[EL] Paz Harassment
JBoppjr at aol.com
JBoppjr at aol.com
Fri Aug 30 05:34:52 PDT 2013
One way to weed out contributions that are not attempts at gaining undue
influence is to determine what the candidate's position was before the
contribution. All my clients determine that first and then contribute if the
candidate is already supportive of their issue -- and the stronger the
candidate believes in their issue, the more they are likely to give.
Now I know this is hard work but without it any studies will just show that
people tend to support candidates that vote with them on issues. So what
if this is so. Jim Bopp
In a message dated 8/29/2013 5:17:12 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
mmcdon at gmu.edu writes:
I'm trying to devise an empirical way to observe the level where a
contribution turns into an attempt to buy influence. I'm open to other suggestions
how to measure it.
I agree that the level should be relative to the "cost" of the election. I
was just following the example for federal elections. You'd want to
replicate whatever study can be devised for state and local elections.
============
Dr. Michael P. McDonald
Associate Professor
George Mason University
4400 University Drive - 3F4
Fairfax, VA 22030-4444
phone: 703-993-4191 (office)
e-mail: mmcdon at gmu.edu
web: _http://elections.gmu.edu_ (http://elections.gmu.edu/)
twitter: @ElectProject
____________________________________
From: Joe La Rue [joseph.e.larue at gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, August 29, 2013 4:57 PM
To: Michael P McDonald
Cc: law-election at UCI.edu
Subject: Re: [EL] Paz Harassment
But why should the question be about who gives more to whom? Why
shouldn't the question rather be, Who is giving enough to buy influence (in the
case of candidate elections) or to have a significant interest in the outcome
(in the case of ballot initiatives)? In other words, in a multi-million
dollar campaign, is it really reasonable to think that someone who gives
$1,000 is purchasing influence, or has a significant interest in the outcome
of the ballot question?
Now, if we're talking about a $10,000 campaign, I think it is reasonable
to think that such a donor may have an interest that it behooves the public
to know about. But in a multi-million dollar campaign? Of course someone
giving $1,000 isn't buying interest. Nor is he doing enough to ensure the
ballot question a better chance of passage.
Rather, what that donor is doing is simply trying to help a candidate or
cause he or she believes in. How does it serve the public interest for me
to know that?
Joe
___________________
Joseph E. La Rue
cell: 480.272.2715
email: _joseph.e.larue at gmail.com_ (mailto:joseph.e.larue at gmail.com)
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 have
received this message in error, please immediately notify the sender and
permanently delete the message.
PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL - ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION/ATTORNEY WORK
PRODUCT.
IRS CIRCULAR 230 DISCLOSURE: Any tax advice contained in this
communication was not written and is not intended to be used for the purpose of (i)
avoiding penalties imposed by the Internal Revenue Code or (ii) promoting,
marketing, or recommending any transaction or matter addressed herein.
On Thu, Aug 29, 2013 at 1:47 PM, Michael P McDonald <_mmcdon at gmu.edu_
(mailto:mmcdon at gmu.edu) > wrote:
The literature on campaign finance donations from large (i.e., above $200)
donors finds that they give predominantly more to incumbents over
non-incumbents. I'm working on a manuscript now that examines small donor patterns
(below $200) and we find, among other things, that small donors give to
incumbents and non-incumbents alike.
I don't know the motivation why larger donors give more to incumbents. I
think we need to know more to understand why they might want to give to
those in power versus those out. One might presume it is for access or more
nefarious reasons, which is those "democratic values" some care about enough
to balance against disclosure. What I'm trying to get at is a threshold
number that we might be able to empirically measure to agree upon: the value at
which a donor has the perception that their donation is buying them
something. I hesitate to suggest that I think Brad and I are in agreement that is
where the line should be drawn. I haven't seen an analysis patterns of
giving for gradated large donations, say $200-$500,$500-$1000, etc. That might
inform us as to an agreeable level to set the threshold. I'm certainly
willing to believe that the line is above $200. I'm a skeptical it is as high
as $25K, but I'm willing to let the evidence speak for itself.
