THIS WEEK IN TEANECK

‌

VOTER SUPPRESSION COMING TO TEANECK?

Voter suppression comes in many forms. Sometimes it is simply a failure to recognize that a restrictive system is already in place and to rectify it.

In Teaneck, we hold elections for either three or four seats on our Council every other year in May. We therefore have two separate election days, one in May and one in November. Getting to both is harder for those who can’t get days off from work; who can’t afford childcare; or who just don’t have time to focus on local politics. Many residents only vote in November, reducing the diversity of voices represented on our Council.

One Town, One Vote is a nonpartisan grass roots organization dedicated to moving our Council elections from May to November. The movement has gained momentum. In a matter of weeks, more than a thousand Teaneck voters signed the petition that aims to place the question on this coming November’s ballot. Now the petition has been submitted to the Town Clerk.

Moving the election to November makes common sense. It would save Teaneck taxpayers about $50,000 every two years and make it more convenient for more people to vote in the local election.

It is wonderful to see Council being so responsive to this popular initiative that it has already started discussing the idea of simply using its powers to place a question on the ballot for Teaneck residents to decide.

But, unfortunately, at the same time the Council has agreed to "contemplate" placing some kind of question on the ballot about moving the elections to November, some Councilmembers are already hard at work with an ongoing negative campaign to persuade voters to nix it. Why not simply adopt the petition that has already been submitted?

The arguments made by some members of the Council are that 1) moving the elections to November will make them partisan (and thus subject to manipulation by unnamed “party bosses”) and 2) the change will not increase voter participation because many people will not bother to go all the way to the bottom of the ballot to vote.

Prior experience, in Teaneck and other New Jersey towns, proves that neither of these scenarios is true.

First, the petition does not seek to change the form of government, it simply seeks to change the date of the election. The form of government is unchanged and remains non-partisan. Second, both voter turnout and the number of votes cast for local candidates increase significantly when local elections take place in November at the same time as state and federal elections. In Teaneck, this could result in an election that more accurately represents the diversity of our town.

The indisputable facts about the increase in voter turnout and votes cast for local candidates are known in Teaneck because our own Board of Education voluntarily decided to move their elections to November in 2011. Ten years later, there is no evidence of the BOE elections having been influenced by partisan politics.

‌

The move has, however, dramatically increased participation in BOE elections from an average of 10,827 votes for BOE candidates cast to an average of 15,743 votes cast for BOE candidates in the decade since the elections were moved to November.

Above graphs prepared by Noah Liben and Reshma Khan can be found online:

Total Votes for Teaneck BOE Candidates, 2002-2020 and Teaneck Ballots Cast, 2002-2020

The facts are also known from analysis of other towns in Bergen County and across the nation that moved their municipal elections to coincide with what everyone knows as Election Day, the first Tuesday after the first Monday in November. See the research here by Sarah F. Anzia showing how incumbents and special interests benefit: How off-cycle election timing distorts local democracy

This practical, common-sense move, which would increase voter participation in our local election, is being loudly opposed by some members of our town Council. Why would anyone wish to mount a campaign against this change?

Voting has been restricted in America from the very beginning. At first, only men with real estate could vote. In effect, this meant only white landowners. Throughout American history, every step taken to expand voting rights in accord with our ideals of freedom and equality has been met with an inflammatory backlash from those intent on holding power.

Like all current voter suppression activities across the United States, the opposition to moving our municipal elections to November appears designed by incumbents to maintain their hold on power by having fewer and less diverse voters.

And like all voter suppression activities across the United States, the arguments for fewer voters are based on big lies or misinformation, and intended, at the very least, to sow seeds of doubt about facts that are crystal clear. The lies are not all the same, but the objective is always identical.

What is the local misinformation now being handed out as part of the ruling majority’s alternate reality?

1. Corruption

Some members of Teaneck’s Council would have us believe that voting in November will corrupt our local elections:

They illustrate this point (for example, see the above caricature they recently published), suggesting that our town will now be paid off and run by outside forces; that we need to keep our elections pure; and that we should all be afraid of the “ramifications” of voting in November for local candidates.

The initiative to move elections to November is a grass-roots effort by Teaneck residents with no outside funding at all.

