[EL] Project Vote v. Project Vote

[Soren Dayton]

Of course "those who pay attention to these things" include the people who
have the experience to design and execute large scale voter registration
programs. While I only have close relationships with 3 people working in the
Obama HQ, every single one of them has worked with Project Vote in the
field. And while, as a Republican, I am not attuned to the internal
decision-making processes of the Obama campaign, I would be hard-pressed to
imagine that at least some of these people weren't involved in
conceptualizing and planning something like this, especially because at
least one of them has oversight for a large part of the territory where this
program would be most impactful.

As you point out, Project Vote has a perfectly respectable lineage and
reputation among Democratic voter registration and voting access types. Why
not view this as a feature? Obama's Project Vote will be working on the
ground in many of the same places that Project Vote has had footprints. If a
voter reg operative showed up a community meeting and said that they were
from "Project Vote," it would be totally understandable. They might even
contract with them to get some work done, as Obama did with another ACORN
affiliate for GOTV services in
2008<http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/news/election/s_584284.html>
.

By this theory, the name Project Vote wasn't picked as a "dog whistle" so
much as something that makes it easier to work on the ground.

Just for my own amusement, I went to check who else was at the address of
Project Vote in DC, which I found on their
website<http://www.projectvote.org/>.
Turns out that it is the same address as the DC office of ACORN
housing, referenced
here <http://www.livebaltimore.com/buy/counseling/dclist/>. If you look it
up on Google Street View <http://g.co/maps/x4b4>, you find a sign in the
window that clearly says "ACORN Housing".


On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 at 1:01 PM, Larry Levine <larrylevine at earthlink.net>wrote:

> I think this whole discussion assumes something that may not be true: that
> “Project Vote” is a brand with any identification beyond those who pay
> attention to these kinds of things. While ACORN might carry a broader
> awareness factor, I think “project vote” sounds more generic. There probably
> have been scores of “project votes” in communities across the land over the
> decades. There is a certain almost noble sound of purpose to “project vote”.
> To attack it as an extension or part of ACORN requires multiple steps of
> linkage. I think such attacks would appeal mostly to those already fixed in
> voting against Obama. Having said all that, the fact that we are having this
> discussion is evidence of why there probably were better choices for a name
> of this operation.****
>
> Larry ****
>
> ** **
>
> *From:* Rick Hasen [mailto:rhasen at law.uci.edu]
> *Sent:* Thursday, August 25, 2011 9:45 AM
> *To:* Larry Levine
> *Cc:* 'Dan Johnson-Weinberger'; 'law-election at uci.edu'
>
> *Subject:* Re: [EL] Project Vote v. Project Vote****
>
> ** **
>
> My impression is that the ACORN meme has permeated beyond core Republican
> voters to independents, and there is no reason for the Obama campaign to
> help stoke the fires for no apparent purpose.
>
> If the name Project Vote was deliberately chosen as a kind of dog whistle
> for the left, I think the point is going to be lost by most Democratic
> voters, who may have heard of ACORN but not Project Vote.
>
>
> On 8/25/2011 9:34 AM, Larry Levine wrote: ****
>
> While you can’t let the other side dictate your agenda – a trap into which
> the administration has stepped with regularity – you also don’t need to buy
> into futile controversy. But above all, you must remember there are people
> out there who won’t voter for you under any circumstances. The late Sen.
> Alan Cranston once said: “If you are running against a rock the rock will
> get 35% of the vote.” In this instance the Obama campaign could have come up
> with a name for the program that would have sidestepped even the possibility
> of becoming an issue. On the other hand they opted for a name that describes
> what they intend to do and will appeal to the targeted audiences. Tell me
> what ACORN hater was going to vote for Obama anyway.****
>
> Larry****
>
>  ****
>
> *From:* law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu [
> mailto:law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu<law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu>]
> *On Behalf Of *Dan Johnson-Weinberger
> *Sent:* Thursday, August 25, 2011 9:23 AM
> *To:* Rick Hasen
> *Cc:* law-election at uci.edu
> *Subject:* Re: [EL] Project Vote v. Project Vote****
>
>  ****
>
> Why Project Vote?
>
> Perhaps because the Obama campaign refuses to play to the lowest common
> denominator of those who lie about voter fraud conspiracies in order to
> reduce.the number of citizens who vote. Instead, perhaps, the Obama campaign
> is proud of the President's lifelong work at expanding the electorate and
> will not allow the enemies of full participation to tarnish the name of a
> successful registration campaign that the President helped to lead in 1992.
>
> Perhaps it is less of a "stupid name" and more of a confident choice from
> those who will not concede the truth to their enemies. The meme is a lie. I
> suspect their choice of name reflects that bedrock understanding.
>
> I should say I am neither an employee nor vendor to the Obama campaign so
> my thoughts are mine alone.
>
> Dan
>
>
>
> On Thursday, August 25, 2011, Rick Hasen <rhasen at law.uci.edu> wrote:
> > Project Vote v. Project Vote: Dept. of Dumb Names <
> http://electionlawblog.org/?p=22241>
> >
> > Posted on August 25, 2011 8:47 am <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=22241>
> by Rick Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
> >
> > Mike Allen today reports <
> http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0811/62049.html>for Politico that
> “President Barack Obama’s reelection campaign on Thursday announced ‘Project
> Vote,’ a campaign-within-a-campaign that is aimed at increasing registration
> and participation among Democratic base constituencies — including young
> voters, seniors, African Americans and Hispanics, plus Native Americans and
> gay and lesbian voters.”
> >
> > While the move to increase participation among the Democratic base may be
> a smart one, I cannot think of a more stupid name for the initiative—it is
> going to feed into the right-wing Democratic voter fraud meme.  “Project
> Vote” is also the name of this organization <http://projectvote.org/>, an
> organization aimed at getting out the vote as well.  Although non-partisan
> in the sense that it is not affiliated with any political party, the group
> works toward enfranchisement of groups that have been disenfranchised,
> especially pushing the provisions of the National Voter Registration Act
> (NVRA) which require states to take steps to register voters at welfare
> offices and other government agencies.
> >
> > Project Vote has long been affiliated with ACORN (and there has been some
> dispute about the entangling of the two organizations).  ACORN is now
> defunct, but the cries of voter fraud against ACORN are now being directed
> to Project Vote.  Just today, for example, the Washington Times has run a
> story <
> http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2011/aug/24/watchdog-suspicious-of-federal-ties-to-project-vot/>
> on a FOIA request by Judicial Watch to seek information about ties between
> Project Vote and the Justice Department.
> >
> > In conducting research for my book, The Voting Wars, I came across a
> nauseating amount of unsubstantiated claims against President Obama as
> promoting voter fraud to help him win his election.  Much of this writing
> stems from work Obama had done as a community organizer in Chicago and
> briefly as a lawyer for the Project Vote organization.
> >
> > Why on earth would the Obama campaign seek to stoke these conspiracy
> theories, and cause confusion, by naming its efforts Project Vote?
> >
> > </mail/u/0/s/?view=att&th=13201a4eddf94059&attid=0.0.1&disp=emb&zw> <
> http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D22241&title=Project%20Vote%20v.%20Project%20Vote%3A%20Dept.%20of%20Dumb%20Names&description=
> >
> > Posted in election administration <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>,
> fraudulent fraud squad <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=8> | Comments Off
> > --
> > Rick Hasen
> > Professor of Law and Political Science
> > UC Irvine School of Law
> > 401 E. Peltason Dr., Suite 1000
> > Irvine, CA 92697-8000
> > 949.824.3072 <tel:949.824.3072 <949.824.3072>> - office
> > 949.824.0495 <tel:949.824.0495 <949.824.0495>> - fax
> > rhasen at law.uci.edu
> > http://law.uci.edu/faculty/page1_r_hasen.html
> > http://electionlawblog.org
> >
>
> --
> Dan Johnson-Weinberger
>
> Attorney at Law
> 111 West Washington, Suite 1920
> Chicago, Illinois 60602
>
> 312.867.5377 (office)
> 312.933.4890 (mobile)
> 312.794.7064 (fax)****
>
> ** **
>
> --
> Rick Hasen
> Professor of Law and Political Science
> UC Irvine School of Law
> 401 E. Peltason Dr., Suite 1000
> Irvine, CA 92697-8000
> 949.824.3072 - office
> 949.824.0495 - fax
> rhasen at law.uci.edu
> http://law.uci.edu/faculty/page1_r_hasen.html
> http://electionlawblog.org****
>
> _______________________________________________
> Law-election mailing list
> Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu
> http://department-lists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/law-election
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20110825/7a4c6509/attachment.html>