[EL] straight ticket voting
Rick Hasen
rhasen at law.uci.edu
Mon Jan 14 14:01:14 PST 2013
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: RE: [EL] ELB News and Commentary 1/14/13
Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2013 21:09:35 +0000
From: Jeffrey Alan Taylor <jtaylor7 at umd.edu>
To: law-election-owner at department-lists.uci.edu
<law-election-owner at department-lists.uci.edu>
I would like to post the following in response to the recent ELB News
and Commentary posting. Would you be able to send the message below to
the Election Law mailing list?
For a recent study on the impact of the straight-ticket voting option, I
would like to call everyone’s attention to Paul Herrnson, Michael J
Hanmer, and Richard G Niemi’s 2012 article, “The Impact of Ballot Type
on Voter Errors,” in the /American Journal of Political Science/,
available at
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1540-5907.2011.00579.x/pdf.
*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] *On Behalf Of
*Rick Hasen
*Sent:* Monday, January 14, 2013 11:06 AM
*To:* law-election at uci.edu <mailto:law-election at uci.edu>
*Subject:* [EL] ELB News and Commentary 1/14/13
Supreme Court Denies Cert. in RNC v. DNC Case
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=46179>
Posted on January 14, 2013 8:04 am <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=46179>
by Rick Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Lyle links <http://www.scotusblog.com/2013/01/gop-request-denied/> to
the order. I had thought this case had a pretty good chance of being
granted, as it raised some very interesting issues about modification of
long standing consent decrees in the context of a meaty political dispute.
The effect of the cert. denial is to keep the consent decree barring the
RNC from engaging in certain “ballot security” measures in place. The
ruling prevents the RNC from engaging in certain activities, such as
organizing poll challengers, etc. But the ruling only applies to the
RNC, and does not stop state parties (such as the Ohio Republican Party)
or non-party groups on the Republican side of things (such as True the
Vote) from engaging in the same activities. So keeping the ruling in
effect likely will not have large consequences in the voting wars.
Share
<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D46179&title=Supreme%20Court%20Denies%20Cert.%20in%20RNC%20v.%20DNC%20Case&description=>
Posted inelection administration <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>,
political parties <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=25>, The Voting Wars
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60> | Comments Off
“NH bill would bring back straight ticket voting; law repealed in
2007″ <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=46175>
Posted on January 14, 2013 7:54 am <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=46175>
by Rick Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
AP reports
<http://www.therepublic.com/view/story/21b96ba24c97479c990a2a0d3e1c97d1/NH--Straight-Ticket>.
MORE
<http://blog.lib.umn.edu/cspg/electionacademy/2013/01/straight-ticket_voting_in_or_o.php?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=twitter&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+HHHElections+%28The+Election+Aacdemy%29>
on straight ticket voting from Doug Chapin.
Share
<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D46175&title=%E2%80%9CNH%20bill%20would%20bring%20back%20straight%20ticket%20voting%3B%20law%20repealed%20in%202007%E2%80%B3&description=>
Posted invoting <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=31> | Comments Off
“Any voter ID law will face legal, GOP obstacles”
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=46173>
Posted on January 14, 2013 7:54 am <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=46173>
by Rick Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
AP <http://www.salisburypost.com/article/20130114/SP01/130119851/>: “But
getting a bill to [incoming North Carolina governor] McCrory won’t be
simple, with some lawmakers insistent on a tough photo ID measure and
others comfortable with some non-photo documents. And while 11 states
required voters to show some form of photo identification in November,
photo ID laws in six other states were in legal limbo for 2012,
according to the National Conference of State Legislatures.”
Share
<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D46173&title=%E2%80%9CAny%20voter%20ID%20law%20will%20face%20legal%2C%20GOP%20obstacles%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted inelection administration <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>,
The Voting Wars <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60>, voter id
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=9> | Comments Off
“Filibuster Reform Won’t Come Easily”
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=46170>
Posted on January 14, 2013 7:50 am <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=46170>
by Rick Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
The /National Law Journal/ reports.
