Changes in Local Election Laws Will Not Bring More Participation
More New York Laws That Do Not Deliver as Promised
Governor Kathy Hochul signed a law (December 2023) in New York State to shift most county, town, and village elections to even-numbered years. Sheriff and judicial elections will not change because they are directed under the state constitution, which was not changed. Democrats stated this change was needed to increase voter turnout in local elections.
There has been a legal challenge to this new law which was successful in a lower court, but has been overturned by an appeals court. Realistically, no further legal challenge will be successful and this new law will stand.
As a result of this law, all local officials elected in 2025 will serve a shortened term to align with the new schedule and they will have to run again in 2026. This will be expensive as well as frustrating for these representatives since they will have to continue to campaign almost as soon as the election in 2025 is over.
Opponents of the law fear that local issues may be overshadowed by the attention given to state and federal races. Longer ballots mean not only a full page of candidates, but multiple pages. Down ballot fatigue is real.
Studies show that longer ballots actually lead to less participation in lower-profile contests, local issues and candidates. Voters become fatigued and even overwhelmed by the complexity of ballots leading to higher levels of abstentions of down ballot voting.
Andrew Janusz, assistant professor in he College of Liberal Arts and Sciences at the University of Florida (with his co-authors) conducted a study of 60,000 elections over 20 years. The study found that longer ballots are not complete, more so than ballots with fewer options.
The more options, regardless of divisions by party classification, the less participation down-ballot. Up to 84% of down ballot choices have less participation than the bigger (federal) races on the ballot. Considering that local races and candidates (governor, state assembly or senate, mayoral, board or council, etc) have more interaction with constituents than federal level offices, this is not a good strategy.
Services utilized within communities are governed by local and state officials, not federal. For instance, the public library, first responders, services offered by government (licenses, permits), public schools, etc are all led by local representation.
The lie , which it is, that moving all elections to even years will lead to more participation at the local level. Now anyone interested in running for local office will have an even harder time reaching voters than if this law wasn’t passed. They will be drowned out by federal level candidates (congress, senate, president).
Competing against congressional races and presidential races is going to be impossible. The noise created by these elections in the form of commercials, mailings and other interactions will make it harder for state, county and city/town candidates to be heard. These candidates will either have to raise more money to produce more ads or mailers, or develop a different strategy altogether, just to inform their constituents that they need votes.
Combining this obstacle with the other laws passed concerning elections, do not be surprised if more people refrain from running for state office. Effective this year, state level representatives cannot earn more than $35,000 income separate from their state salary. Another lie told was that this will encourage more women and minorities to run for office. It did not. It will keep others from running for office since they cannot keep their present income. This includes farmers, investors or others who make income other than wages.
There are also limits on how much corporations and individuals can make to campaigns. But, never fear, taxpayers will now fund these elections based on this new contribution matching fund scale. Governor, Lt. Governor, state comptroller and AG candidates can max out at $3.5 million tax-funded contributions. State senate candidates max out at $375K and state assembly max out at $175K contributions. These amounts are for primaries…and then resets to the general election. A gubernatorial candidate could take up to $7 million each election cycle. Do the math; multiple candidates in primaries, multiple candidates in general elections…all funded by New York taxpayers. In a state that has already overtaxed people to the point they have moved out, how is this new expenditure manageable without new taxes?