[EL] ELB News and Commentary 1/16/13

Rick Hasen rhasen at law.uci.edu
Wed Jan 16 07:41:27 PST 2013


    The Weak Anti-Fraud Argument Against Universal Voter Registration
    <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=46257>

Posted on January 16, 2013 7:40 am <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=46257> 
by Rick Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

One of the key recommendations I make in /The Voting Wars 
<http://www.amazon.com/Voting-Wars-Florida-Election-Meltdown/dp/0300182031/ref=sr_1_cc_2?s=aps&ie=UTF8&qid=1329286945&sr=1-2-catcorr>/to 
fix the problems with our election system is universal voter 
registration conducted by the federal government combined with a 
national voter id card.  The i.d. card would assign each potential voter 
a unique voter id number, which would stay with the voter her entire 
life as she moves across the U.S.  The id card would give voters the 
option of providing a thumb print, so that if a voter ever forgets or 
loses the card she can use a thumb print for voting.  States would still 
get to set qualifications for voting: determining, for example, whether 
a person who registers to vote in a state is really a resident, is 
entitled to vote under rules barring felon voting, etc.

I have no illusions that this plan is going to be adopted any time 
soon.  Indeed, I often joke that the plan is one that unites Democrats 
and Republicans....against the plan. Republicans tend not to like the 
universal voter id aspect (which is why election reformers speak in 
terms of "modernization" of voter registration) and Democrats don't like 
the i.d. portion.

But a key benefit of the dual system I propose is that it prevents a 
number of different types of fraud, including voter registration fraud 
(no more third party voter registration groups) and double voting 
between states.  National voter id also would prevent voter 
impersonation fraud (if this were a real problem---which it is not).  It 
would also prevent non-citizen voting, because the federal government 
would verify citizenship before putting someone onto the national voter 
registration rolls.

So imagine my surprise that a group of conservative Secretaries of State 
are getting together 
<http://www.heritage.org/events/2013/01/mandatory-voter-registration>to 
attack the proposal for universal voter registration on grounds that it 
would promote fraud.

Let's be clear. There are three reasons why Republican secretaries of 
state would really oppose this effort.

1. A turf war/federalism.  State and local officials believe they should 
have the right to run federal elections, even though the Constitution 
gives Congress the power to set national rules for federal elections.

2. Federal government incompetence. State and local officials may think 
they can do a better job running elections. The track record on the 
state and local level, as I detail in my book, leaves me doubting this 
claim.

3. Expansion of the electorate could benefit Democrats. Whether it is 
true or not, there's a belief that nonvoters tend to skew Democratic, 
and expanding the rolls to make it easier to vote could help Democrats.  
It empowers people to vote who did not take the time to vote or who did 
not do things right to register. As a matter of both philosophy 
<http://www.sacbee.com/2012/11/03/4958430/republicans-have-pursued-election.html#storylink=misearch> 
and partisanship, Republicans may well oppose expanding the electorate 
in this way.

Share 
<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D46257&title=The%20Weak%20Anti-Fraud%20Argument%20Against%20Universal%20Voter%20Registration&description=>
Posted in election administration <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>, 
The Voting Wars <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60>, voter registration 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=37> | Comments Off


    "Agents Ordered Not to Arrest Menendez Intern"
    <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=46254>

Posted on January 16, 2013 7:23 am <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=46254> 
by Rick Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

This story 
<http://politicalwire.com/archives/2013/01/16/agents_ordered_not_to_arrest_menendez_intern.html> 
will likely get some attention.

Share 
<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D46254&title=%E2%80%9CAgents%20Ordered%20Not%20to%20Arrest%20Menendez%20Intern%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted in Uncategorized <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1> | Comments Off


    "Court opened door to $933 million in new election spending"
    <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=46251>

Posted on January 16, 2013 7:17 am <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=46251> 
by Rick Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Center for Public Integrity 
<http://www.publicintegrity.org/2013/01/16/12027/court-opened-door-933-million-new-election-spending>:

    The Supreme Court's /Citizens United /decision unleashed nearly $1
    billion in new political spending in the 2012 election, with media
    outlets and a small number of political consulting firms raking in
    the bulk of the proceeds.

    Spending records released by the Federal Election Commission show
    that throughout the 2012 election, corporations, unions and
    individuals that could take advantage of the high court's ruling
    were responsible for about $933 million of the estimated $6 billion
    <http://www.opensecrets.org/news/2012/10/2012-election-spending-will-reach-6.html>
    spent during the contest.

    Nearly two-thirds of the new money --- about $611 million --- went
    to 10 political consulting firms, according to a Center for Public
    Integrity analysis. All but one of the top 10 recipients bought
    advertising in various media markets on behalf of super PACs and
    nonprofits. Eighty-nine percent of the expenditures made to the top
    10 went to spots attacking candidates, the data show.