<http://www.law.com/jsp/nlj/PubArticleNLJ.jsp?id=1202584201848&et=editorial&bu=National%20Law%20Journal&cn=20130114nlj&src=EMC-Email&pt=NLJ.com-%20Daily%20Headlines&kw=Filibuster%20reform%20won%27t%20come%20easily&slreturn=20130014104948>
Share
<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D46170&title=%E2%80%9CFilibuster%20Reform%20Won%E2%80%99t%20Come%20Easily%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted inlegislation and legislatures
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=27> | Comments Off
“Bill would tighten some Montana campaign finance laws”
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=46168>
Posted on January 14, 2013 7:49 am <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=46168>
by Rick Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
The Missoulian reports
<http://missoulian.com/news/state-and-regional/montana-legislature/bill-would-tighten-some-montana-campaign-finance-laws/article_6144420a-5c55-11e2-92c6-0019bb2963f4.html>.
Share
<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D46168&title=%E2%80%9CBill%20would%20tighten%20some%20Montana%20campaign%20finance%20laws%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10> |
Comments Off
“Fund-Raising Is Lagging, So Far, for Inaugural Plan”
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=46166>
Posted on January 14, 2013 7:48 am <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=46166>
by Rick Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
NYT reports
<http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/12/us/politics/fund-raising-lags-for-inaugural-events.html?smid=pl-share>.
Share
<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D46166&title=%E2%80%9CFund-Raising%20Is%20Lagging%2C%20So%20Far%2C%20for%20Inaugural%20Plan%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10> |
Comments Off
“Hoboken rent control advocates’ election victory can be contested,
judge rules” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=46164>
Posted on January 14, 2013 7:48 am <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=46164>
by Rick Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Will the post-Sandy rules and election changesaffect an election
outcome?
<http://www.nj.com/hudson/index.ssf/2013/01/hoboken_rent_control_november.html>
Share
<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D46164&title=%E2%80%9CHoboken%20rent%20control%20advocates%E2%80%99%20election%20victory%20can%20be%20contested%2C%20judge%20rules%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted invoting <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=31> | Comments Off
“FEC Deadlock on Berman Super PAC Previews Struggle With Flood of
Cases” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=46162>
Posted on January 14, 2013 7:44 am <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=46162>
by Rick Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Bloomberg BNA
<http://news.bna.com/mpdm/MPDMWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=29086600&vname=mpebulallissues&jd=a0d5z2y7p9&split=0>:
“A deadlock at the Federal Election Commission over whether to
investigate charges of illegal coordination between a Super PAC and a
congressional campaign offered a preview of struggles the agency faces
over how to handle the heavy volume of complaints received during the
2012 campaign. The FEC commissioners deadlocked in a 3-3 vote on whether
to pursue charges that the Super PAC supporting former Rep. Howard
Berman (D-Calif.) coordinated with Berman’s campaign through use of a
common vendor.”
Share
<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D46162&title=%E2%80%9CFEC%20Deadlock%20on%20Berman%20Super%20PAC%20Previews%20Struggle%20With%20Flood%20of%20Cases%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10> |
Comments Off
“New York’s Pension Muscle” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=46160>
Posted on January 14, 2013 7:42 am <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=46160>
by Rick Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
NYT Editorial.
<http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/12/opinion/new-yorks-pension-muscle.html?_r=0>
Share
<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D46160&title=%E2%80%9CNew%20York%E2%80%99s%20Pension%20Muscle%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10> |
Comments Off
9th Circuit Sets Feb. 13 Hearing in Top Two Primary Appeal
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=46158>
Posted on January 14, 2013 7:42 am <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=46158>
by Rick Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
See here.
<http://businessandelectionlaw.com/2013/01/12/federal-appeals-court-sets-hearing-for-top-two-primary/>
Share
<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D46158&title=9th%20Circuit%20Sets%20Feb.%2013%20Hearing%20in%20Top%20Two%20Primary%20Appeal&description=>
Posted inpolitical parties <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=25>,
primaries <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=32> | Comments Off
What’s Next for Corporate Political Disclosure?
