[RP TownTalk] Countdown to the municipal elections to be held on May 6th - and what constitutes 'electioneering'?

[Dwight Holmes]

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Dwight Holmes <dwightrholmes at gmail.com>
Date: Wed, Mar 6, 2013 at 5:11 PM
Subject: Countdown to the municipal elections to be held on May 6th - and
what constitutes 'electioneering'?
To: Michelle Burns <mishburns at yahoo.com>


*"I shall not today attempt further to define the kinds of material I
understand to be embraced within that shorthand description [hard-core
pornography]; and perhaps I could never succeed in intelligibly doing
so. But I know it when I see it, and the motion picture involved in this
case is not that."*

                    --Justice Potter Stewart, in his concurring opinion in
the case, Jacobellis v. Ohio, 378 U.S. 184 (1964).

As recently noted on this list, town policy calls for prohibition of
"electioneering" on this list for the 60-day period leading up to an
election.  As list moderator, I feel it incumbent on me to be as clear as
possible as to what this means in practice: What are the criteria, the
definitions that I will use as a guide?

I may, as Justice Potter so artfully articulated it, "know it when I see
it," but ideally I should be able to state now, up front, what would and
what would not constitute electioneering in my mind, so that all members of
the list are clear about that.

On the surface, the meaning of electioneering seems clear enough.  Using
online dictionaries, I find these definitions:

*electioneer*: to work for the success of a particular candidate, party,
ticket, etc., in an election.

*electioneering*:
     n 1: persuasion of voters in a political campaign
     2: the campaign of a candidate to be elected
*
*If a candidate were to post anything along the lines of "I did this,"
"This happened under my watch," "What I want for Riverdale Park in the next
5 years is..." etc. - that would clearly be electioneering. (The same would
apply to anyone else who wrote similar things on behalf of/in support of a
candidate.)

The rub comes, I believe, when a topic is introduced by someone who is
neither a candidate nor an overt supporter of any particular candidate, but
the topic itself calls for or leads to discussion of things which involve
decisions (or indecisions), achievements (or lack thereof), a vision of
what the town should (or should not) be, etc. -- any of which *could* be
part of a debate in this election.  Recent discussions about the property
on Rt 1 are a perfect example.  It's challenging to have an official of the
town or a candidate for town office participate in a substantive discussion
regarding matters like this that are a part of current town deliberations
and avoid any potential appearance of electioneering.

Unfortunately, adherence to this policy will also mean loss of some of the
richness that we get on this list.  Current councilmembers and the Mayor
will have to keep any responses they make to questions that are posted here
short.  In the spirit of Jack Webb/Sgt Friday (of *Dragnet*), "just the
facts, ma'am."  If someone asks "Did such and such pass at last night's
council meeting?" it would be totally appropriate to answer "Yes, it did."
It would obviously be out of bounds to add four more paragraphs taking
credit for its passage and all the good things that will come to the town
from this and (even unspecified) future acts if you vote to reelect me.

It must also be said that it's incumbent on those of us who don't hold
office in the town, and who aren't running for office, or campaigning for
anyone who is, to refrain from asking questions (or making charges) that
cannot be answered or responded to by the candidates! This is not the time
to ask "Why has Situation X been allowed to fester with no one trying to do
anything about it for five long years now - why hasn't the town fixed this
problem?" If incumbent officials can't answer your question without
breaking the rule (or the spirit) of no electioneering - then this is not
the time or the forum for your question!

But, of course, inevitably, there will be grey areas, between, for
example,  "Yes, it did," and the four-page screed.  And so, in the end, I
will have to play Justice Potter - I will know when I see it, and I will
act accordingly.  I am confident, however, that if every one uses common
sense, I won't need my Justice Potter hat.

For those interested in the language of the town's policy on
electioneering, here it is:

*The town has established this policy regarding electioneering on TownTalk:*

Email List Electioneering Policy

"Electioneering shall be prohibited on any e-mail list supported by the
Town of Riverdale Park. For these e-mail lists, electioneering is
defined as an attempt to influence how people will vote on a ballot
issue or candidate in an upcoming election. Electioneering on the
e-mail lists shall only be regulated for sixty days before an
election. The e-mail list administrator shall ensure that
electioneering does not occur. The list administrator has the
authority to delegate their responsibility for administering policy.
List members who wish to appeal decisions under this policy shall
appeal decisions to the list administrator. An appeal of the list
administrator's decision can be made to the town administrator. The
decision of the town administrator is final.

"The list administrator or town staff will post information pertaining
to the election to the Town's official website and do so in
conjunction with the public posting of the notice of candidates. This
posting shall include the full list of candidates whose qualifications
have been verified by the judges of election in accordance with §29-12
of the Riverdale Park Town Code. The posting on the Town website shall
include a candidate's name and street address. In addition, if
provided by the candidate, contact information will be included in the
posting. Contact information is limited to a telephone number, an
e-mail address, and a web site address. A notice will be posted to
Town Announce stating the availability of this information."

The above resolution was passed by the Town of Riverdale Park council
on April 2, 2007.


Dwight Holmes
List Moderator
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://riverdale-park.org/pipermail/towntalk/attachments/20130306/a52e29f1/attachment.html>