[EL] voter id laws and boycotts

Mon Apr 16 20:25:18 PDT 2012

National businesses face social and economic costs in opposing the civil
rights of underrepresented and under-resourced communities which private,
anonymous individuals do not.  They don't want to be tied to controversy,
even if they think the other side is wrong.  Same reason why publicly-traded
companies haven't been involved in the whole SuperPAC/Citizens United
universe of activities despite potential business interests in doing so,
including the potential to reap the benefits anyway via free-riding.  

--Adam Bonin

From: law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu
[mailto:law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu] On Behalf Of Smith,
Brad
Sent: Monday, April 16, 2012 10:32 PM
To: law-election at uci.edu
Subject: [EL] voter id laws and boycotts

 <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=33017> "73% Think Photo ID Requirement
Before Voting Does Not Discriminate"

Posted on April 16, 2012 12:37 pm <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=33017>  by
Rick Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3> 

New Rasmussen survey
<http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/general_politics/ap
ril_2012/73_think_photo_id_requirement_before_voting_does_not_discriminate>
.

If voter i.d. laws are so popular, is there still reason to oppose them? Yes
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=30177> .

Now, here's another question: given that voter i.d. laws are so popular, can
it really be that corporations are scared to death to be associated with an
organization associated with them (ALEC)? Wouldn't we expect corporations to
want to be associated with such a popular cause?

This suggests that the boycott issue we've discussed here the last few days
is a bit more complex than Mark Schmidt seems to think. 

Bradley A. Smith

Josiah H. Blackmore II/Shirley M. Nault

   Professor of Law

Capital University Law School

303 E. Broad St.

Columbus, OH 43215

614.236.6317

http://law.capital.edu/faculty/bios/bsmith.aspx

  _____  

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, April 16, 2012 4:41 PM
To: law-election at uci.edu
Subject: [EL] Breaking news: federal contractor contribution case, more news

Breaking News: Federal Court Rejects Challenge to Ban on Contractor
Contributions to Federal Candidates <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=33020>  

Posted on  <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=33020> April 16, 2012 1:38 pm by
Rick Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>  

You can read the 26-page decision denying the preliminary injunction at this
link <https://ecf.dcd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/show_public_doc?2011cv1841-28> .
(H/t Bloomberg BNA) The court held that the ban on contractor contributions
was "closely drawn" to the government's anticorruption interest, and that
current evidence of a problem of corruption was unnecessary:

This same factor is at play here. When Congress first enacted the ban on
political contributions by federal contractors, it was responding to a
recent history of corruption. As just discussed, the ban was originally
passed in 1940 on the heels of the  "campaign-book racket," in which those
seeking government contracts were effectively required to buy copies of the
Democratic campaign book at highly inflated prices in order to secure
government business. 84 Cong. Rec. 9598-99 (1939). In the wake of this
scandal, it was eminently reasonable for the legislature to ban
contributions by federal contractors. Doing so would not only insulate
prospective contractors from pressure to give money to politicians, but it
would also help ensure a merit-based system of awarding contracts and
"reassure[] citizens that its politicians are acting on their behalf and not
on behalf of the highest bidder." Preston, 660 F.3d at 741. Because, just as
in Green Party, Congress reacted to recent scandals in imposing the ban on
contractor contributions, its restrictions are more easily characterized as
closely drawn. Plaintiffs argue that there is no current evidence that
individual federal contractors may corrupt the election process or be
pressured to give. An absence of corruption does not necessarily mean,
however, that the ban is no longer needed. It could simply be an indication
that the ban is working. See Burson v. Freeman, 504 U.S. 191, 208 (1992)
(noting difficulty of finding evidence to support long-enforced statutes).
Nor is it possible to say that the role of money in federal campaigns has
diminished; indeed, the converse is incontrovertibly true. See Wisconsin
Right to Life, 551 U.S. at 507 ("If the threat . flowing from concentrations
of money in politics has reached an unprecedented enormity, it has been
gathering force for generations.").
As a result, the suggestion that those seeking federal contracts might "pay
to play" is hardly novel or implausible. See Shrink Missouri, 528 U.S. at
391 ("The quantum of empirical evidence needed to satisfy heightened
judicial scrutiny . will vary up or down with the novelty and plausibility
of the justification raised."). It in no way stretches the imagination to
envision that individuals might make campaign contributions to curry
political favor. Examples of such behavior abound, as Connecticut's recent
corruption scandals demonstrate. See, e.g., Green Party, 616 F.3d 189, 193
(discussing corruption scandals in Connecticut that preceded ban); see also
Ognibene v. Parkes, 671 F.3d 174, 188-89 (2d Cir. 2012) (imposition of lower
contribution limits on those who do business with New York City "responded
to actual pay-to-play scandals in [the city] in the 1980s"); Blount v. SEC,
61 F.3d 938, 944-45 (D.C. Cir. 1995) (specific evidence of quid pro quo
corruption unnecessary because "underwriters' campaign contributions
self-evidently create a conflict of interest in state and local officials
who have power over municipal securities contracts and a risk that they will
award the contracts on the basis of benefit to their campaign chests rather
than to the governmental entity"; "risk of corruption is obvious and
substantial"). The threat of corruption addressed by the provision at issue
here is thus far from "illusory," see Ognibene, 671 F.3d at 183, but instead
provides a reasonable basis for restricting political contributions by
federal contractors.

