NYS should avoid partisan election ploy

Gov. Kathy Hochul and Albany legislative leaders, all Democrats, let it be known a few days ago that they are suddenly mulling a possible change in the rules for filling vacancies in elected offices.

These leaders have made it way too clear that their goal here is not voter empowerment but the reverse — a transparent bid to keep open the 21st Congressional District seat upstate for as long as possible after Republican Rep. Elise Stefanik leaves it. She’s expected to be confirmed soon as President Donald Trump’s choice for United Nations ambassador.

Under current law, Hochul must schedule a special election to succeed Stefanik within about three months of the resignation. Changes being floated could let her schedule it as late as the June 26 primary or perhaps beyond.

Delaying Stefanik’s likely succession by another Republican in a special election could hinder the GOP House majority’s agenda. For now, that majority is 218-214, which Stefanik’s departure will narrow to a two-seat margin. Democratic Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries of Brooklyn could benefit if this makes it harder even temporarily for Speaker Mike Johnson to push through legislation requiring broad support.

Jeffries hasn’t the power to alter the timing; he met with state allies about the maneuver. Republicans have gone verbally ballistic, charging — with reason — that voters could be deprived of a voice in the House for some time. They’d fight any change in court.

As justification for the possible manipulation, Hochul told reporters this week that a “very short time frame” for a special election “favors people who are already elected officials versus a citizen who wants to run.” As if to reinforce that the ploy is purely about Stefanik: A state assemblyman, Chris Tague, is her likely successor for the GOP nomination. He’s expected to face a Democratic dairy farmer, Blake Gendebien, in the special. 

If reform were a serious consideration, it would be far better for Hochul, the state Senate, and the Assembly to research and negotiate a bill effective for future local, county, state, and federal vacancies — not this year’s opening. Because special elections do not have primaries, bosses pick the candidates, not the party rank-and-file. Lawmakers should consider changing that to broaden voter choice. Or, if a vacancy’s timing properly allows, hold the special to coincide with the June primary, assuring better turnout.

Such legislation should not be done ad hoc. Amid the public storm, maybe Democratic legislators are getting the message. On Monday, they seemed to be hesitating before introducing a bill. They should turn that “pause” into a fair, nonpartisan rethinking of how to reform systemic weaknesses — not a quick Albany fix to help their national party. In attempting to regain the House majority, Jeffries & Co. should do it the old-fashioned way — by winning elections whenever they’re scheduled.