[EL] ELB News and Commentary 9/14/11
Joe La Rue
joseph.e.larue at gmail.com
Wed Sep 14 07:54:05 PDT 2011
I think same-sex marriage is a very complicated issue in North Carolina. A poll
conducted this past
February<http://www.thebluebanner.net/news/10-study-revels-same-sex-marriage-support-on-rise-across-the-state>revealed
that only 28 percent of North Carolinans support same-sex marriage.
However, the same poll revealed that 56 percent oppose a constitutional
amendment defining marriage as between one man and one woman. What does this
mean for Rick's question about the timing of this initiative? I don't know
for sure. But I don't think it indicates that public opinion on same-sex
marriage has shifted significantly in North Carolina -- the vast majority do
not seem to support the concept.
Gay Marriage Initiative Timing <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=23067>
Posted on September 14, 2011 7:22 am <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=23067>
by Rick Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
I’m surprised this North Carolina
measure<http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/14/us/north-carolina-voters-to-decide-on-same-sex-marriage.html?_r=1&ref=politics>was
not pushed to be on the general election ballot, as a potential way of
getting out the Republican vote. Could it be that public opinion has shifted
enough so that this is not a reliable type of measure to get a net gain in
conservative votes?
Joe
___________________
Joseph E. La Rue, Esq.
812-232-2434, ext. 25 (Office)
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message, including any attachments, is
for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential
and privileged information or otherwise be protected by law. Any
unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you
are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail
and destroy all copies of the original message.
On Wed, Sep 14, 2011 at 10:36 AM, Rick Hasen <rhasen at law.uci.edu> wrote:
> “NJ Election Cover-Up” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=23074>
> Posted on September 14, 2011 7:34 am <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=23074>
> by Rick Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>
> Don’t miss this first of four posts
> <https://freedom-to-tinker.com/blog/appel/nj-election-cover>by Princeton
> computer scientist Andrew Appel: “There is a reason to believe that New
> Jersey election officials have destroyed evidence in a pending court case,
> perhaps to cover up the noncompliance with these measures or to cover up
> irregularities in this election. There is enough evidence of a cover-up that
> a Superior Court judge has referred the matter to the State prosecutor’s
> office.”
>
> This should get some national coverage.
> [image: Share]<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D23074&title=%E2%80%9CNJ%20Election%20Cover-Up%E2%80%9D&description=>
> Posted in chicanery <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=12>, election
> administration <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18> | Comments Off
> Carl Lewis Case Going Further, With Petition to Third Circuit En Banc or
> Supreme Court <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=23072>
> Posted on September 14, 2011 7:31 am <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=23072>
> by Rick Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>
> See here<http://www.forbes.com/feeds/ap/2011/09/13/general-us-carl-lewis-residency_8676979.html>(via Richard
> Winger<http://www.ballot-access.org/2011/09/13/opponents-of-carl-lewis-will-appeal-ruling-that-put-him-on-ballot/>
> ).
> [image: Share]<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D23072&title=Carl%20Lewis%20Case%20Going%20Further%2C%20With%20Petition%20to%20Third%20Circuit%20En%20Banc%20or%20Supreme%20Court&description=>
> Posted in Uncategorized <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1> | Comments
> Off
> “The pitfalls of a third-party candidacy”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=23070>
> Posted on September 14, 2011 7:28 am <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=23070>
> by Rick Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>
> Norm Ornstein and Tom Mann have written this WaPo oped<http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/the-pitfalls-of-a-third-party-candidacy/2011/09/08/gIQA4axWQK_story.html?hpid=z5>
> .
> [image: Share]<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D23070&title=%E2%80%9CThe%20pitfalls%20of%20a%20third-party%20candidacy%E2%80%9D&description=>
> Posted in third parties <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=47> | Comments
> Off
> Gay Marriage Initiative Timing <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=23067>
> Posted on September 14, 2011 7:22 am <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=23067>
> by Rick Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>
> I’m surprised this North Carolina measure<http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/14/us/north-carolina-voters-to-decide-on-same-sex-marriage.html?_r=1&ref=politics>was not pushed to be on the general election ballot, as a potential way of
> getting out the Republican vote. Could it be that public opinion has shifted
> enough so that this is not a reliable type of measure to get a net gain in
> conservative votes?
> [image: Share]<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D23067&title=Gay%20Marriage%20Initiative%20Timing&description=>
> Posted in direct democracy <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=62> | Comments
> Off
> Quote of the Day <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=23064>
> Posted on September 14, 2011 7:19 am <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=23064>
> by Rick Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>
> The Ohio congressional redistricting plan “has all the earmarks of a
> partisan gerrymander, and I would be shocked if it were not challenged on
> constitutional grounds.”
>
> Dan Tokaji, testifying<http://www.the-daily-record.com/news/article/5095582>about the proposed plan. I might add that I would be shocked if a partisan
> gerrymander challenge succeeds, in Ohio or anywhere.
> [image: Share]<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D23064&title=Quote%20of%20the%20Day&description=>
> Posted in redistricting <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=6> | Comments
> Off
> Fraudulent Fraud Squad Lesson # 2 <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=23061>
> Posted on September 14, 2011 7:16 am <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=23061>
> by Rick Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>
> If the Republican wins<http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/14/nyregion/ny-democrats-try-to-avoid-upset-in-special-election.html?hp>the race, forget
> allegations <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=22999> of voter fraud made
> before the election. (Lesson # 1 is to scream voter fraud if it looks like
> the Democrat may win.)
