Common Cause/NY Responds to Court's Decision Not to Include "Abortion" in Prop 1 Ballot Language

NEW YORK, NY (08/26/2024) (readMedia)-- On Friday, a judge declined to amend the language of a ballot proposal that would add an amendment to the state constitution banning discrimination and protecting the right to abortion. Despite the intentions of the amendment's sponsors, the proposal maintains a college reading level and fails to include the word "abortion," making it harder for New Yorkers to understand what they are being asked to vote on and violating the state's recently passed plain language law, which Common Cause/NY championed.

In response, Susan Lerner, Executive Director of Common Cause New York, issued the following statement about the Court's incorrect decision and urged state election officials to uphold New York's commitment to simplifying the voting process for all New Yorkers and appeal the decision.

"New Yorkers should not be required to have an advanced degree to understand what they are voting on. Yet the judge's ruling completely ignores New York's plain language law which sets the standard for ballot language at an 8th grade reading level, and explicitly requires ballot language to reflect the impact of the proposal - not its legal basis. Proposal 1 is about abortion, whatever its legal language may be, which is why the language should include the word abortion. It's that simple."

Last week, Lerner penned an op-ed in the New York Daily News that urged the State to add the word "abortion" to the ballot proposal, stating that "Shying away from the 'A-word' does not help voters. It leads them astray - and that only sows more confusion and doubt that they are being tricked by politicians with unclear motives."

Background

The sponsors of both the antidiscrimination amendment and New York's plain language law have urged state election officials to amend the ballot proposal language to make it clearer for voters. Last month, Senator Liz Krueger, sponsor of the antidiscrimination amendment, sent a letter signed by 31 other State Senators to the Board of Elections that, "urge[d] the BOE Commissioner to revise the draft ballot language to clearly and accurately describe the practical impact of the amendment" in accordance with the state's plain language requirement.

Senator Comrie similarly urged the Board to amend the ballot proposal, stating in written comments to the Board that the current language, "violates the [plain language] law by describing the change in terms of the legal mechanism, an express prohibition we put in place which does not serve voters and could lead to more confusion."