[EL] ELB News and Commentary 5/30/11

[James Woodruff]

"Interesting thoughts, though my sense is that both Democrats and Republicans both see Republicans as benefitting much more from absentee voting than Democrats."

I don't see as much of a difference if the campaigns change messaging and direct their voters to absentee voting. Here in Florida it appears that most of the Democratic Party messaging is directed at early voting while the Republican Party focuses on absentee. If the argument is convenience, it doesn't get much more convenient than through no-excuse absentee voting in the Sunshine State.

To add to the complexity of the issue, we recently had a mayoral election in Duval County where the Democratic Party effectively used absentee voting on Election Day to extend the democratic candidate's lead out of the recount range.

James J. Woodruff II, Esq.
Associate Professor of Lawyering Process
Florida Coastal School of Law
8787 Baypine Road
Jacksonville, FL  32256
(904) 256-1226
http://theartoflitigation.com/
jwoodruff at fcsl.edu

View my research on my SSRN Author page:
http://ssrn.com/author=1343708
________________________________
From: law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu [law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu] on behalf of Rick Hasen [rhasen at law.uci.edu]
Sent: Monday, May 30, 2011 12:09 PM
To: law-election at uci.edu
Subject: [EL] ELB News and Commentary 5/30/11

“Campaign Finance Experts See Few Implications for Virginia Ruling”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=18461>
Posted on May 30, 2011<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=18461> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Roll Call offers this report<http://www.rollcall.com/news/Campaign-Finance-Experts-See-Few-Implications-Virginia-Ruling-206060-1.html>.

[Share]<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D18461&title=%E2%80%9CCampaign%20Finance%20Experts%20See%20Few%20Implications%20for%20Virginia%20Ruling%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted in Uncategorized<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1> | Comments Off
“Use of ‘God’ on voting stickers stirs controversy”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=18458>
Posted on May 30, 2011<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=18458> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

New election controversy<http://www.journal-news.com/news/hamilton-news/use-of-god-on-voting-stickers-stirs-controversy-1172324.html> in Ohio.

[Share]<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D18458&title=%E2%80%9CUse%20of%20%E2%80%98God%E2%80%99%20on%20voting%20stickers%20stirs%20controversy%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted in Uncategorized<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1> | Comments Off
A Reader’s Response to Jim Crow and Voter ID<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=18453>
Posted on May 30, 2011<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=18453> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

In response to this post<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=18443>, a longtime ELB reader writes:

I think it’s silly to believe that either end of this fight are motivated by actual concerns of ballot fraud, either to prevent it, or enable it to be perpetrated. While I suppose it’s possible the occasional election is close enough that somebody voting in person under false pretenses might swing the result, doesn’t everybody understand that absentee ballots are where the rubber really hits the road, fraud-wise?

Rather, what’s going on with the Democratic opposition to voter ID is that the Democratic party is reliant on some groups which are extremely poorly motivated to vote. Even the most trivial
> inconvenience can, accordingly, impact Democratic turnout. While Republicans are, relatively speaking, strongly motivated to turn out; If they don’t show, it’s more likely to be because the party hasn’t provided them with a candidate worth voting for, than because voting is a bit inconvenient.

But, of course, we don’t typically demand that the actual motives of legislators be sparklingly clean, just that their laws could hypothetically be justified by some savory motive. (Or else we’d be striking down laws left and right.) And the inconvenience in question really IS quite trivial. At least compared to restricting the availability of absentee ballots to people who can show genuine need, which probably would have a major impact on ballot fraud… Making it a two-fer as far as Republicans are concerned.

I’m having a hard time figuring out why the GOP doesn’t go for that measure, unless maybe it’s just that they figure it’s a hill too far, given the way Democrats would go berserk if it were proposed…

Interesting thoughts, though my sense is that both Democrats and Republicans both see Republicans as benefitting much more from absentee voting than Democrats.

[Share]<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D18453&title=A%20Reader%E2%80%99s%20Response%20to%20Jim%20Crow%20and%20Voter%20ID&description=>

Posted in Uncategorized<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1> | 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<mailto: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://electionlawblog.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20110530/32594ce8/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: share_save_171_16.png
Type: image/png
Size: 1520 bytes
Desc: share_save_171_16.png
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20110530/32594ce8/attachment.png>