============
Dr. Michael P. McDonald
Associate Professor
George Mason University
4400 University Drive - 3F4
Fairfax, VA 22030-4444
phone: _703-993-4191_ (tel:703-993-4191) (office)
e-mail: _mmcdon at gmu.edu_ (mailto:mmcdon at gmu.edu)
web: _http://elections.gmu.edu_ (http://elections.gmu.edu/)
twitter: @ElectProject
____________________________________
From: Smith, Brad [_BSmith at law.capital.edu_
(mailto:BSmith at law.capital.edu) ]
Sent: Thursday, August 29, 2013 3:21 PM
To: Michael P McDonald; law-election at UCI.edu
Subject: RE: [EL] Paz Harassment
I think you'd want to get into five figures before you can be taken
seriously, at least in a race for federal office. I would like to see it at $25K
or $50K.
I'm willing to entertain a lower number, but when I press on what
threshold might be agreeable to regulators, no one was willing to give a number. Is
it $1,000, $250, or what? What contribution level qualifies as one as a
small donor? We can't have a reasonable discussion about changing policy
without that information.
Ball in your court.
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_ (tel:614.236.6317)
http://law.capital.edu/faculty/bios/bsmith.aspx
____________________________________
From: _law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu_
(mailto:law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu)
[_law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu_ (mailto:law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu) ] on behalf
of Michael P McDonald [_mmcdon at gmu.edu_ (mailto:mmcdon at gmu.edu) ]
Sent: Thursday, August 29, 2013 2:52 PM
To: law-election at UCI.edu
Subject: Re: [EL] Paz Harassment
I'll cut to the chase and start this debate where we last left it off. The
current federal disclosure law is an aggregate of $200/candidate per
election. As I said then, a disclosure threshold is reasonable. Many
conservatives on the list also expressed agreement that disclosure thresholds are
reasonable. I'm willing to entertain a higher number, but when I pressed on
what threshold might be agreeable to conservatives, no one was willing to give
a number. Is it $1,000, $1 billion, or what? What contribution level
qualifies as one as a small donor? We can't have a reasonable discussion about
changing policy without that information.
============
Dr. Michael P. McDonald
Associate Professor
George Mason University
4400 University Drive - 3F4
Fairfax, VA 22030-4444
phone: _703-993-4191_ (tel:703-993-4191) (office)
e-mail: _mmcdon at gmu.edu_ (mailto:mmcdon at gmu.edu)
web: _http://elections.gmu.edu_ (http://elections.gmu.edu/)
twitter: @ElectProject
____________________________________
From: Smith, Brad [_BSmith at law.capital.edu_
(mailto:BSmith at law.capital.edu) ]
Sent: Thursday, August 29, 2013 2:41 PM
To: Michael P McDonald; law-election at UCI.edu
Subject: RE: [EL] Paz Harassment
It is an important "democratic value" that the names and addresses of
smalltime donors such as Holly Paz be made public.
Serious argument, or "straw man"?
I'm going with "straw man," but there may be people who take that argument
seriously.
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_ (tel:614.236.6317)
http://law.capital.edu/faculty/bios/bsmith.aspx
____________________________________
From: _law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu_
(mailto:law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu)
[_law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu_ (mailto:law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu) ] on behalf
of Michael P McDonald [_mmcdon at gmu.edu_ (mailto:mmcdon at gmu.edu) ]
Sent: Thursday, August 29, 2013 2:24 PM
To: law-election at UCI.edu
Subject: Re: [EL] Paz Harassment
Do you guys ever get tired of punching straw men? No one ever said there
was no political harassment and several people gave examples of it, myself
included. The claim was the harassment *for a campaign donation* was a rare
thing, is terrible, but when weighed against other democratic values should
be properly handled through law enforcement. I don't think Ms. Paz is
being harassed for a campaign donation.
