[EL] ELB News and Commentary 1/9/13
Sean Parnell
sean at impactpolicymanagement.com
Wed Jan 9 08:34:35 PST 2013
Rick is exactly right in regards “How Romney Could Have Won.” I recall
hearing that George W. Bush, asked after the 2000 election was settled in
his favor whether it was fair that he was President even though he received
fewer votes than Al Gore, said something along the lines of: We ran our
campaign under the rules as they were, if the rules instead were that you
had to get the most votes nationally then I would have spent a lot more time
in Texas and Georgia getting out the vote.
I don’t have a link or cite to this, and it could very well be apocryphal.
But the insight attributed to Bush here is pretty obviously correct - had
the rules been different in the past, then the vote totals (and potentially
the outcomes as well) would have been much different. There’s no particular
reason to believe that Al Gore would have won the most votes nationally in
2000 under different rules, just as there’s no particular reason to believe
we wouldn’t have President John Kerry completing his second term this month
if different rules had been in place in 2004.
“How Romney Could Have Won” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=45994>
Posted on <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=45994> January 8, 2013 8:07 am by
Rick Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
National Review
<http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/337076/how-romney-could-have-won-kat
rina-trinko> : “If votes in every state were awarded by congressional
district, President-elect Romney would be planning his inauguration right
now.”
That strikes me as overly simplistic: if voting took place on a district by
district basis, the campaigns would have focused their efforts much
differently.
Sean Parnell
President
Impact Policy Management, LLC
6411 Caleb Court
Alexandria, VA 22315
571-289-1374 (c)
sean at impactpolicymanagement.com
From: law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu
[mailto:law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu] On Behalf Of Rick
Hasen
Sent: Wednesday, January 09, 2013 12:00 AM
To: law-election at UCI.edu
Subject: [EL] ELB News and Commentary 1/9/13
“Is America Governable?” Conference at UT Austin Jan. 24-26
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=46027>
Posted on <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=46027> January 8, 2013 8:54 pm by
Rick Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
I’m really looking forward to participating in this symposium <https://www.
utexas.edu/law/conferences/governable/> organized by Sandy Levinson (see
the schedule <https://www.utexas.edu/law/conferences/governable/sessions/>
and list of participants
<https://www.utexas.edu/law/conferences/governable/participants/> ). Here’
s the general description:
Pundits and political figures across the political spectrum now regularly
refer to the United States government-and to some of its state governments
as well-as “dysfunctional” or even “pathological,” with serious
questions raised as to whether the United States in the 21st century can
even be described as “governable.” No doubt the answer depends on what
one expects from government. If the only test is, for example, continuing
to pay debts owed by the United States or not willfully falling off “fiscal
cliffs,” then perhaps the answer is yes, though one commentator has
compared this standard as the equivalent of a parent proudly proclaiming of
a child that “he has remained out of prison.” Should “governability” be
defined as the ability to confront a host of challenges facing us in the
contemporary world, the answer might be less optimistic.
The weekend after the inauguration of President Barack Obama for his final
term in office is a propitious time for confronting basic questions about
the health of the American political system. The symposium brings together
a remarkable array of scholars across many disciplines, persons with a
variety of high-level political experience, and eminent journalists to
discuss these and other questions of vital relevance to every American (or
person affected by decisions made by American governments).
Political polarization and the law has become one of my main research
interests these days. So far I’ve written Fixing Washington
<http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/126/december12/Book_Review_9410.php>
, 126 Harvard Law Review 550 (2012) (Larry Lessig reply
<http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/126/december12/forum_983.php> ) and
End of the Dialogue? Political Polarization, the Supreme Court, and Congress
<http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2130190> , 86 Southern
California Law Review (forthcoming 2013).
<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%
3Fp%3D46027&title=%E2%80%9CIs%20America%20Governable%3F%E2%80%9D%20Conferenc
e%20at%20UT%20Austin%20Jan.%2024-26&description=> Share
Posted in legislation and legislatures <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=27>
, political parties <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=25> , political
polarization <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=68> , Supreme Court
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29> | Comments Off
“Rhode Island Likely to Lose a House Seat”
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=46024>
Posted on <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=46024> January 8, 2013 8:39 pm by
Rick Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
NYT
<http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/09/us/politics/shrinking-rhode-island-likely
-to-lose-house-seat.html?ref=politics&_r=0> : “It may seem early to be
thinking about the redistribution of House seats that will take place after
the Census in 2020, but one state, Rhode Island, is being forced to because
its population is declining.”
