Deems certain nominating or designating petitions to be permeated with fraud and invalidating the filings made by a contested candidate

◆ The sponsor's argument

Why William Weber says this is needed

New York State has seen repeated examples of petition fraud. In several election cycles, including parts of the Hudson Valley, courts have uncovered petitions containing forged signatures, duplicate names, and signatures from people who were not registered voters. In some cases, entire pages were filled out in the same handwriting. These practices are not simple errors; they are deliberate attempts to bypass the demo- cratic process. Under current law, even if a significant number of signatures are rejected or deemed fraudulent, candidates may still remain on the ballot if they technically meet the minimum requirement. This creates a situ- ation in which campaigns can submit large numbers of questionable signa- tures without facing meaningful consequences. By setting a 25 percent fraud threshold, this legislation would protect honest candidates who follow the rules and collect valid signatures in good faith. Most importantly, it would help restore voters' confidence that those who appear on the ballot have earned their place fairly. It does not punish minor mistakes but rather holds candidates accountable when fraud reaches a level that calls the entire petition into question. The petition process is meant to ensure that candidates have genuine voter support before appearing on the ballot. When that process is abused through fraud, it weakens public trust and undermines fair compe- tition. Our elections should reflect the will of the people, not the success of those willing to bend the rules.

This is the sponsor's own case for the bill, quoted from their memorandum. It is not Agora's description of what the bill does.