It Is Time For Non-Partisan Elections In NYC
by Frank J. Macchiarola
May 26, 2003
In
more than 80 percent of the nations largest cities, mayors are elected
through nonpartisan elections elections in which the candidates do not
run on the Democratic or Republican or any other established party line, but
as individuals. The cities where there are non-partisan elections include Los
Angeles, Chicago, Houston, Detroit, Denver, and San Francisco. New York City
is the exception.
That is why the new Charter Revision Commission, which Mayor Bloomberg asked
me to chair, will be considering this important matter, with the intention of
putting it on the ballot for the voters to decide, along with several other
issues. (See Blue Box for some of the other issues).
I have been a member of two previous Charter Commissions, and was interested
in the work of the last commission, chaired by Robert McGuire, and felt that
it was important to build on what they had done. Because of the pressures of
time, they had left several important matters on the table, including not whether
but when to offer the voters a chance to choose nonpartisan elections on a ballot
referendum.
The opportunity for citizens to choose freely and fairly those who represent
them is at the core of democracy. Steps toward promoting democracy include encouraging
greater participation of voters and a wider range of candidates, increasing
the electorates knowledge of candidates and issues, and providing resources
for those who seek public office. Nonpartisan elections may better complement
and support these goals than the current partisan system.
|
The Commission's Other Tasks |
|
The Charter Revision Commission will be addressing several
issues, in addition to nonpartisan elections. Among the issues that the
mayor has asked the Commission to address are government purchasing, agency
(re)organization, and issues of fiscal management. The purchase of goods
and services accounts for greater than $8 billion in public funds. These
include the purchase of fuel for the city's police cars, fire engines,
and other vehicles; office supplies and equipment; the construction of
schools and other municipal buildings; as well as contracting with community
organizations for the provision of health services, social services, educational
and recreational activities. In doing this the city needs not only to
purchase goods and services of a high quality, at a fair price, delivered
in a timely manner, it must, as well, be concerned with the integrity
of the process and fair dealing with vendors. At a time of great strain on the city's resources, we
must ensure that in the organization and structure of our governmental
agencies that redundancy, duplication, and overlap are eliminated, both
to save the public's money and to improve the quality of services the
city's provides. At the same time, we need to address where areas requiring
government attention are lacking. The establishment of the "311"
system is a harbinger of the changes needed. The financial reforms established during the fiscal crisis
were established to assure lenders that the city was managing its funds
in a prudent manner and to allow it to issue and market bonds. With the
anticipated payoff of the bonds issued at that time, many of these reform
provisions "sunset." The Commission will be looking at areas
where the city can set its own program of fiscal self-discipline. In these
issues, as with nonpartisan elections, the principles of access and transparency
apply. And, as with the provisions regarding nonpartisan elections, the
Commission's recommendations (in these and any other areas) -Frank Macchiarola |
As the Charter Revision Commission considers nonpartisan elections, there are
issues both concerning the why and the how.
Why nonpartisan elections?
Writing on these pages in January, Doug
Muzzio cited the learned Yogi Berra: Before you build a better mousetrap,
it helps to know if there are mice out there. Indeed, there are plenty
of mice out there:
Voting in local elections is declining. The number of non-enrolled voters
is growing rapidly, particularly among youth and recent immigrants.
The ballot petition procedures candidates must follow are famously burdensome
and knocking opponents off the ballot absurdly common
Party bosses still seek to stifle competition and exact patronage
Perhaps most significantly, many candidates win their party primary with
fewer than a third of the votes, with general elections serving as confirmations
rather than contests. What should be a fierce competition is instead a fait
accompli.
It is not surprising, given the sum of these variables, that incumbent re-election
rates approach 100 percent, as party bosses continue to wield power.
The system is indeed broken. The citys independent voters, ever-growing
in number, are effectively disenfranchised, since the party primary decides
all but a few elections. As the noted political scientist V.O. Key wrote about
the segregated south, a one party system is the functional equivalent of a no
party system.
How would nonpartisan elections work?
Over the next few months, as the Commission studies nonpartisan elections and
their potential impact on New York City, our attention will focus on several
key areas.
Nonpartisan elections across the nation and in New York City
Non-partisan elections are not some untried scheme. Indeed, they are not even
new to New York City. Since the Charter revision of 1989, a proposal that I
made has been in effect. Special elections to fill a vacancy in the term of
a City Council member have been conducted on a nonpartisan basis. Speaker Gifford
Miller, Majority Leader Joel Rivera, and Minority Leader James Oddo were first
elected to the Council in nonpartisan elections. And earlier this year, there
was a spirited nonpartisan election for a vacant City Council seat in Bay Ridge.