It will be interesting to watch this case on its inevitable appeal to the
D.C. Circuit, and potentially to the Supreme Court.

<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%
3Fp%3D33020&title=Breaking%20News%3A%20Federal%20Court%20Rejects%20Challenge
%20to%20Ban%20on%20Contractor%20Contributions%20to%20Federal%20Candidates&de
scription=> Share

Posted in campaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>  | Comments
Off 

 <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=33017> "73% Think Photo ID Requirement
Before Voting Does Not Discriminate" 

Posted on  <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=33017> April 16, 2012 12:37 pm by
Rick Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>  

New Rasmussen survey
<http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/general_politics/ap
ril_2012/73_think_photo_id_requirement_before_voting_does_not_discriminate>
.

If voter i.d. laws are so popular, is there still reason to oppose them? Yes
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=30177> .

<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%
3Fp%3D33017&title=%E2%80%9C73%25%20Think%20Photo%20ID%20Requirement%20Before
%20Voting%20Does%20Not%20Discriminate%E2%80%9D&description=> Share

Posted in election administration <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18> , The
Voting Wars <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60> , voter id
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=9>  | Comments Off 

 <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=33014> "MacArthur Grants to Support Campaign
Finance Research, Information Sharing, and Efforts to Improve Elections
Process" 

Posted on  <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=33014> April 16, 2012 12:15 pm by
Rick Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>  

Must be some happy people
<http://www.macfound.org/press/press-releases/macarthur-grants-support-campa
ign-finance-research-information-sharing-and-efforts-improve-elections-proce
ss/>  in the campaign finance reform world today.

<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%
3Fp%3D33014&title=%E2%80%9CMacArthur%20Grants%20to%20Support%20Campaign%20Fi
nance%20Research%2C%20Information%20Sharing%2C%20and%20Efforts%20to%20Improv
e%20Elections%20Process%E2%80%9D&description=> Share

Posted in campaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10> , election
law biz <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=51>  | Comments Off 

Naked Quote of the Day <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=33011>  

Posted on  <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=33011> April 16, 2012 9:45 am by
Rick Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>  

"This is an 'emperor has no clothes on' moment. It is the responsibility of
the IRS to tell Crossroads GPS that it 'has no clothes on,' and that it does
not qualify as a tax-exempt 501(c)(4) 'social welfare' organization."

-Fred Wertheimer, in an emailed press release " Rove-Backed Tax-Exempt
'Social Welfare' Organization, Crossroads GPS, Reportedly Received a $10
Million Secret Contribution for Obama Attack Ads"

<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%
3Fp%3D33011&title=Naked%20Quote%20of%20the%20Day&description=> Share

Posted in campaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>  | Comments
Off 

-- 
Rick Hasen
Chancellor's 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

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20120416/10ac9a90/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.png
Type: image/png
Size: 1520 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20120416/10ac9a90/attachment.png>