Share 
<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D46251&title=%E2%80%9CCourt%20opened%20door%20to%20%24933%20million%20in%20new%20election%20spending%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted in campaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>, tax law 
and election law <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=22> | Comments Off


    "Watchdog Groups Call on IRS to Investigate American Tradition
    Partnership; Cite Its Reported Submission of Apparent False
    Information to the IRS Regarding Its Application for Tax-exempt
    Status" <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=46249>

Posted on January 16, 2013 7:16 am <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=46249> 
by Rick Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

The following press release arrived via email:

**

In a letter sent today to the IRS 
<http://www.democracy21.org/vertical/sites/%7B3D66FAFE-2697-446F-BB39-85FBBBA57812%7D/uploads/IRS_LETTER_WESTERN_TRADITION_PARTNERSHIP_1_15_13.pdf>, 
Democracy 21, joined by the Campaign Legal Center, called on the agency 
to investigate whether American Tradition Partnership (ATP), formerly 
known as Western Tradition Partnership (WTP), obtained its section 
501(c)(4) tax-exempt status based on false information submitted to the IRS.

According to the letter from the watchdog groups:

According to published reports, the apparently false information 
included misrepresentations made to the IRS by WRP in urging expedited 
approval of its application and misrepresentations in its application to 
the IRS, asserting that it would not participate or intervene in elections.

According to Democracy 21 President Fred Wertheimer:

This is yet another case where a group apparently has claimed status as 
a section 501(c)(4) "social welfare" organization in order to keep 
secret from the American people the donors financing its campaign 
activities. According to news reports published by /ProPublica /and 
/Frontline,/ American Tradition Partnership (ATP) appears to have 
knowingly misled the IRS about its campaign activities and knowingly 
submitted false information to the IRS to obtain its tax-exempt status 
on an expedited basis.

The IRS should promptly investigate and take appropriate action against 
ATP, whose apparent brazen abuse of the tax laws is a powerful signal of 
the need for the IRS to act against groups improperly claiming 
tax-exempt status and to adopt new regulations governing eligibility for 
status as a 501(c)(4) tax-exempt organization.

According to the letter:

WTP submitted its Form 1024, Application for Recognition of Exemption 
under Section 501(a), to the IRS on July 21, 2008. A copy of the 
application is publicly available.

According to a news report by /ProPublica /and /Frontline,/ WTP 
submitted a letter to the IRS on September 29, 2008, while their IRS 
application was still pending, requesting that the IRS expedite 
processing of its application. According to the /ProPublica/Frontline 
/report/,/ the request for expedition stated that Jacob Jabs, who was 
described as the organization's "primary donor," had promised to make a 
$300,000 donation to the group but only if WTP received recognition from 
the IRS for tax-exempt status by September 29, 2008. /Id./

The letter from the watchdog groups continued:

The letter further said, however, that Jabs had extended his deadline, 
and said he "will give us the grant if we receive our tax exempt status 
by October 15, 2008.  If we have not received our tax exempt status by 
this date, Mr. Jabs has assured us that he will no longer contribute 
said amount and instead will direct his donation to other 
organizations." /Id./

According to the /ProPublica/Frontline/ report, the IRS responded to WTP 
the next day, September 30, 2008, and said that the request for 
expedited consideration would be granted.  Tax-exempt status as a 
section 501(c)(4) "social welfare" organization was granted to WTP two 
days later on October 2, 2008/. Id./

According to a report published by /ProPublica /and /Frontline/ on 
October 30 2012, Jabs has subsequently said "he had never pledged money 
to the group, and never even been in contract with them until press 
stories appeared naming him."  The /ProPublica/Frontline /story states:

"I think they just grabbed my name out of a hat to forward their 
agenda," Jabs told us.  "I know nothing about the group, never heard of 
them, never have heard of them until the last few days, and I did not, 
absolutely did not, commit $300,000 to start this company." (Jabs also 
spoke with the Bozeman Daily Chronicle, again denying any connection to 
the group.)

According to /ProPublica /and/Frontline, /a subsequent release of WTP's 
bank records as a result of state court litigation in Montana "show[ed] 
no money came in from the man WTP claimed as its primary donor when it 
asked the IRS to expedite the approval of its application."

According to the letter:

Assuming the /ProPublica/Frontline/ reports are correct, the IRS agreed 
to expedited processing of WTP's application for tax-exempt status that 
resulted in its approval, based on apparent material fraudulent 
information that WTP provided to the IRS and that WTP had to know was false.