<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%
3Fp%3D46024&title=%E2%80%9CRhode%20Island%20Likely%20to%20Lose%20a%20House%2
0Seat%E2%80%9D&description=> Share
Posted in legislation and legislatures <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=27>
, voting <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=31> | Comments Off
“Blowing the Whistle on the Pay-to-Play Game: Campaign Financing Reform in
New Jersey, 1998-2012″ <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=46021>
Posted on <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=46021> January 8, 2013 7:42 pm by
Rick Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Rachel Jackson of Princeton has written this case study
<http://www.princeton.edu/successfulsocieties/content/superfocusareas/traps/
PP/policynotes/view.xml?id=221> . Here is the abstract:
ABSTRACT: In the late 1990s, civil society reformer Harry Pozycki began a
grassroots campaign to eliminate pay to play, a form of influence buying
whereby businesses donated money to New Jersey political parties and
candidates in exchange for favorable consideration in the awarding of
government contracts. Pay to play had plagued state politics for decades and
raised the cost of public services. Pozycki pushed for enactment of
contracting regulations at the state and local levels that would bar
companies making campaign contributions from being awarded New Jersey
government contracts. Although civic groups did make steady progress in
winning public support for reform, the state legislature failed to pass
regulations because both political parties relied heavily on donations from
contractors to fund their electoral campaigns. But in 2004, outgoing
Governor James E. McGreevey implemented the regulations by executive order,
and his successor, Richard J. Codey, carried forward that momentum, thereby
enacting a state law that made the regulations permanent. The state and
local pay-to-play reforms ultimately required very little administrative
cost and avoided legal complications related to free speech by their
regulation of state contracts rather than of campaign financing. By 2006,
New Jersey had one of the strongest anti-pay-to-play laws in the United
States, and several other states followed its model. Under two successive
governors, New Jersey continued to consider the legislation and make changes
to it through the end of 2012.
<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%
3Fp%3D46021&title=%E2%80%9CBlowing%20the%20Whistle%20on%20the%20Pay-to-Play%
20Game%3A%20Campaign%20Financing%20Reform%20in%20New%20Jersey%2C%201998-2012
%E2%80%B3&description=> Share
Posted in campaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10> , chicanery
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=12> | Comments Off
Forum on “The Voting Wars” at Cardozo law Feb. 11 <http://electionlawblog.
org/?p=46018>
Posted on <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=46018> January 8, 2013 1:16 pm by
Rick Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Cardozo Law School’s Foersheimer Center for Constitutional Democracy is
putting on this event
<http://www.cardozo.yu.edu/MemberContentDisplay.aspx?ccmd=ContentDisplay&ucm
d=UserDisplay&userid=10374&contentid=25758&folderid=340> Feb. 11 at noon:
The Voting Wars: From Florida 2000 to the Next Election Meltdown, a
discussion with the author
2/11/2013
12:00 pm - 1:30 pm
Richard L. Hasen, Chancellor’s Professor of Law and Political Science at
the University of California, Irvine, will discuss and respond to commentary
about his recent book, The Voting Wars: From Florida 2000 to the Next
Election Meltdown. Professor Hasen is a well-known expert in the field of
election law, having co-founded the Election Law Journal and published more
than eighty articles in the field.
Commenting on Professor Hasen’s book will be election law Professors Janai
S. Nelson, from St. John’s University School of Law; Richard Briffault,
from Columbia Law School; and Mark C. Alexander, from Seton Hall Law School.
Professor Alexander is currently running for the New Jersey Senate.
The panel will be moderated by Professor Michelle Adams.
