145,000 to a different pro-Lhota outside group.

Among the winners on Election Day were the supporters of the constitutional amendment legalizing gambling in the Empire State. As the New York Times put it, “The push to expand gambling was a textbook case of how well-financed interests can push Albany to embrace an industry, hiring an army of lobbyists and wooing Mr. Cuomo and lawmakers with millions of dollars in campaign contributions.” Since the casino licenses have yet to be awarded, political spending by the companies that want them is sure to continue.

These and other examples of Albany’s corrupt culture show the need for comprehensive campaign finance reform. A public financing system with a small-donor multiple match can empower candidates whose support depends on many average constituents. It can provide them the resources they need to respond to attacks by outside groups supported by a few wealthy interests. And it can free candidates from chasing the biggest donors, making it harder for certain industries to buy policies that suit them.

Latest News

Fixing the System
New York Times columnist Joe Nocera includes a system of small-donor matching funds like New York City’s as one of five reforms that “could both invigorate the electorate and encourage more responsive, and less extreme, political candidates.”

Cuomo and Skelos Meet; Is Peace Coming?
The Buffalo News reports that Gov. Andrew Cuomo and Senate co-leader Dean Skelos had a face-to-face meeting this week. Speculation about meeting topics included a deal on campaign finance reform, and whether that would mean the end of the Moreland Commission.

***

Over the next several weeks, the Brennan Center for Justice at NYU School of Law will send regular updates to this list of Friends of Reform in New York State on efforts to secure comprehensive campaign finance reform centered on public financing of elections. These updates will be sent to good government advocates, allies of the Fair Elections New York campaign, legislative and opinion leaders, scholars and engaged students, reporters, and other advocates for reform. They will also be posted on the Brennan Center’s New York blog at ReformNY.blogspot.com.

Election Bills Pending in City Council

Our friends at Citizens Union alerted us to six important bills pending in the New York City Council that would help increase voter participation and make sure that Election Day runs as smoothly as possible. As, we know, this coming election will be the first time that the City uses its new voting machines in a presidential election where turnout is expected to be high and both voters and election officials will benefit from greater preparation.

At a time when state governments across the country have passed laws in record numbers that make it harder to vote, this package of election bills is a great example of how local governments can take action to improve elections. We hope that the City Council will advance these bills by holding a hearing so that election experts, good government groups, and members of the public can provide their input. 

The six bills in the package are listed and summarized below: 

• Intro 613 would help keep registered voters informed of important election related dates by requiring the Campaign Finance Board to send email notifications to voters who sign up to receive them;
• Intro 721 would provide incentives for City employees to serve as poll workers on Election Day and staff unfilled positions; 
• Intro 728 would make registering to vote easier for parents by requiring that voter registration forms be provided when they enroll their children in school; 
• Intro 760 would require that the City Board of Elections track and publish data on the number of residents who the complete voter registration forms while seeking services at city agencies;
• Intro 769 would help keep voters informed by expanding the City’s Voter guide to include state and federal elections; and 
• Intro 778 would allow the City Council to better measure the performance of the Board of Elections by requiring that it report data required by the Mayor’s Management Report.

Court to Rule on Primary Date

U.S. District Court Judge Gary Sharpe indicated this week that he would reach a decision within the next few weeks on the date for New York’s primaries in a case involving the state’s compliance with the Federal MOVE Act. The MOVE Act was enacted to ensure that members of the military and other U.S. citizens abroad have the opportunity to receive and return absentee ballots on a timely basis.

The New York legislature failed again to pass legislation this session to change its September primary date to ensure compliance with the MOVE Act, which requires that absentee ballots be sent to voters overseas at least 45 days before a general election. In years past, the state was granted a waiver from the Department of Defense. This year however, the request for a waiver was denied.

A coalition of civic groups, including the Brennan Center, wrote Judge Sharpe urging him to favor a June primary. Senate Republicans on the other hand, arguing that since June is typically when the legislature wraps up its session, favor an August primary. Given that August is typically a month when many New Yorkers are on vacation, we believe that it would likely result in low turnout election. August is also the month when many students are going away to college. Moreover, if a there is a delay in certification of an election (due to either counting absentee ballots or litigation), there is a chance that an August primary may not allow enough time to comply with the MOVE Act.

The Election Commissioners’ Association of New York State has also come out in favor of a June primary. They have noted that many public schools used as polling sites are closed during the last two weeks in August and opening them up would result in an additional cost for local boards.

Given the legislature’s inaction, the matter will now rests in the hands of the court. We sincerely hope that Judge Sharpe will take these views into consideration when issuing his decision.

Why the Long Face?

Bummed about the ultra-low turnout we see during off-year elections?

You're not alone. The Politicker quotes a Brooklyn Heights voter: "Besides the depressing reality that the Kings County Democrats and Republicans had an identical slate of candidates for Supreme Court Judge, I was further buoyed in my faith in Brooklyn Democracy by being the 8th voter in my ED to vote at 8:30 this morning (an average of three voters per hour)."

This voter hits on an important point: turnout is boosted when elections are competitive and voters feel that their vote counts. With the gentleman's agreement between the two major parties in many jurisdictions to cross-endorse judicial candidates, it's no wonder turnout is low in an election in which judicial "contests" get top billing.