News

NEW YORK, NY October 28, 2003 — One week from today, New York City voters will get to decide on a measure that could eliminate the Democratic and Republican primaries. Ballot Question Number 3, offered by Mayor Bloomberg, calls for Non Partisan elections. And as Election Day draws closer, opponents and supporters are struggling to capture the attention of voters. WNYC's Beth Fertig has more.

Non Partisan elections almost sounds like a contradiction in terms. Aren't elections partisan by definition?

Well, New York's Democrat turned Republican Mayor says city politics are a little too partisan. So he's seeking to change that with his proposal for Non Partisan elections. Robert Wojack of Inwood recently received a glossy pamphlet in the mail promoting the ballot question.

WOJACK: When they say Non Partisan elections to me it sounded like, I don't know what I was thinking, I probably would voted for it because it sounds like oh we're eliminating some sort of um, I can't quite explain it. Like you're eliminating partisanship. Maybe it would make things more congenial but apparently that's not the case!

The feud over Non Partisan elections is now moving into a partisan gear.

First, here's how the mayor's proposal would work. Starting in 2009, candidates of all parties would get to run in one big September primary after gathering enough signatures. The top two vote getters would then move on to the November general election. Democrats raise the specter of the crowded California Governor's race. Upper Manhattan Councilman Robert Jackson held a meeting with supporters including Wojack recently where he explained the party line. He told them Ballot Question Number 3 is supported by Independence Party leader Lenora Fulani - and Mayor Michael Bloomberg.

JACKSON: And let me tell you they're pumping a lot of literature and I tell people if it comes to money we cannot compete. We won't even go there. But when it comes to educating the masses that's our job.

Democrats have accused the mayor of running a deceptive campaign. Some voters have gotten phone calls saying non partisan elections would strengthen the Democratic party. Meanwhile, mailings supporting the plan fail to mention Bloomberg's name. Even though he's spending 2 million dollars of his own money to promote the measure. Bloomberg says he's just trying to level the playing field because Democrats and labor unions have been working all summer to defeat the ballot question.

BLOOMBERG: What happened is the opponents of this have gone out, hired consultants, done fundraisers and started the process. And then they turn around when I'm going to respond and say oh you shouldn't do this. Wrong. I mean, I didn't want to have it go this way. They wanted it and if I don't go and spend some money right now and try to explain this to people, people are going to go into election place, the voting booth, on November 4th and not understand the issues.

In fact, the issues are a lot more complicated than voters may realize in this increasingly polarized campaign.

Supporters of the ballot question believe it would enable a more diverse array of candidates to run for office. Despite the fact that New York has spent more than a decade being led by Republicans, most city races are really determined by the Democratic primary. And that's only open to registered Democrats says Alan Gartner of the mayor's charter revision commission, leaving out 700 thousand registered independents.

GARTNER: That means they cannot participate in the party primary; they cannot participate in the whole process of the primary, getting on the primary ballot, signing a petition, carrying a petition or in fact voting.

Gartner believes this system will make it easier for minorities to participate. But the fact remains that most blacks and Latinos are registered Democrats. Giving them electoral clout in the primary. At a city council hearing last week, commission members Anthony Crowell and Alan Gartner argued with Bronx councilman Joel Rivera when he said non partisan elections would dampen minority turnout.

CROWELL: I don't know anyone who could logically tell you it would decrease. RIVERA: Are you a gambling man sir? CROWELL: Sorry? RIVERA: Are you a gambling man? GARTNER: No on the record, Mister Chairman, but I'd be glad to talk with you privately about that! RIVERA: Cause gambling with voter participation and minority participation is a great risk for a city that the demographics favor minorities in our city.

Supporters of the ballot question have data showing cities with non partisan elections are MORE likely to elect minorities. Forty one of the nations' 50 largest cities have now gone this route, including Boston.

But opponents point to studies showing voter turnout has decreased in some cities with non partisan elections. And they say the system being proposed for New York City isn't really Non Partisan, anyway. That's because candidates could list their party affiliation - a hybrid system that's only known to exist in 3 cities. Rachel Leon of Common Cause New York says some candidates may not choose to disclose their parties.

LEON: The way that they've construed this question so that you can put your party down or you don't have to it's very confusing for the public so we're concerned that celebrity - and you can say the Arnold Schwarzenegger factor - may have increasing relevance in future elections if a question like that passes.

Good government groups have also criticized Mayor Bloomberg for proposing this ballot question in an off-year election - when voters have little reason to pay attention. Supporters, though, say that could make it easier for people to focus.

As the two sides continue their war of words, city residents will undoubtedly find their mailboxes filled with competing literature. Alan Gartner says that's just fine. Because on an issue this important, he says, the voters should get to decide which electoral system they prefer.

GARTNER: I think as that campaign unfolds the voters will understand that this is something in favor of democracy, this is something they should support. I'm heartened by the recent poll data that suggests voters evenly divided on the topic. I think when election day comes and goes they will be in support.

Maybe, or maybe they'll just be more confused. There are two other questions dealing with city law. One would give the mayor more power over contracts, and another controls when data from city agencies would be released to the City Council. For WNYC I'm Beth Fertig.