On these grounds alone, the section 501(c)(4) tax-exempt status of WTP 
should be revoked and the IRS should consider what, if any, other 
actions it should take against WTP.  The IRS should also forward any 
relevant information in this case to the Department of Justice so the 
Department can determine what, if any, action it should take against WTP 
for apparently submitting material false information to a federal agency 
in order to obtain action by the agency.

Furthermore, according to its initial application for tax-exempt status, 
WTP stated that "[t]he organization will not directly or indirectly 
participate or intervene on behalf of or in opposition to a candidate 
for public office." Application at 2.  It reiterated its intention to 
engage in no campaign related activities in response to a separate 
question on page 4 of the application.

However, according to a report by /ProPublica/ and /Frontline/ published 
on October 22, 2012, shortly before WTP submitted its IRS application in 
2008, the organization "and a related political committee sent out 
fliers weighing in on candidates for Montana state office" in the days 
before the Republican primary in the state.

/ProPublica /and /Frontline /reported that "the group sponsored mailers 
that criticized politicians in the 2008 Republican primary." According 
to /ProPublica/Frontline, /WTP has continued to participate or intervene 
in campaigns, in contravention of the representation it made to the IRS 
that it would engage in no campaign activity:

Western Tradition Partnership is now known as American Tradition 
Partnership.  So far this election season [in 2012], the group has 
advocated for candidates in Montana's Republican primary, putting out a 
press release announcing that 12 of those candidates won.

The letter continues:

Furthermore, according to /ProPublica/ and /Frontline/, WTP "raised 
money specifically by telling people and corporations that they could 
give unlimited amounts in secret" to be spent to influence elections:

"The only thing we plan on reporting is our success to contributors like 
you who can see the benefits of a program like this," said one document, 
a 2010 election briefing to read to potential donors. "You can just sit 
back on election night and see what a difference you've made."

The reported campaign activities by WTP and its successor, ATP, raise 
serious questions about whether WTP knowingly misrepresented its planned 
activities to the IRS in its initial application for tax-exempt status 
and whether it continued this misrepresentation over the years.  This 
matter also warrants an investigation by the IRS to determine whether 
the organization's tax-exempt status should be revoked on these grounds 
and what, if any, other action should be taken against the organization.

The /ProPublica/Frontline/ reports also raise serious questions about 
whether WTP has as its primary purpose intervening and participating in 
campaigns and is improperly claiming tax-exempt status in order to serve 
as a vehicle for secret contributions to be injected into state and 
federal elections. The IRS should also investigate this matter to 
determine what, if any, action should be taken against WTP based on 
these circumstances.

The letter concludes:

The IRS is responsible for enforcing the tax laws and preventing the tax 
laws from being misused to keep secret from the American people the 
sources of money spent to influence elections.

We strongly urge the IRS to investigate WTP/ATP and to take appropriate 
action against the organization for any violations of the tax laws and 
other federal laws that may have occurred.

To view the letter: click here. 
<http://www.democracy21.org/vertical/sites/%7B3D66FAFE-2697-446F-BB39-85FBBBA57812%7D/uploads/IRS_LETTER_WESTERN_TRADITION_PARTNERSHIP_1_15_13.pdf>

Share 
<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D46249&title=%E2%80%9CWatchdog%20Groups%20Call%20on%20IRS%20to%20Investigate%20American%20Tradition%20Partnership%3B%20Cite%20Its%20Reported%20Submission%20of%20Apparent%20False%20Information%20to%20the%20IRS%20Regarding%20Its%20Application%20for%20Tax-exempt%20Status%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted in campaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>, tax law 
and election law <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=22> | Comments Off


    "Election Law on Senate Democrats' Agenda"
    <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=46247>

Posted on January 16, 2013 7:14 am <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=46247> 
by Rick Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

News 
<http://www.dispatch.com/content/stories/local/2013/01/16/election-law-on-senate-dems-agenda.html> 
from Ohio.

Share 
<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D46247&title=%E2%80%9CElection%20Law%20on%20Senate%20Democrats%E2%80%99%20Agenda%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted in election administration <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>, 
The Voting Wars <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60> | Comments Off


    "Is the Supreme Court any less partisan than the two other branches
    of government?" <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=46239>

Posted on January 15, 2013 9:02 pm <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=46239> 
by Rick Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Zocalo asks 
<http://www.zocalopublicsquare.org/2013/01/15/supreme-partisans/ideas/up-for-discussion/>.  
Here are the answers from a number of experts:

Tom S. Clark 
<http://www.zocalopublicsquare.org/2013/01/15/supreme-partisans/ideas/up-for-discussion/#Tom+S.+Clark>
It depends on how you define partisan