============
Dr. Michael P. McDonald
Associate Professor
George Mason University
4400 University Drive - 3F4
Fairfax, VA 22030-4444
phone: _703-993-4191_ (tel:703-993-4191) (office)
e-mail: _mmcdon at gmu.edu_ (mailto:mmcdon at gmu.edu)
web: _http://elections.gmu.edu_ (http://elections.gmu.edu/)
twitter: @ElectProject
____________________________________
From: _law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu_
(mailto:law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu)
[_law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu_ (mailto:law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu) ] on behalf
of Smith, Brad [_BSmith at law.capital.edu_ (mailto:BSmith at law.capital.edu) ]
Sent: Thursday, August 29, 2013 2:03 PM
To: Bill Maurer; law-election at UCI.edu
Subject: Re: [EL] Paz Harassment
Ah, so that explains why the President has urged higher taxes on the
wealthy - he's a captive of his donor base of IRS agents! Thank goodness now we
know. Had I know this 10 months ago, it would certainly have influenced my
vote, and helped me make sense of the campaign.
By the way, Bill - you're not much good at using the databases - I got to
her street address in 25 seconds from the time I started looking, and it
took me that long because I kept hitting the "caps lock" key when I meant to
hit the "tab" key. I'm tempted to publish it here, because, like you say,
it's probably not worth worrying about, and it's important for people to
know. Otherwise, we couldn't be sure it was the right Holly Paz. Besides, most
people making death threats probably don't *really* plan to kill her, they
just want to harass her a bit, and a little harassment for someone is,
well, like Justice Scalia and a few others I could name always say, it's a
small price to pay when the alternative is not knowing which politicians are
beholden to Holly Paz.
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_ (tel:614.236.6317)
http://law.capital.edu/faculty/bios/bsmith.aspx
____________________________________
From: _law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu_
(mailto:law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu)
[_law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu_ (mailto:law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu) ] on behalf
of Bill Maurer [_wmaurer at ij.org_ (mailto:wmaurer at ij.org) ]
Sent: Thursday, August 29, 2013 1:32 PM
To: Rick Hasen; law-election at UCI.edu
Subject: Re: [EL] Paz Harassment
I was wondering how people got Ms. Paz’s private information so they could
engage in the harassment discussed in story, given that I imagine that
most IRS officials are not all that forthcoming about where they live. Then I
did a search for her political donations and—Shazam!—there it was, at
least what state and city she lives in (had she given money in Washington
state, her street address would have been listed too).
However, I’ve been told repeatedly that using this information to harass
people (i) doesn’t happen, (ii) isn’t that bad anyway, and (iii) it’s the
price of political courage, so I guess it’s all okay. Maybe she’ll be able
to get an exemption from reporting now that people have actually
threatened to kill her, but that will depend on whether a judge decides her fear is “
reasonable” in light of the need to “follow the money” right up to where
the yellow police tape starts.
Bill
From: _law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu_
(mailto:law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu)
[mailto:_law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu_ (mailto:law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu) ] On
Behalf Of Rick Hasen
Sent: Wednesday, August 28, 2013 9:42 PM
To: law-election at UCI.edu
Subject: [EL] ELB News and Commentary 8/29/13
_“IRS official who scrutinized conservative groups facing harassment,
attorney says”_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?p=54904)
Posted on _August 28, 2013 9:38 pm_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?p=54904)
by _Rick Hasen_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3)
_WaPo:_
(http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/irs-official-who-scrutinized-conservative-groups-facing-harassment-attorney-says/2013/08/28/50577962-0ff
6-11e3-bdf6-e4fc677d94a1_story.html)
A top Internal Revenue Service official has faced harassment, including
threatening telephone calls and visits to her home, after being singled out
for criticism by Republicans, her lawyer alleges in a letter to lawmakers.
