[EL] mooting Kinston case?/noncitizen voting/charlie white

[Rob Richie]

Matt,

You aren't correct in explaining the nature of the 2009 objection in
Kinston. It's not about African American voters needing the partisan brand
to know how to vote. It's about more white voters supporting African
American candidates because of the partisan brand - -- with one very
concrete fact being that NC has "straight ticket voting," which no longer
would apply when going to nonpartisan contests. The change will easily mean
fewer white voters casting votes for African American candidates running
with strong African American support.

Furthermore, going to a plurality vote would force African Americans to
nominate only a single candidate to maximize their chances, which can be
hard to do when you are becoming the majority of the electorate.

For what it's worth, I think changing from traditional partisan primaries
to nonpartisan elections in places with Kinston-type numbers will have a
real tendency for "first choice candidate" of racial minorities to lose to
a "second choice candidates." My view came out of rigorous analysis of the
Top Two primary system as adopted in California and as used (and just
reinstated for congressional races) in Louisiana.

The math of the problem is rather straightforward. Let's take a runoff/Top
Two system in a jurisdiction that is 60% to 70% African American (or one
could swap another racial minority). It won't be unusual for two African
Americans to advance to a final runoff, with one of those candidates  being
a strong candidate of choice of African American voters and the other a
weak choice. In the runoff, let's say the candidate who is a strong choice
of African Americans gets two-thirds of the black vote, but very few white
votes. That can allow white voters to ally with some African American
voters to elect the "weak choice" candidate.

We've seen this often in mayoral elections in New Orleans, as one example.
This fall, i suspect it will play out in several California races. Top Two
will have little o no effect on most races, as the majority of races will
end up with one Republican facing one Democrat. But in heavily racial
minority districts, there may well be two racial minority Democrats -- and
then this dynamic kicks in.

Still, I can imagine this isn't the kind of case the DOJ wants to debate
before the Supreme Court as much as other Section 5 cases.

Rob

On Fri, Feb 3, 2012 at 12:43 PM, Mathew Manweller <ManwellerM at cwu.edu>wrote:

>  Or, it could be that the case in Kinston is so intellectually
> indefeasible, so offensive in the suggestion that minorities need partisan
> cues on how to vote and other races do not, and such a mind boggling
> overreach of federal power, that even Eric Holder understood that this dog
> would not hunt.
>
> Matt Manweller
>
>
>
> Central Washington University
> Assoc. Professor of Political Science
> manwellerm at cwu.edu
> 509-963-2396 >>> Rick Hasen <rhasen at law.uci.edu> 2/3/2012 9:24 AM >>>
>  Breaking: DOJ Poised to Moot Kinston Case Challenging Constitutionality
> of Voting Rights Act <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=29175>
> Posted on February 3, 2012 9:20 am <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=29175>
> by Rick Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>
> Check out this document<http://www.scribd.com/doc/80392086/KinstonReconsiderationLetter>.
> I would guess that the thinking is that DOJ would rather go up to the
> Supreme Court on the Shelby County case record than the record in the
> Kinston case.  I think that’s probably a wise calculation.  Kinston
> involves a DOJ denial of preclearance of a move from partisan to
> nonpartisan elections, with DOJ’s objection in part that minority voters
> would have a harder time identifying Democratic candidates.
>  [image: Share]<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D29175&title=Breaking%3A%20DOJ%20Poised%20to%20Moot%20Kinston%20Case%20Challenging%20Constitutionality%20of%20Voting%20Rights%20Act&description=>
>  Posted in Voting Rights Act <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=15> | Comments
> Off
>  Credible NBC Report of Non-Citizen Voting in Florida<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=29172>
> Posted on February 3, 2012 9:07 am <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=29172>
> by Rick Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>
> Very interesting report<http://www.nbc-2.com/story/16662854/2012/02/02/nbc2-investigates-voter-fraud>which requires further investigation.
>  [image: Share]<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D29172&title=Credible%20NBC%20Report%20of%20Non-Citizen%20Voting%20in%20Florida&description=>
>  Posted in chicanery <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=12>, voter
> registration <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=37>, voting<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=31>
> | Comments Off
>  Jury May Reach Verdict Today in Charlie White Voter Fraud Case<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=29169>
> Posted on February 3, 2012 8:45 am <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=29169>
> by Rick Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>
> See here.<http://www.indystar.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=2012202030342>From White’s perspective, a good
> day <http://www.nfl.com/superbowl/46> for it to happen.
>  [image: Share]<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D29169&title=Jury%20May%20Reach%20Verdict%20Today%20in%20Charlie%20White%20Voter%20Fraud%20Case&description=>
>  Posted in SOS White <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=13> | 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
>
> _______________________________________________
> Law-election mailing list
> Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu
> http://department-lists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/law-election
>



-- 
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"Respect for Every Vote and Every Voice"

Rob Richie
Executive Director

FairVote
6930 Carroll Avenue, Suite 610
Takoma Park, MD 20912
www.fairvote.org  <http://www.fairvote.org> rr at fairvote.org
(301) 270-4616

Please support FairVote through action and tax-deductible donations -- see
http://fairvote.org/donate. For federal employees, please consider  a gift
to us through the Combined Federal Campaign (FairVote's  CFC number is
10132.) Thank you!
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20120203/cd2ef69c/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/png
Size: 1520 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20120203/cd2ef69c/attachment.png>