<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%
3Fp%3D46018&title=Forum%20on%20%E2%80%9CThe%20Voting%20Wars%E2%80%9D%20at%20
Cardozo%20law%20Feb.%2011&description=> Share
Posted in election administration <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18> , The
Voting Wars <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60> | Comments Off
“Why ‘gerrymandering’ doesn’t polarise Congress the way we’re told”
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=46015>
Posted on <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=46015> January 8, 2013 11:52 am by
Rick Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Harry Enten writes
<http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/jan/03/gerrymandering-polarise
-congress> for The Guardian.
<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%
3Fp%3D46015&title=%E2%80%9CWhy%20%E2%80%98gerrymandering%E2%80%99%20doesn%E2
%80%99t%20polarise%20Congress%20the%20way%20we%E2%80%99re%20told%E2%80%9D&de
scription=> Share
Posted in legislation and legislatures <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=27>
, political parties <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=25> , political
polarization <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=68> | Comments Off
“DISCLOSE Act Causes Less Disclosure”
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=46013>
Posted on <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=46013> January 8, 2013 11:51 am by
Rick Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Eric Wang has written this Roll Call oped
<http://www.rollcall.com/news/wang_disclose_act_causes_less_disclosure-22051
7-1.html?zkPrintable=true> .
<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%
3Fp%3D46013&title=%E2%80%9CDISCLOSE%20Act%20Causes%20Less%20Disclosure%E2%80
%9D&description=> Share
Posted in campaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10> | Comments
Off
“Curbing Campaign Cash: Henry Ford, Truman Newberry, and the Politics of
Progressive Reform” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=46010>
Posted on <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=46010> January 8, 2013 11:43 am by
Rick Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Paula Baker’s new book <http://www.kansaspress.ku.edu/bakcur.html> :
In the 1918 Michigan race for the U.S. Senate, auto tycoon Henry Ford faced
off against a less well-known industrialist, Truman Newberry. Bent on
countering Ford’s fame and endorsement from President Wilson, Newberry’s
campaign spent an extravagant amount, in fact much more than the law seemed
to allow. This led to
his conviction under the Federal Corrupt Practices Act-but also to his
eventual exoneration in the first campaign finance case to be decided by the
U.S. Supreme Court. In Newberry v. United States the Court ruled that
Congress had no jurisdiction to regulate primary elections, a controversial
decision that allowed southern states to create whites-only primaries and
stalled campaign finance reform.
In the first book in eight decades on this initial test of federal campaign
finance regulations, Paula Baker examines this case study of state and local
campaign spending to describe how politicians found their footing in an
environment created by progressive reform and invented modern campaigns.
Through this seminal election, she pries apart two persistent strains in
American political culture: suspicion of money in politics and suspicion of
politics itself.
In reexamining the story of the 1918 election, Baker takes a broad view of
the history of the political reform to probe some of the foundational
arguments about why money in politics sometimes seems so corrupt. She
follows the controversy as it unfolded-beginning with progressive reform of
politics and the remaking of campaigns-then takes readers through the
shifting scenes, from Detroit to Washington, where the Ford-Newberry
conflict played out.
Baker reexamines the political divisions between conservatives and
progressive reformers to reveal contradictions in how Progressive Era
federal finance regulations worked, with efforts to weaken the power of
political parties and democratize politics actually making campaigns more
expensive. And although the law opened the door to partisan prosecutions for
spending, Congress remained unwilling to craft legislation that actually
curbed spending.
While legislation in recent decades largely has aimed at contributions
rather than spending and the Supreme Court has weighed whether specific
limits abridge free speech, Progressive Era ideas about money and politics
continue to guide campaign finance reform. Curbing Campaign Cash provides a
compelling new account of a key chapter in the history of this issue.
<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%
3Fp%3D46010&title=%E2%80%9CCurbing%20Campaign%20Cash%3A%20%20Henry%20Ford%2C
%20Truman%20Newberry%2C%20and%20the%20Politics%20of%20Progressive%20Reform%E
2%80%9D&description=> Share
Posted in campaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10> | Comments
Off
“The Political Speech of Charities in the Face of Citizens United: A
Defense of Prohibition” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=46007>
Posted on <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=46007> January 8, 2013 11:33 am by
Rick Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Roger Colinvaux has posted this paper
<http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1726407> on SSRN (Case
Western Reserve Law Review). Here is the abstract:
The Supreme Court’s decision in Citizens United v. Federal Election
Commission makes a Supreme Court challenge to the tax law rule that
prohibits charities from involvement in political activities more likely,
and a reexamination of the political speech of charities necessary. Part I
of the Article surveys the history of the political activities prohibition
in order to emphasize that it was not a reactionary policy but quite
considered, and that there are strong State interests supporting it,
including protection of the definition of charity from further dilution.