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=46156>
Posted on January 14, 2013 7:40 am <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=46156>
by Rick Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
“NACD Directorship
<http://www.nacdonline.org/Resources/Article.cfm?ItemNumber=6262> spoke
with Glass Lewis Chief Policy Officer Robert McCormick on what boards
and shareholders can expect in the upcoming proxy season:
*“**Having just come through a presidential election and the Supreme
Court ruling on Citizens United allowing political expenditures from
corporations (and unions), what’s your expectation for how campaign
finances will be disclosed?*
”
If you had asked me about six months ago, I would have said, “Well, with
the election being over, the fallout from Citizens United may be
dissipating and there will probably be less focus on it.” However, the
more I hear anecdotally, the more I expect there to be at least as much
focus on political contribution activity and ultimately disclosure by
companies.… Some shareholders probably don’t want companies to make any
donations, and this may be a way to try to force that on companies. But
I think most investors are just looking for more information―if this is
an outlay of shareholder money, which it is, what are the returns that
shareholders can expect on it? And are there any reputational risks that
come from this? Which is what Target ran into. So it’s not so much that
shareholders want them to stop, but shareholders want to make sure that
the board is aware of the donations, that there is a structure for board
oversight, and to understand what the returns are for making this
investment―just like any other investment a company would make.”
Share
<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D46156&title=What%E2%80%99s%20Next%20for%20Corporate%20Political%20Disclosure%3F&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10> |
Comments Off
“The House GOP can’t be beat: It’s worse than gerrymandering”
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=46154>
Posted on January 14, 2013 7:38 am <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=46154>
by Rick Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Rob Richie and Devin McCarthy inSalon
<http://www.salon.com/2013/01/13/the_house_gop_cant_be_beat_its_worse_than_gerrymandering/>.
Share
<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D46154&title=%E2%80%9CThe%20House%20GOP%20can%E2%80%99t%20be%20beat%3A%20It%E2%80%99s%20worse%20than%20gerrymandering%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted inredistricting <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=6> | Comments Off
“Votes Behind Bars” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=46152>
Posted on January 14, 2013 7:37 am <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=46152>
by Rick Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Pam Karlan
<http://www.bostonreview.net/BR38.1/pamela_s_karlan_voting_rights_prisoners_convicted_felons.php>:
“The consequences of adopting an essentially negative approach to
political voice extend beyond enhanced protection for the political
deployment of concentrated wealth and beyond new rules, such as voter ID
requirements, that block full participation. The negative approach
underwrites a practice that continues to set the United States apart
among advanced democracies: disenfranchising millions of citizens due to
criminal convictions.”
Share
<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D46152&title=%E2%80%9CVotes%20Behind%20Bars%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>, felon
voting <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=66> | Comments Off
“How Did People Vote and Who Did They Vote For?”
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=46149>
Posted on January 14, 2013 7:34 am <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=46149>
by Rick Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Michael McDonald <http://goo.gl/RbKHT>: “You know who won the 2012
presidential election. What you may not know is which candidate did best
among the different ways that people vote.”
Share
<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D46149&title=%E2%80%9CHow%20Did%20People%20Vote%20and%20Who%20Did%20They%20Vote%20For%3F%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted incampaigns <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59>, voting
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=31> | Comments Off
“Reince Priebus backs electoral vote change, but it’s state’s
decision” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=46147>
Posted on January 14, 2013 7:33 am <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=46147>
by Rick Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Milwaukee Journal Sentinel:
<http://www.jsonline.com/news/statepolitics/reince-priebus-backs-electoral-vote-change-but-its-states-decision-fp8bqc3-186720481.html>
“The head of the Republican National Committee believes Wisconsin and
other battleground states should change the way they allocate their
Electoral College votes, but he said he is not inserting himself into
how states decide to proceed.”
Share
<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D46147&title=%E2%80%9CReince%20Priebus%20backs%20electoral%20vote%20change%2C%20but%20it%E2%80%99s%20state%E2%80%99s%20decision%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted inelectoral college <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=44> |
Comments Off
“Sunday Dialogue: Is a Bigger House Better?”
