This November, New Yorkers will be asked to vote on whether they support an “equal protection” amendment that was specifically crafted to enshrine the right to abortion in New York — but the proposed amendment inexplicably leaves the word “abortion” out. That doesn’t help anyone.
New Yorkers deserve to understand exactly what they are asked to weigh in on. The Center for Plain Language reports that the average American reads at an eighth grade level, meaning overly complex language is simply inaccessible to many voters. That’s why lawmakers passed legislation last year requiring any ballot language to be at an eighth grade reading level or lower.
But the ballot language for New York’s abortion-related proposal fails to do that, instead mentioning abortion in vague terms. Now, New Yorkers are suing to force the Board of Elections to change the ballot language from a 15th grade reading level to eighth — the law.
According to a 2022 poll, voters here in New York want state leaders to do more to protect abortion rights. That’s exactly what our elected leaders did, easily passing the Equal Rights Amendment in successive sessions. If voters approve it, then the amendment will be enshrined into the state’s Constitution and the right to abortion will be protected.
But New Yorkers who aren’t versed in the wordy legal language and specific processes — and that is most voters — may not understand the significance of what they are asked to vote on. The ballot proposal would specifically ban discrimination over ethnicity, national origin, age, disability, and sex — including “pregnancy outcomes.” That’s legalese for abortion.
Ballot proposals are already too complicated. According to previous election results in New York, many voters — sometimes up to a quarter of all who cast a ballot — fail to answer all of the proposals on their ballot.
Many New Yorkers simply will not understand that Proposal 1 is essentially a referendum on abortion, as many other states have put to voters in clearer terms. And that means many New Yorkers will tune out and not vote on the proposal, either too distrusting of the complicated language or too uncertain about what their vote will mean. Recognizing that, last year the Legislature and the governor added the simple, common sense plain language for ballot proposals as a requirement to New York law, which Common Cause/NY strongly supported.
Some have defended the Board of Elections’ decision not to mention abortion by pointing to the amendment language — specifically that the amendment does not mention abortion, so the proposal that voters are affirming shouldn’t either.
But voters aren’t politicians. 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. And the new plain language law passed last year expressly addresses this problem by requiring that ballot language explain the impact of the proposed change, and not how it’s legally described.
Nobody understands this more than the Equal Rights Amendment’s sponsor, state Sen. Liz Krueger. Last month, she authored a letter with 31 other senators urging the Board of Elections to reflect the intentions of the measure they passed and emphasize that the amendment would protect the right to abortion. Attorney General Letitia James similarly recommended that the proposal’s language be amended to explicitly clarify that it would protect abortion rights and protect LGBTQ people.
“Pregnancy outcomes,” as it is currently written in this year’s proposal, does not meet that requirement. This proposal is about abortion and fails to mention it. It really is that simple.
If we want to encourage civic engagement and increase voter turnout, then we must avoid unnecessary barriers. That starts with ensuring every ballot proposal is easy to read, and that voters understand what is being asked of them. And that’s what our state did last year when it added the plain language requirement for ballot proposals to state law.
Voters deserve to know what they are voting for — and they deserve to have confidence that they can trust their vote. The Board of Elections has dropped the ball. Now it’s up to the courts to make sure that the ballot language presented to voters actually follows New York’s law and includes the word abortion in describing the impact of voting for or against the proposed amendment.
Lerner is the executive director of Common Cause/NY.