The Big Lie on the national level is about Voter Fraud. Here in Teaneck, the local misinformation is that November elections will inevitably lead to corruption, presumably of the candidates themselves, and that voters will be duped into electing them without knowing whose pockets they are in.

2. Partisanship

By voting in November, some members of Teaneck’s own Council now argue that our Council candidates will be elected based on whether they are Democrat or Republican rather than on their merits. They try to dismiss those who clearly want non-partisan local elections in November as “partisans” in the worst sense of that word.

The Big Lie on the national level is that Voting Rights is just a partisan issue. An even bigger lie is that the opposition to voting rights is non-partisan. It is similar here in Teaneck, along with fear mongering that “Partisanship” will destroy our town and that these “partisans” are a “farce”.

Most important, voting for Council in November does not make the local election partisan in any way. Despite the fact that the original reason for separating municipal elections from the country’s Election Day may have been to diminish partisan influences on local issues and to have voters focus on those local issues, there is simply no fact-based evidence for these Councilmen’s assertion that voting in November will make Teaneck Council elections partisan.

And that is why this popular initiative to move municipal elections to the national election day in November has the full support of the most indisputably non-partisan group around – the League of Women Voters of Teaneck. You can read the rationale for their support on their blog: LWV Teaneck Co-sponsors One Town, One Vote Ballot Initiative.

Meanwhile, after vowing not to accept any partisan backing in the last Council election, ostensibly to keep our elections pure, the Schwartz-Orgen-Pagan slate accepted major donations from several partisan political PACs. See: Councilwoman Candidate Orgen speaks for her 3-candidate MTF Slate on non-partisanship

In fact, most of their campaign funding came from sources outside Teaneck. See: Pay to Play - Moving Teaneck Forward and the Nishuane Group and 2020's Big Contributors to Winning Slate - Not from Teaneck for further details.

With this kind of funding, just which “outside forces” are some Council members saying they are so afraid of?

Furthermore, we know that voting in November does not make local candidates into partisan candidates. How do we know this? Because the Teaneck Board of Education elections are no more partisan now that they are held in November than they were when they took place in April.

And the layout of our ballots makes absolutely clear that the candidates for state and national office are partisan and that local Teaneck offices are not associated with any party. Candidates for state and national offices are listed at the top in columns labeled by party. Candidates for local office are listed at the bottom in rows by name with no party designations even allowed.

3. Ballot Fatigue

Some members of our own Council want us to believe that November elections do not increase the number of votes cast locally. Apparently, they think that voters are so exhausted by the time they vote for national and state officers that they just don’t have any energy left to scroll further down the ballot to cast their votes for Council. These council members claim that sophisticated deep analysis of the numbers “proves” this alternate reality.

For sure, it is true everywhere that more people vote for the President of the United States than vote for local candidates, but the total votes cast for local offices indisputably increases when municipal elections are held in November.

Nationally, officials in power across America are fighting against efforts to expand access to the polls. They are trying to make it harder and less convenient to vote, particularly for people of color and for those with fewer financial resources.

Here in Teaneck, whether well-intentioned or not, officers on Council are spreading inflammatory misinformation with tortured logic that November elections do not increase votes for local candidates. In defiance of both the evidence and common sense, they, too, are trying to convince residents that the fewer votes cast in the May elections make for better government.

What could happen now if we had a really helpful Council trying to serve all residents as best they can? Rather than trying to drum up opposition to this common-sense initiative based on misinformation, they could, on their own, respond to the initiative by passing an ordinance that moves the local elections to November, saving money for the town, and making it more convenient for everyone.

They could then direct the Town Manager to make his very effective and useful robocalls to the residents before November elections and ask them to vote from the bottom of the ballot upward, to ensure they do not miss the local, nonpartisan, candidates for Council.

Let us nourish the hope that Teaneck, of all places, does not fall prey to the big lies that are playing themselves out on the national scene. It is one thing to praise diversity in Teaneck. We need to honor that diversity and the traditions of our town, by making it easier and more convenient for everyone to vote.

--Bernard Rous, Teaneck resident

E-mail us! Send to your friends so they can subscribe!