The official, _Holly Paz_
(http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2013/06/17/what-did-top-irs-official-holly-paz-tell-congressional-investigator
s-here-are-the-highlights/) , has been on administrative leave since June
in connection with _the controversy_
(http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/obama-denounces-reported-irs-targeting-of-conservative-groups/2013/05/13/a01
85644-bbdf-11e2-97d4-a479289a31f9_story.html) over how the IRS scrutinized
conservative groups applying for tax-exempt status. Paz was involved in
subjecting some tea party groups to scrutiny and helped conduct an internal
review of the program, but has not been formally accused of wrongdoing.
(http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http://electionlawblog.org/?p=54904&title=“
IRS%20official%20who%20scrutinized%20conservative%20groups%20facing%20harassment,%20attorney%20says”&description=)
Posted in _campaign finance_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10) , _tax
law and election law_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=22)
_Tom Edsall Gets Major Republican Strategists, Top U.S. Political
Scientists to Weigh in On Chances for Republicans to Capture Presidency in 2016_
(http://electionlawblog.org/?p=54902)
Posted on _August 28, 2013 9:34 pm_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?p=54902)
by _Rick Hasen_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3)
_Important perspectives_
(http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/08/28/can-republicans-paint-the-white-house-red/?hp&_r=0) .
(http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http://electionlawblog.org/?p=54902&title=Tom%20Edsall%20Gets%20Major%20Republican%20Strategists,%20Top%20U.S.%
20Political%20Scientists%20to%20Weigh%20in%20On%20Chances%20for%20Republican
s%20to%20Capture%20Presidency%20in%202016&descript)
Posted in _campaigns_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59)
_“Obama: ‘We’re Not Going To Wait For Congress’ To Act On Voting Rights
Act”_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?p=54900)
Posted on _August 28, 2013 9:28 pm_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?p=54900)
by _Rick Hasen_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3)
_Video_ (http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2013/08/2
8/obama_were_not_going_to_wait_for_congress_to_act_on_voting_rights_act.html) from PBS News
Hour interview.
(http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http://electionlawblog.org/?p=54900&title=“Obama:%20‘We’re%20Not%20Going%20To%20Wait%20For%20Congress’
%20To%20Act%20On%20Voting%20Rights%20Act”&description=)
Posted in _Department of Justice_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=26) ,
_The Voting Wars_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60) , _Voting Rights
Act_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=15)
_“N.C. Lawmakers Meet Raucous Crowd at Charlotte Forum”_
(http://electionlawblog.org/?p=54898)
Posted on _August 28, 2013 9:26 pm_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?p=54898)
by _Rick Hasen_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3)
_The backlash begins._
(http://electionlawblog.org/N.C.%20lawmakers%20meet%20raucous%20crowd%20at%20Charlotte%20forum%20%20Read%20more%20here:%20http:/w
ww.charlotteobserver.com/2013/08/28/4271194/nc-lawmakers-meet-raucous-crowd.
html#storylink=cpy)
(http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http://electionlawblog.org/?p=54898&title=“N.C.%20Lawmakers%20Meet%20Raucous%20Crowd%20at%20Charlotte%20Forum”
&description=)
Posted in _The Voting Wars_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60)
_“The True Cost of Free Voter I.D. in Texas”_
(http://electionlawblog.org/?p=54896)
Posted on _August 28, 2013 9:17 pm_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?p=54896)
by _Rick Hasen_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3)
_This interesting item_
(http://texaselectionlaw.wordpress.com/2013/07/25/the-true-cost-of-free-voter-i-d-in-texas/) (and many other interesting
items) appear at the new “Texas Election Law Blog.” The blog is _written by_
(http://texaselectionlaw.wordpress.com/about/) “Joseph Kulhavy – I am a
licensed attorney in the State of Texas, and from October 6, 2004 until July
2, 2013, I was a staff attorney with the Elections Division, Texas Secretary
of State.”
Keep an eye here.