Part II of the Article analyzes Citizens United in detail and argues that if
the Supreme Court considers a challenge to the political activities
prohibition, Citizens United is distinguishable: the purpose of the
political activities prohibition is not to suppress speech but to define
charity; the legal setting is tax and not campaign finance; unlike the
campaign finance rule, violation of the political activities prohibition is
not criminal; and the political activities prohibition is by nature a rule
associated with a tax status rather than a ban on corporate speech.
Accordingly, the political activities prohibition, unlike the campaign
finance rule, is not a burden on speech and therefore is constitutional.
Part III of the Article discusses cautionary notes to the analysis of Part
II, and explains that even if there is a constitutional defect to the
political activities prohibition, the political activities limitation on the
charitable deduction nonetheless would survive. Regardless of the
constitutionality of the political activities prohibition, Part IV examines
a number of possibilities for a charitable tax status in which political
activity is allowed, and argues that the current rule is the best option.
The Article concludes that the prohibition represents the evolution of a
century of wrestling with the subject of political activity and charity, and
the wisdom that the two are not compatible. Such wisdom should not be
contravened.
<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%
3Fp%3D46007&title=%E2%80%9CThe%20Political%20Speech%20of%20Charities%20in%20
the%20Face%20of%20Citizens%20United%3A%20A%20Defense%20of%20Prohibition%E2%8
0%9D&description=> Share
Posted in campaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10> , tax law
and election law <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=22> | Comments Off
“Everyone’s Fight: The New Plan to Defeat Big Money”
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=46005>
Posted on <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=46005> January 8, 2013 11:27 am by
Rick Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Democracy: A Journal of Ideas, has published this symposium,
<http://www.democracyjournal.org/27/everyones-fight.php> including:
<http://www.democracyjournal.org/27/an-open-letter-to-patriotic-philanthropi
sts.php> An Open Letter to Patriotic Philanthropists by Bill Moyers & Arnold
Hiatt
<http://www.democracyjournal.org/27/curing-philanthropys-blind-spot-one-perc
ent-for-democracy.php> Curing Philanthropy’s Blind Spot: One Percent for
Democracy by Nick Penniman & Ian Simmons
<http://www.democracyjournal.org/27/nonpolitical-no-such-thing-today.php>
Nonpolitical? No Such Thing Today by Wendell Potter
<http://www.democracyjournal.org/27/how-big-money-corrupts-the-budget.php>
How Big Money Corrupts the Budget by Stan Collender
<http://www.democracyjournal.org/27/how-big-money-corrupts-the-economy.php>
How Big Money Corrupts the Economy by Jacob S. Hacker and Nathaniel
Loewentheil
<http://www.democracyjournal.org/27/campaign-finance-remedies-beyond-the-cou
rt.php> Campaign Finance: Remedies Beyond the Court by Trevor Potter and
Bryson B. Morgan
<http://www.democracyjournal.org/27/building-a-permanent-majority-for-reform
.php> Building a Permanent Majority for Reform by Russ Feingold
<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%
3Fp%3D46005&title=%E2%80%9CEveryone%E2%80%99s%20Fight%3A%20The%20New%20Plan%
20to%20Defeat%20Big%20Money%E2%80%9D&description=> Share
Posted in campaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10> | Comments
Off
“Texas redistricting appeal not relisted for this Friday”
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=46002>
Posted on <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=46002> January 8, 2013 11:10 am by
Rick Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Waiting on Shelby County
<http://txredistricting.org/post/40023541668/texas-redistricting-appeal-not-
relisted-for-this-friday> ? It wouldn’t surprise me. It would be a lot of
work to decide the Texas redistricting case, and the case would be moot if
the Supreme Court strikes down section 5 of the VRA first in Shelby County.