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=46144>
Posted on January 14, 2013 7:26 am <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=46144>
by Rick Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
NYT Sunday Review topic
<http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/13/opinion/sunday/sunday-dialogue-is-a-bigger-house-better.html?src=recg&pagewanted=all&_r=0>,
including a response from Jack Rakove.
Share
<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D46144&title=%E2%80%9CSunday%20Dialogue%3A%20Is%20a%20Bigger%20House%20Better%3F%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted inlegislation and legislatures
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=27> | Comments Off
“Voter ID Battle Set to Rage Again”
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=46140>
Posted on January 11, 2013 2:51 pm <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=46140>
by Rick Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Politico reports.
<http://www.politico.com/story/2013/01/voter-id-battle-set-to-rage-again-86080.html>
Share
<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D46140&title=%E2%80%9CVoter%20ID%20Battle%20Set%20to%20Rage%20Again%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted inelection administration <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>,
The Voting Wars <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60>, voter id
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=9> | Comments Off
“Discouraging Election Contests” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=46138>
Posted on January 11, 2013 2:50 pm <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=46138>
by Rick Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Josh Douglas has postedthis draft
<http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2199631> on SSRN
(/University of Richmond Law Review/). Here is the abstract:
This brief article offers a few proposals for discouraging losing
candidates from contesting the certified result of an election. Our
system encourages -- or at least does not dissuade -- the filing of
post-election contests in close races. But election contests are often
bad for our democracy, as they can harm the ideals of finality,
certainty, and legitimacy of the election process -- with little
tangible benefit given that most election contests fail, at least at the
federal and statewide level. The article suggests three possible
disincentives to initiating post-election litigation: we could eliminate
any possibility for a candidate to challenge the certified result,
require a large monetary filing fee or the posting of a high bond, or
impose a public stigma on candidates who contest an election and lose.
In the end, the goal of this article is to promote a broader discussion
of the propriety of post-election litigation and what we can do to
curtail it.
Share
<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D46138&title=%E2%80%9CDiscouraging%20Election%20Contests%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted incampaigns <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59>, election
administration <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>, The Voting Wars
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60> | Comments Off
“Elected Judges and Statutory Interpretation”
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=46135>
Posted on January 11, 2013 2:27 pm <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=46135>
by Rick Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Andrew-Aaron P. Bruhl and Ethan Leib have written this article
<https://lawreview.uchicago.edu/sites/lawreview.uchicago.edu/files/uploads/79_4/01%20Bruhl%20%26%20Leib%20ART.pdf>
for the /University of Chicago Law Review/. Here is the abstract:
This Article considers whether differences in methods of judicial
selection should influence how judges approach statutory interpretation.
Courts and scholars have not given this question much sustained
attention, but most would probably embrace the “unified model,”
according to which appointed judges (such as federal judges) and elected
judges (such as many state judges) are supposed to approach statutory
text in identical ways. There is much to be said for the unified
model―and we offer the first systematic defense of it. But the Article
also attempts to make the best case for the more controversial but also
plausible contrary view: that elected judges and appointed judges should
actually interpret statutes differently. We explain and defend that view
and explore some of its implications and limits. We identify categories
of cases in which the argument for interpretive divergence is at its
strongest. We also show how the possibility of interpretive divergence
might illuminate several specific doctrinal problems related to judicial
federalism and judicial review of agency action.
Share
<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D46135&title=%E2%80%9CElected%20Judges%20and%20Statutory%20Interpretation%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted injudicial elections <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=19>,
statutory interpretation <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=21> | Comments
Off
Supreme Court Grants Cert in Six Cases, But No Order in RNC v. DNC
Case <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=46132>
Posted on January 11, 2013 11:57 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=46132> by Rick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Orders list here
<http://www.supremecourt.gov/orders/courtorders/011113zr_6537.pdf>. A
cert. denial in RNC may come Monday, or the case might be put off for a
future conference.