(http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http://electionlawblog.org/?p=54896&title=“The%20True%20Cost%20of%20Free%20Voter%20I.D.%20in%20Texas”
&description=)
Posted in _The Voting Wars_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60) , _voter
id_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=9) , _Voting Rights Act_
(http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=15)
_Other Goings-On in Texas Since The Supreme Court Killed Voting Rights Act
Section 5 Preclearance_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?p=54892)
Posted on _August 28, 2013 9:11 pm_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?p=54892)
by _Rick Hasen_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3)
_In Pasadena, TX:_
(http://txredistricting.org/post/58935159956/pasadena-redistricting-moves-draw-questions) “the City of Pasadena in southeast Harris
County voted 5-4 to place a proposition on the November 2013 ballot that,
if approved by voters, would change the city’s current 8 single member
district system of electing members of the city council to a 6-2 system
featuring two at large members_._
(http://txredistricting.org/post/58935159956/pasadena-redistricting-moves-draw-questions) State Sen. Sylvia Garcia, MALDEF,
and the Houston Chronicle have all expressed concerns that the move would
dilute the voting strength of the city’s rapidly growing Hispanic
population.”
In _Galveston, TX: _
(http://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/houston-texas/houston/article/Galveston-County-may-run-afoul-of-Voting-Rights-4747681.php) “
Galveston County commissioners have slashed the number of justice of the
peace and constable districts a year after the U.S. Justice Department
blocked a similar plan as discriminatory.”
Yeah, the e_nd of preclearance matters_
(http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2013/08/north_carolina_s_speedy_vote_suppression_
tactics_show_exactly_why_the_voting.html) . And for those like _James
Taranto _
(http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324108204579024942693167698.html) who say the Court didn’t really kill Section 5, only the
preclearance provision of section 4, I debunk that claim in my APSA paper (which I’
m presenting tomorrow), _Shelby County and the Illusion of Minimalism._
(http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2291612)
(http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http://electionlawblog.org/?p=54892&title=Other%20Goings-On%20in%20Texas%20Since%20The%20Supreme%20Court%20Kill
ed%20Voting%20Rights%20Act%20Section%205%20Preclearance&description=)
Posted in _Supreme Court_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29) , _Voting
Rights Act_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=15)
_Eric Wang on McCutcheon_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?p=54890)
Posted on _August 28, 2013 9:00 pm_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?p=54890)
by _Rick Hasen_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3)
_Here_
(http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/aug/28/wang-cutting-the-price-tag-off-free-speech/) , in the Washington Times.
(http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http://electionlawblog.org/?p=54890&title=Eric%20Wang%20on%20McCutcheon&description=)
Posted in _campaign finance_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10)
_“Black Republicans try to appropriate Martin Luther King”_
(http://electionlawblog.org/?p=54888)
Posted on _August 28, 2013 8:56 pm_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?p=54888)
by _Rick Hasen_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3)
And apparently they _don’t suppor_
(http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/dana-milbank-black-republicans-try-to-appropriate-martin-luther-king/2013/08/
26/2eb47d18-0e99-11e3-bdf6-e4fc677d94a1_story.html) t fixing the Voting
Rights Act:
A similar response greeted Rep. Jim Sensenbrenner (R-Wis.), who criticized
_the Supreme Court decision_
(http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/supreme-court-stops-use-of-key-part-of-voting-rights-act/2013/06/25/26888528-dda5-1
1e2-b197-f248b21f94c4_story.html) that invalidated part of the Voting
Rights Act and vowed to repair the law so that it is “impervious to another
challenge that will be filed by the usual suspects. I’m with you on that.”
The light applause suggested that most of those in attendance were not with
him.