<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%
3Fp%3D46002&title=%E2%80%9CTexas%20redistricting%20appeal%20not%20relisted%2
0for%20this%20Friday%E2%80%9D&description=> Share
Posted in Department of Justice <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=26> ,
redistricting <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=6> , Voting Rights Act <http:
//electionlawblog.org/?cat=15> | Comments Off
“Early voting in New York easier said than done”
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=45999>
Posted on <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=45999> January 8, 2013 10:45 am by
Rick Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
See here.
<http://poststar.com/news/local/early-voting-in-new-york-easier-said-than-do
ne/article_4a1c8e4c-594a-11e2-841e-0019bb2963f4.html>
<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%
3Fp%3D45999&title=%E2%80%9CEarly%20voting%20in%20New%20York%20easier%20said%
20than%20done%E2%80%9D&description=> Share
Posted in election administration <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18> |
Comments Off
“Attorney general rivals offer bills to require photo ID to vote”
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=45996>
Posted on <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=45996> January 8, 2013 8:09 am by
Rick Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
News from Virginia: “A year after controversial voter identification
legislation passed the Virginia General Assembly, several Republican
lawmakers are proposing even greater restrictions on the identification
required to cast a ballot, including the requirement of photo
identification. Del. Robert B. Bell, R-Albemarle, will introduce what he
terms “Photo ID - No Exceptions,” a measure that would require voters to
present valid government-issued photo identification in order to vote.
Acquiring the identification would also require proof of U.S. citizenship,
which the Virginia Department of Motor Vehicles requires to obtain
identification.”
<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%
3Fp%3D45996&title=%E2%80%9CAttorney%20general%20rivals%20offer%20bills%20to%
20require%20photo%20ID%20to%20vote%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
“How Romney Could Have Won” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=45994>
Posted on <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=45994> January 8, 2013 8:07 am by
Rick Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
National Review
<http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/337076/how-romney-could-have-won-kat
rina-trinko> : “If votes in every state were awarded by congressional
district, President-elect Romney would be planning his inauguration right
now.”
That strikes me as overly simplistic: if voting took place on a district by
district basis, the campaigns would have focused their efforts much
differently.
<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%
3Fp%3D45994&title=%E2%80%9CHow%20Romney%20Could%20Have%20Won%E2%80%9D&descri
ption=> Share
Posted in campaigns <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59> , electoral college
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=44> | Comments Off
“SEC Moves to Require That Corporations Disclose All Political Spending”
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=45991>
Posted on <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=45991> January 8, 2013 8:01 am by
Rick Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Press release
<http://www.citizen.org/pressroom/pressroomredirect.cfm?ID=3790> : “The
Corporate Reform Coalition <http://corporatereformcoalition.org/> applauds
the Securities and Exchange Commission’s (SEC) commitment to seek
disclosure of all corporate political spending in response to a historic
demonstration of investor demand for such a rule-making. In one of the last
actions of departing SEC Chair Mary Schapiro’s term, the agency announced
that it will consider a proposed rule to require that public companies
provide disclosure to shareholders regarding the use of corporate resources
for political activities. A petition requesting this rulemaking was filed in
2011 by a bipartisan committee of leading law professors.”
<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%
3Fp%3D45991&title=%E2%80%9CSEC%20Moves%20to%20Require%20That%20Corporations%
20Disclose%20All%20Political%20Spending%E2%80%9D&description=> Share
Posted in campaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10> | Comments
Off
“Candidate Challenges City Limits On Funding”
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=45988>
Posted on <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=45988> January 8, 2013 7:59 am by
Rick Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
WSJ
<http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887323482504578228191663513914.h
tml> : “New York mayoral candidate George McDonald on Monday filed a
lawsuit to prevent the city’s Campaign Finance Board from taking
enforcement action against his campaign for accepting contributions in
excess of city limits and a loan that is prohibited by city law.”
<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%
3Fp%3D45988&title=%E2%80%9CCandidate%20Challenges%20City%20Limits%20On%20Fun
ding%E2%80%9D&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
Now available: The Voting Wars: http://amzn.to/y22ZTv
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20130109/d0b46f1e/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.png
Type: image/png
Size: 1504 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20130109/d0b46f1e/attachment.png>
View list directory