>
> I give some examples of this phenomenon in *The Voting Wars.*
> [image: Share]<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D23061&title=Fraudulent%20Fraud%20Squad%20Lesson%20%23%202&description=>
> Posted in election administration <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>, fraudulent
> fraud squad <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=8> | Comments Off
> “It’s Not Just Who You Are, It’s Where You Live: Domicile and the
> Elections Stained Glass Window” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=23059>
> Posted on September 14, 2011 7:14 am <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=23059>
> by Rick Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>
> Doug Chapin muses<http://blog.lib.umn.edu/cspg/peea/2011/09/its_not_just_who_you_are_its_w.php>
> .
> [image: Share]<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D23059&title=%E2%80%9CIt%E2%80%99s%20Not%20Just%20Who%20You%20Are%2C%20It%E2%80%99s%20Where%20You%20Live%3A%20Domicile%20and%20the%20Elections%20Stained%20Glass%20Window%E2%80%9D&description=>
> Posted in election administration <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>,
> residency <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=38> | Comments Off
> “3-3 FEC Vote Drops Charge Denham Used State Campaign Funds for U.S.
> House Race” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=23056>
> Posted on September 13, 2011 8:48 pm <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=23056>
> by Rick Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>
> The usua<http://news.bna.com/mpdm/MPDMWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=22826680&vname=mpebulallissues&fn=22826680&jd=a0c9a1m8u0&split=0>
> l.
> [image: Share]<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D23056&title=%E2%80%9C3-3%20FEC%20Vote%20Drops%20Charge%20Denham%20Used%20State%20Campaign%20Funds%20for%20U.S.%20House%20Race%E2%80%9D&description=>
> Posted in campaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10> | Comments
> Off
> Kris Kobach and the Seven Dwarfs <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=23053>
> Posted on September 13, 2011 8:45 pm <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=23053>
> by Rick Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>
> During yesterday’s “To the Point” show<http://www.kcrw.com/news/programs/tp/tp110912is_there_a_war_on_vo>,
> Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach and I went over the question whether
> voter identification laws actually can prevent fraud. I pointed out that
> impersonation fraud rarely if ever happens, and Kobach confirmed he’s got no
> cases of impersonation fraud he can point to in Kansas. But Kobach also
> said that a state id requirement would be necessary to prevent a different
> type of crime: the use of false registrations (of fictitious people) to cast
> votes in elections. He gave the example of someone registering and voting
> ballots for the fictitious seven dwarfs. I pointed out that I was not aware
> of a single case of fraudulent registrations (such as from ACORN) leading to
> actual fraudulent votes (the reason the ACORN-type fraud occurred was
> because poor people who worked to register voters made up fake names to keep
> their jobs, not to rig elections.) But a reader sends along another great
> point about why a state i.d. is unnecessary to stop voter fraud in this
> instance:
>
> I was struck by the “perfect crime” tale — the hypothetical attempt to
> register the seven dwarves. He seems to have ignored that HAVA’s voter id
> requirements for any voter who registers to vote by mail and has not
> previously voted in a Federal election. (See HAVA Section 303) That is of
> course, presuming that Sleepy and Grumpy are not long time registered
> voters. If those “voters” want to vote absentee (I doubt the fraudster would
> be able to produce Sleepy and Grumpy to cast an in person vote without
> arousing some suspicion), they are required to provide a valid photo ID or a
> current utility bill, bank statement, government check, paycheck or other
> government document that shows the name and address of the voter.
>
> This “perfect crime” meme is a recent theme of the fraudulent fraud squad.
> As I pointed out on yesterday’s show, we see prosecutions, or at least
> credible reports, of other types of voter fraud—absentee vote buying, double
> voting, etc., but not of impersonation fraud. Why not? As I argue in *The
> Voting Wars*, it is an exceedingly dumb way to try to steal an election.
> And it is the kind of fraud which would be the *hardest* to try to hide,
> because it involves a conspiracy to find many voters to go into the polling
> place as impersonators. The reason we don’t see it is because it rarely, if
> ever, happens, and not on any kind of scale to change election outcomes.
>
> Nonetheless, former Indana SOS (and now Member of Congress) Todd Rokita
> made the same perfect crime point<http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/09/gop_rep_voter_fraud_happening_everywhere_but_prosecutors_wouldnt_take_cases_video.php?ref=fpc>testifying before the Senate Judiciary Committee. This, even though his
> *l*awyers stipulated in court during the *Crawford* challenge to Indiana’s
> photo ID law that there has never been a single case of voter impersonation
> fraud in Indiana’s history.
>
> The perfect crime indeed.
> [image: Share]<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D23053&title=Kris%20Kobach%20and%20the%20Seven%20Dwarfs&description=>
> Posted in fraudulent fraud squad <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=8>, The
> Voting Wars <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60>, voter id<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=9>
> | 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 - 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/20110914/f7e448f2/attachment.html>
-------------- 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/20110914/f7e448f2/attachment.png>
View list directory