Share
<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D46132&title=Supreme%20Court%20Grants%20Cert%20in%20Six%20Cases%2C%20But%20No%20Order%20in%20RNC%20v.%20DNC%20Case&description=>
Posted inelection administration <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>,
Remedies <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=57> | Comments Off
“Money vs. Money-Plus: Post-Election Reports Reveal Two Different
Campaign Strategies” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=46129>
Posted on January 11, 2013 11:51 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=46129> by Rick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
The Campaign finance Institute has posted this press release
<http://cfinst.org/Press/PReleases/13-01-11/Money_vs_Money-Plus_Post-Election_Reports_Reveal_Two_Different_Campaign_Strategies.aspx>,
with the subhead: “69% of Obama’s Itemized Donors Started with a Small
Contribution; Obama’s Itemized Donors Averaged More than Five
Contributions Each.”
Share
<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D46129&title=%E2%80%9CMoney%20vs.%20Money-Plus%3A%20Post-Election%20Reports%20Reveal%20Two%20Different%20Campaign%20Strategies%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10> |
Comments Off
Another View of the Section 5 Voting Rights Case
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=46126>
Posted on January 11, 2013 9:47 am <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=46126>
by Rick Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
A longtime reader of the blog writes of my “What’s Lost If the Voting
Rights Falls”
<http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2013/01/voting_rights_act_what_s_lost_if_the_supreme_court_kills_it.html>
piece at /Slate/:
I assume you don’t write the headlines, but can we dispense with the
“strike down the Voting Rights Act” phraseology [Google it!] that has
been rampant regarding the Shelby County case? (..or in this
case…”…Voting Rights Act Falls?”) You accurately explain that in fact,
changes to only one provision are being contemplated, hence the idea
that VRA will “fall” is borderline yellow journalism. And to that end,
you never mention Section 2 at all, let alone explain that Section 2 is
the primary means to address voting inequities, and that it will remain
as the core component of VRA enforcement. I suppose “Supreme Court May
Require Congress to Update Voting Formula” doesn’t sell newspapers. Yes,
I realize your article was addressing the “bargaining chip” aspect of
Section 5, but repeat it enough, and “strike down the Voting Rights Act”
will be the headline when SCOTUS rules. That only serves to rile up the
masses, but for what purpose? Frankly, given that SCOTUS has already
upheld Section 5 as a valid exercise of Congressional power when
warranted by specific evidence in limited geographical areas, I’ll
predict that Section 5, per se, is upheld, and Section 4 will be
rejected. You can hardly object to the idea of requiring Congress to
update the coverage formula since you have supported this idea in the
past. You have said that doing so is a “political problem”, but that’s
with your thumb on the scale on the side of those who want the existing
states to remain covered. If there were truly an objective formula that
could root out evidence of significant government sponsored racial
discrimination, who would oppose it?
Despite hanging your hat on the finding against Texas (which, as you are
well aware, has not had appellate review), Section 5 proponents
consistently fail to acknowledge a fundamental difference regarding
redistricting that has occurred since the 60s and 70s: in the South of
those days, it was the white Democrats discriminating against the
minority Democrats. Hence, there could be no argument that redistricting
changes were driven by party preference. They were all in the same
party!! That is no longer true, and it is objectively apparent that GOP
dominated states attempt to do “political” redistricting to discriminate
against Democrats (legally, as the Dems do likewise in MD, IL, etc.),
not against minorities in general. After all, who was the biggest target
of the GOP in the 2012 redistricting in Texas? Lloyd Doggett ― a white
Democrat.
I’m writing something broader which will respond to these points on the
merits, but I should point out that I am responsible for that headline
and stand by it (though more accurate to have said “What’s Lost if A Key
Part of the Voting Rights Act Falls?”).
Share
<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D46126&title=Another%20View%20of%20the%20Section%205%20Voting%20Rights%20Case&description=>
Posted inVoting Rights Act <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=15> |
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 <mailto: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/20130114/162f9793/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/png
Size: 1504 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20130114/162f9793/attachment.png>
View list directory