[EL] ELB News and commentary 6/24/11

Fri Jun 24 07:31:50 PDT 2011

One of the great things about Epps' piece in *The
Atlantic*<http://m.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2011/06/constitutional-myth-5-corporations-have-the-same-free-speech-rights-as-individuals/240874/>is
his smug sense that anyone who disagrees with him is some sort of
illiterate knuckle-dragger... Then, he describes *Citizens United* thusly:

"Almost every literate American knows that in 2009, the United States
Supreme Court held
<http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/08-205.ZX1.html>that
corporations must be given the same free-speech rights under the
Constitution as ordinary Americans to fund advertising advocating the
election or defeat of political candidates."

Well, I fancy myself a literate American, but I thought *Citizens
United*was decided in Jan. 2010. Most election law professors also
know that the
Court didn't grant corporations personhood (too late, guys!)—it simply
prohibited the government from restricting the independent political speech
of companies, labor unions and advocacy groups.

Epps also refers to "American Future Funds." The Iowa group, run by some
political friends of mine, is called the "American Future Fund."

*The Atlantic* could use a fact-checker...
------------------------------------------
*Jeff Patch*
(703) 679-7301 [office]
(202) 527-2598 [mobile]
Facebook <http://www.facebook.com/jeffpatch> I
Twitter<http://www.twitter.com/PatchDC>ILinkedIn<http://www.linkedin.com/in/jeffpatch>

On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 12:29 AM, Rick Hasen <rhasen at law.uci.edu> wrote:

> **
>  Want More Flavor About the Brooklyn Fraud Described in the 1984 Grand
> Jury Report, the Collusion of Election Officials, and Prosecutions for
> Impersonation Vote Fraud? <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=19584>
> Posted on June 23, 2011 <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=19584> by Rick
> Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>
> Jim Sleeper’s recollections<http://tpmcafe.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/10/31/treat_or_trick_elections_offic/index.php>jibe with the grand jury report and the NY Times reporting at the time.
> Sleeper’s story
> <http://jimsleeper.com/articles/scoops&revelations/Vender%20Beatty.pdf>from
> the *Village Voice* in that period notes some impersonation fraud *and*some convictions:
>
> <http://electionlawblog.org/wp-content/uploads/beatty.png>The Brooklyn
> example is not looking like such a great one of impersonation voter fraud
> going on without notice of diligent elected officials.
>
>
>  [image: Share]<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D19584&title=Want%20More%20Flavor%20About%20the%20Brooklyn%20Fraud%20Described%20in%20the%201984%20Grand%20Jury%20Report%2C%20the%20Collusion%20of%20Election%20Officials%2C%20and%20Prosecutions%20for%20Impersonation%20Vote%20Fraud%3F&description=>
>   Posted in election administration <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>, fraudulent
> fraud squad <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=8>, Uncategorized<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>,
> voter id <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=9> | Comments Off
>   Two from FollowtheMoney.org <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=19579>
> Posted on June 23, 2011 <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=19579> by Rick
> Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>
> Best practices<http://www.followthemoney.org/press/ReportView.phtml?r=444>for state campaign finance disclosure and a 50-statesurvey<http://www.followthemoney.org/content/bestpractices/index.phtml>
> .
>  [image: Share]<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D19579&title=Two%20from%20FollowtheMoney.org&description=>
>   Posted in campaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10> | Comments
> Off
>   “National Political Committees Must Return Donations from Stanford”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=19576>
> Posted on June 23, 2011 <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=19576> by Rick
> Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>
> Bloomberg reports<http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-06-22/u-s-political-committees-must-return-1-7-million-in-stanford-donations.html>:
> “Five Democratic and Republican national political committees must return
> more than $1.7 million in contributions received from indicted financier R.
> Allen Stanford to his court-appointed receiver, a federal judge ruled.”
>
> You can access the judge’s order here<http://electionlawblog.org/wp-content/uploads/Janvey-Order.pdf>
> .
>  [image: Share]<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D19576&title=%E2%80%9CNational%20Political%20Committees%20Must%20Return%20Donations%20from%20Stanford%E2%80%9D&description=>
>   Posted in campaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>,
> chicanery <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=12> | Comments Off
>   “The Hatch Act: Showcasing the Absurdity of Congress”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=19573>
> Posted on June 23, 2011 <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=19573> by Rick
> Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>
> Jeff Patch blogs<http://thehill.com/blogs/congress-blog/politics/168179-the-hatch-act-showcasing-the-absurdity-of-congress>
> .
>  [image: Share]<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D19573&title=%E2%80%9CThe%20Hatch%20Act%3A%20Showcasing%20the%20Absurdity%20of%20Congress%E2%80%9D&description=>
>   Posted in conflict of interest laws <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=20>
> | Comments Off
>   “Constitutional Myth #5: Corporations Have the Same Free-Speech Rights
> as Individuals” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=19570>
> Posted on June 23, 2011 <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=19570> by Rick
> Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>
> Garrett Epps blogs<http://m.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2011/06/constitutional-myth-5-corporations-have-the-same-free-speech-rights-as-individuals/240874/>on
> *Danielczyk*.
>  [image: Share]<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D19570&title=%E2%80%9CConstitutional%20Myth%20%235%3A%20Corporations%20Have%20the%20Same%20Free-Speech%20Rights%20as%20Individuals%E2%80%9D&description=>
>   Posted in campaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10> | Comments
> Off
>   “House Votes Not to Confer More Power on Feckless FEC”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=19567>
> Posted on June 23, 2011 <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=19567> by Rick
> Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>
> This item<http://www.clcblog.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=423:house-votes-not-to-confer-more-power-on-feckless-fec-6-23-11>appears on the CLC Blog.
>  [image: Share]<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D19567&title=%E2%80%9CHouse%20Votes%20Not%20to%20Confer%20More%20Power%20on%20Feckless%20FEC%E2%80%9D&description=>
>   Posted in Election Assistance Commission<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=34>,
> federal election commission <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=24> | Comments
> Off
>   NC Governor Vetoes Voter ID Law <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=19564>
> Posted on June 23, 2011 <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=19564> by Rick
> Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>
> Another<http://wkzo.com/news/articles/2011/jun/23/north-carolina-governor-vetoes-voter-photo-id-bill/>Democratic governor vetoes a voter id law passed by a Republican
> legislature.
>  [image: Share]<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D19564&title=NC%20Governor%20Vetoes%20Voter%20ID%20Law&description=>
>   Posted in voter id <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=9> | Comments Off
>   1984 New York Grand Jury Report on Voter Fraud Now Available<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=19560>
> Posted on June 23, 2011 <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=19560> by Rick
> Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>
> Thanks to the hard work of the UCI Law librarians, and the cooperation of
> the Brooklyn District Attorney’s office, I am pleased to provide a link to
> Kings County grand jury report, In the Matter of Confidential
> Investigation R84-11<http://electionlawblog.org/wp-content/uploads/1984_grand_jury_report-r84-11.pdf>
> .
>
> This is the report I tried <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=19393>to get<http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/06/election_expert_cant_find_report_on_1984_voter_impersonation_case_cited_by_von_spakovsky.php>from Hans von Spakovsky and the Heritage Foundation with no success.  von
> Spakovsky had relied on the grand jury report in an effort to justify voter
> identification requirements. (He wrote<http://electionlawblog.org/archives/012191.html>:
> “One doesn’t have to look far to find instances of fraudulent ballots cast
> in actual elections by ‘voters’ who were the figments of active
> imaginations. In 1984, a district attorney in Brooklyn, N.Y. (a Democrat),
> released the findings of a grand jury that reported extensive registration
> and impersonation fraud between 1968 and 1982.”)
>
> It is a fascinating read, about what appear to have been the last days of a
> corrupt Brooklyn Democratic party machine.  Most of the fraud alleged
> involved the cooperation of election officials or inspectors, or the
> downright incompetence of election workers.  (One of the most colorful
> episodes recorded involved party workers hiding in the restroom ceilings at
> the Brooklyn Board of Elections, waiting to phony up voter registration
> cards after an election to manufacture evidence for an election contest.)
>
> It is not clear to me why von Spakovsky did not respond to requests to turn
> over the grand jury report because the report contains the only apparently
> successful effort in the last 40 years of which I’m aware to actually affect
> election results through impersonation fraud.  Perhaps the reason is that
> the way in which the fraud was done almost certainly could not happen today,
> thanks to basic safeguards put in place by election officials (such as
> checking the names and addresses of new registrants and ensuring greater
> security of voter registration materials).  And of course when election
> officials collude with those committing fraud, a voter i.d. requirement
> would not help in the slightest.
>
> The fact that most of this fraud took place 40 years ago and nothing like
> it has been discovered since is a good argument that schemes like these
> cannot  successfully be done anymore. Vote buying schemes, fraudulent
> registration schemes, and absentee ballot fraud *do* get discovered and
> prosecuted.  There’s no reason to think this kind of fraud, if it happened,
> would not at least occasionally be discovered and prosecuted as well.  At
> most we find a handful of isolated cases—nothing organized, and certainly
> nothing to swing elections.
>
> Still, the grand jury report is the best evidence that the Fraudulent Fraud
> Squad has, and now it will see the light of day.
>  [image: Share]<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D19560&title=1984%20New%20York%20Grand%20Jury%20Report%20on%20Voter%20Fraud%20Now%20Available&description=>
>   Posted in election administration <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>, fraudulent
> fraud squad <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=8>, voter id<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=9>
> | Comments Off
>   “Romney backers launch super PAC” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=19557>
> Posted on June 23, 2011 <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=19557> by Rick
> Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>
> *WaPo* reports<http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/romney-backers-launch-super-pac/2011/06/22/AGTkGchH_story.html>
> .
>  [image: Share]<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D19557&title=%E2%80%9CRomney%20backers%20launch%20super%20PAC%E2%80%9D&description=>
>   Posted in campaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10> | Comments
> Off
>   Wonder What the Supreme Court Will Do on Monday in McComish?<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=19554>
> Posted on June 23, 2011 <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=19554> by Rick
> Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>
> Here’ <http://www.slate.com/id/2289193/>s the oral argument preview I
> wrote for *Slate*, “Rich Candidate Expected to Win Again.”
>
> I’ll be writing about the *McComish* decision on Monday, when the decision
> is expected to be released at 10 am eastern.  Stay tuned.**
>  [image: Share]<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D19554&title=Wonder%20What%20the%20Supreme%20Court%20Will%20Do%20on%20Monday%20in%20McComish%3F&description=>
>   Posted in campaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10> | Comments
> Off
>
>  --
> Rick Hasen
> Visiting Professor
> 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
>
> William H. Hannon Distinguished Professor of Law
> Loyola Law School
> http://www.lls.edu/academics/faculty/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/20110624/647720a7/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: beatty.png
Type: image/png
Size: 409799 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20110624/647720a7/attachment.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: share_save_171_16.png
Type: image/png
Size: 1520 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20110624/647720a7/attachment-0001.png>