As the commission explores the design of nonpartisan elections, a number of
variables will be considered. These include:
which municipal offices should be covered;
when should the elections be held;
when should the new arrangements go into effect;
how would candidates get on the ballot;
how would the nonpartisan format affect the citys campaign finance
program and vice versa;
how would votes be counted;
what is a sufficient threshold of votes to elect a candidate;
what would be the role of political parties; and many more.
As we examine the experience of other cities and consider the lessons they
hold for New York, it is important to note several features unique to New York
that can serve to enhance the effects of nonpartisan elections. New York is
the only city in the nation with term limits, a generous campaign finance program,
and a widely distributed Voter Guide. Contributing to civic debate and voter
information in New York are the number of competing daily newspapers, weekly
papers, cable news stations, ethnic and general radio stations, and powerful
unions and other organized groups.
Voter turnout: Some have asserted that nonpartisan elections lead to reduced
voter turnout. The research here is scanty, and often fails to compare turnouts
in large cities. A further contradiction in opponents arguments concerns
the assertion that in the absence of party labels voters will not have a cue
as to a candidates views. Yet in the Democratic primary, where most elections
are decided, voters differentiate among candidates without any party label to
assist them. They do this by using information gleaned from the Voter Guide,
the community newspapers, and the abundance of campaign literature that the
campaign finance program funds. In New York City, at least, this argument lacks
salience and is demeaning to voters.
Minority participation: In a city with a majority minority population,
this is an important issue. Nonpartisan elections are held in forty-one of the
nations fifty largest cities. Compared to partisan election cities in
recent elections, nonpartisan election cities have elected a higher percentage
of black and Latino mayors 34 percent vs. 22 percent. At the least, this
suggests than minorities are likely to do at least as well in nonpartisan cities
as in partisan ones.
Of course, I am aware of the requirement that our proposal will require preclearance
from the Department of Justice to ensure compliance with the Voting Rights Act.
This is a process with which I am familiar, as we went through the same one
when the districting plan that the Commission I chaired was submitted and approved
following the 1990 census. It is important to remember here that the Voting
Rights Act protects the rights of members of the electorate, not candidates
or political parties!
At bottom, the issue is whether we continue to allow a small group of party
officials to determine both who gets on the ballot and who can vote in the elections
that matter or do we expand opportunity and access. This is not a matter of
abstract good government principle, but rather a response to the
increasing numbers of voters who feel left out of the process as it operates
today.
In developing its recommendations concerning nonpartisan elections, the commission
will review the work of four previous Charter Revision Commissions which have
addressed the topic, carry out its own data collection work, and conduct an
extensive program of community engagement. Currently, the commission is in the
midst of an initial series of public outreach activities, hearings in each of
the boroughs and policy forums on selected subjects. (For a schedule of these
activities, please see the commissions web
site.)
If as Clemenceau said, war is too important to leave to the generals, then democracy is too precious to leave to the party bosses. The recommendations put forward by the Commission will be on the basis of consulting widely, listening closely, thinking creatively, and proposing carefully. And, then, it will be for the voters to decide. Democracy is for all.
Frank Macchiarola, president of St. Francis College in Brooklyn and former
New York City public schools chancellor (1978 1983), is the chair of
the Charter Review Commission.
| RELATED STORY: Partisan Man to the Rescue! Mark Green criticizes Mayor Michael Bloomberg's attempt to put the issue of non-partisan elections on the ballot in November, explaining why he calls it "the wrong answer to a non-problem," and suggesting some real "pro-democracy reforms." | ![]() |
Discuss this Article
Other Related Articles:
Crackdown on Protests Could Spark More Scrutiny of Police (2011-11-21)
Showdown Looms over Living Wage Bill (2011-11-18)
The Day at Zuccotti Park -- and Beyond (2011-11-16)
As Poverty Increases, Budget Cuts Tatter the Safety Net (2011-11-11)
Workforce Program Helps People Find Jobs, Not Careers (2011-10-12)
Council Acts to Rein in Contracts (2011-10-06)
New York's Pushout Crisis: Why Students Don't Graduate (2011-09-27)
As Deficits Loom, City Faces More Cuts (2011-09-20)
React to this article on our Message Board.
Visit the Archive

Print Story
Share Story