(http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http://electionlawblog.org/?p=54888&title=“
Black%20Republicans%20try%20to%20appropriate%20Martin%20Luther%20King”&description=)
Posted in _Voting Rights Act_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=15)
_“Sorority offered free drinks to members to vote in Tuscaloosa City Board
of Education race”_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?p=54886)
Posted on _August 28, 2013 8:54 pm_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?p=54886)
by _Rick Hasen_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3)
_The Birmingham News reports. (h/t Political Wire)_
(http://politicalwire.com/archives/2013/08/28/sorority_girls_offered_free_drinks_to_vote.html#.Uh6P
QVbh_mE.twitter)
Offering payments or incentives for voting is illegal in federal
elections. It is also illegal in some states. (It is illegal in all states to pay
someone to vote for or against a candidate or ballot measure.)
More on this in my article, _Vote Buying. _
(http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=257564)
(http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http://electionlawblog.org/?p=54886&title=“
Sorority%20offered%20free%20drinks%20to%20members%20to%20vote%20in%20Tuscaloosa%20City%20Board%20of%20Education%20race”&description=)
Posted in _vote buying_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=43)
_“Colorado: Campaign Finance complaint filed against Morse opponent points
to the hybrid nature of recalls”_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?p=54884)
Posted on _August 28, 2013 10:13 am_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?p=54884)
by _Rick Hasen_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3)
_This item_
(http://recallelections.blogspot.com/2013/08/colorado-campaign-finance-complaint.html) appears at the Recall Elections Blog.
(http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http://electionlawblog.org/?p=54884&title=“
Colorado:%20Campaign%20Finance%20complaint%20filed%20against%20Morse%20opponent%20points%20to%20the%20hybrid%20nature%20of%20recalls”
&description=)
Posted in _campaign finance_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10) ,
_recall elections_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=11)
_“What Today’s Journalists Can Learn From MLK Coverage; In 1963,
newspapers tried to present ‘both sides’ of the civil rights struggle. Modern
reporters should know better — but when it comes to voting rights, they often
make the same mistake.”_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?p=54882)
Posted on _August 28, 2013 10:11 am_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?p=54882)
by _Rick Hasen_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3)
_Andrew Cohen writes_
(http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2013/08/what-todays-journalists-can-learn-from-mlk-coverage/278095/) for The
Atlantic.
(http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http://electionlawblog.org/?p=54882&title=“What%20Today’
s%20Journalists%20Can%20Learn%20From%20MLK%20Coverage;%20In%201963,%20newspapers%20tried%20to%20present%20‘both%20sides’
%20of%20the%20civil%20right)
Posted in _The Voting Wars_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60)
_“Republicans Admit Voter ID Laws Are Aimed at Democratic Voters”_
(http://electionlawblog.org/?p=54880)
Posted on _August 28, 2013 9:17 am_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?p=54880)
by _Rick Hasen_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3)
_Jamelle Bouie writes_
(http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/08/28/republicans-admit-voter-id-laws-are-aimed-at-democratic-voters.html?utm_source=
feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed:+thedailybeast/politics+(The+Da
ily+Beast+-+Politics)) for The Daily Beast.
(http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http://electionlawblog.org/?p=54880&title=“
Republicans%20Admit%20Voter%20ID%20Laws%20Are%20Aimed%20at%20Democratic%20Voters”&description=)
Posted in _The Voting Wars_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60)
_“King’s Deferred ‘Dream’ of Democracy”_
(http://electionlawblog.org/?p=54878)
Posted on _August 28, 2013 8:56 am_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?p=54878)
by _Rick Hasen_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3)
_Janai Nelson writes_
(http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2013/08/27/kings-deferred-dream-of-democracy/) for Reuters Opinion.
(http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http://electionlawblog.org/?p=54878&title=“King’s%20Deferred%20‘Dream’%20of%20Democracy”&description=)
Posted in _Voting Rights Act_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=15)
_An Open Letter to Jonathan Tobin on Voter Fraud Allegations_
(http://electionlawblog.org/?p=54875)
Posted on _August 28, 2013 8:32 am_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?p=54875)
by _Rick Hasen_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3)
Mr Tobin,
Is it possible for you to stop the _bait and switch_
(http://electionlawblog.org/?p=48568) ? No one I know who has studied this issue says there’s no
voter fraud (hence, the misleading title of your piece: _Are You Sure There’
s No Voter Fraud_
(http://www.commentarymagazine.com/2013/08/27/are-you-sure-theres-no-voter-fraud-voter-id-detroi/) ?). It happens, especially with
absentee ballots.
Instead, the claim is that there’s almost no voter impersonation fraud—
the main type of fraud a voter id law would be designed to prevent. For my
book The Voting Wars I tried to find a single instance where an election was
thrown into question _since 1980_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?p=42150) by
such fraud. I _could not find_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?p=19560) a
single example. I found lots of examples of absentee ballot fraud, and
election officials committing fraud. But because impersonation fraud is such a
dumb and inefficient way to steal an election, it is unsurprising that it
doesn’t happen. You offer no such examples in your writing; just innuendo.
And please don’t tell me that this fraud is both widespread and impossible
to detect (to paraphrase Colin Powell’s recent remarks). There’s not a
_single credible academic_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?p=42251) who would
agree. We have some _comparative numbers from News21_
(http://electionlawblog.org/?p=48568) on prosecutions for these kinds of crimes. Absentee ballot
fraud is a real problem. Impersonation fraud is negligible. There’s no
reason to believe that impersonation fraud would be harder to catch. In fact,
because it would involve a lot of people going to polling places claiming
to be someone else, it would be easier to catch.
So spare me the unsubstantiated allegations. And if you are really serious
that voter fraud is a major problem, let’s see you get behind and advocate
for the elimination of no excuse absentee balloting before you attack
phantom targets.
Sincerely,
Rick Hasen
(http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http://electionlawblog.org/?p=54875&title=An%20Open%20Letter%20to%20Jonathan%20Tobin%20on%20Voter%20Fraud%20All
egations&description=)
Posted in _fraudulent fraud squad_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=8) ,
_The Voting Wars_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60)
--
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_ (tel:949.824.3072) - office
_949.824.0495_ (tel:949.824.0495) - fax
_rhasen at law.uci.edu_ (mailto:rhasen at law.uci.edu)
http://www.law.uci.edu/faculty/full-time/hasen/
_http://electionlawblog.org_ (http://electionlawblog.org/)
_______________________________________________
Law-election mailing list
_Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu_
(mailto:Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu)
http://department-lists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/law-election
_______________________________________________
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/20130830/82f3866e/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.png
Type: image/unknown
Size: 1504 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20130830/82f3866e/attachment.bin>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.png
Type: image/unknown
Size: 1504 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20130830/82f3866e/attachment-0001.bin>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.png
Type: image/unknown
Size: 1504 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20130830/82f3866e/attachment-0002.bin>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.png
Type: image/unknown
Size: 1504 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20130830/82f3866e/attachment-0003.bin>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.png
Type: image/unknown
Size: 1504 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20130830/82f3866e/attachment-0004.bin>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.png
Type: image/unknown
Size: 1504 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20130830/82f3866e/attachment-0005.bin>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.png
Type: image/unknown
Size: 1504 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20130830/82f3866e/attachment-0006.bin>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.png
Type: image/unknown
Size: 1504 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20130830/82f3866e/attachment-0007.bin>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.png
Type: image/unknown
Size: 1504 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20130830/82f3866e/attachment-0008.bin>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.png
Type: image/unknown
Size: 1504 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20130830/82f3866e/attachment-0009.bin>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.png
Type: image/unknown
Size: 1504 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20130830/82f3866e/attachment-0010.bin>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.png
Type: image/unknown
Size: 1504 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20130830/82f3866e/attachment-0011.bin>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.png
Type: image/unknown
Size: 1504 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20130830/82f3866e/attachment-0012.bin>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.png
Type: image/unknown
Size: 1504 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20130830/82f3866e/attachment-0013.bin>
View list directory