<http://www.zocalopublicsquare.org/2013/01/15/supreme-partisans/ideas/up-for-discussion/#Tom+S.+Clark> 


Mickey Edwards 
<http://www.zocalopublicsquare.org/2013/01/15/supreme-partisans/ideas/up-for-discussion/#Mickey+Edwards>

It's the partisanship of the U.S. Senate, not the judges it confirms, 
that we should focus on 
<http://www.zocalopublicsquare.org/2013/01/15/supreme-partisans/ideas/up-for-discussion/#Mickey+Edwards>

Ilya Somin

Yes, the court is still less partisan

<http://www.zocalopublicsquare.org/2013/01/15/supreme-partisans/ideas/up-for-discussion/#Ilya+Somin> 


Sahil Kapur 
<http://www.zocalopublicsquare.org/2013/01/15/supreme-partisans/ideas/up-for-discussion/#Sahil+Kapur>

The Court has always been political

<http://www.zocalopublicsquare.org/2013/01/15/supreme-partisans/ideas/up-for-discussion/#Sahil+Kapur> 


<http://www.zocalopublicsquare.org/2013/01/15/supreme-partisans/ideas/up-for-discussion/#Sahil+Kapur>Timothy 
R. Johnson 
<http://www.zocalopublicsquare.org/2013/01/15/supreme-partisans/ideas/up-for-discussion/#Timothy+R.+Johnson>

The justices are less constrained by partisanship---and freer to 
compromise 
<http://www.zocalopublicsquare.org/2013/01/15/supreme-partisans/ideas/up-for-discussion/#Timothy+R.+Johnson>
Share 
<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D46239&title=%E2%80%9CIs%20the%20Supreme%20Court%20any%20less%20partisan%20than%20the%20two%20other%20branches%20of%20government%3F%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted in political parties <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=25>, 
political polarization <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=68>, Supreme 
Court <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29> | Comments Off


    "Meeting with Scott leaves black lawmakers frustrated"
    <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=46236>

Posted on January 15, 2013 8:44 pm <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=46236> 
by Rick Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

News 
<http://www.news4jax.com/news/Meeting-with-Scott-leaves-black-lawmakers-frustrated/-/475880/18145488/-/96t61o/-/index.html> 
from Fla.

Share 
<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D46236&title=%E2%80%9CMeeting%20with%20Scott%20leaves%20black%20lawmakers%20frustrated%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted in Uncategorized <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1> | Comments Off


    "Va. House subcommittee rejects 1 absentee voting bill, backs
    another" <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=46233>

Posted on January 15, 2013 8:37 pm <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=46233> 
by Rick Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Times-Dispatch 
<http://www.timesdispatch.com/news/latest-news/va-house-subcommittee-rejects-absentee-voting-bill-backs-another/article_2647499c-5f19-11e2-a331-001a4bcf6878.html>: 
Va. voters over 65 may be able to vote absentee without an excuse.

Share 
<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D46233&title=%E2%80%9CVa.%20House%20subcommittee%20rejects%201%20absentee%20voting%20bill%2C%20backs%20another%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted in absentee ballots <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=53>, 
election administration <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18> | Comments Off


    "The Phenomenology of Gridlock" <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=46229>

Posted on January 15, 2013 10:51 am 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=46229> by Rick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Josh Chafetz has posted this draft 
<http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2200478> on SSRN 
(/Notre Dame Law Review/).  Here is the abstract:

    Assertions that our legislative process is gridlocked --- perhaps
    even "hopelessly" so --- are endemic. So many more of our problems
    would be fixed, the thinking goes, if only our political
    institutions were functioning properly. The hunt for the causes of
    gridlock is therefore afoot.

    This brief Essay, written for the Notre Dame Law Review's 2012 "The
    American Congress: Legal Implications of Gridlock" Symposium, argues
    that this hunt is fundamentally misguided, because gridlock is not a
    phenomenon. Rather, gridlock is the absence of phenomena; it is the
    absence, that is, of legislative action. Rather than asking why we
    experience gridlock, we should be asking why and how legislative
    action occurs. We should expect to see legislative action, the Essay
    argues, when there is sufficient public consensus for a specific
    course of action. "Sufficient," in this context, is determined with
    reference to our specific constitutional structure. And "public
    consensus" should be understood dialogically, as a function of
    political actors' engagements in the public sphere. In short, before
    we declare legislative inaction to be evidence of dysfunction, we
    should first be sure that the conditions sufficient to trigger
    legislative action in our constitutional regime have been satisfied.
    Part I spells out these conditions in greater detail.

    Once we understand what is constitutionally necessary to motivate
    congressional action, we are then better able to identify true
    dysfunctionalities. Part II gives an example of a procedural
    mechanism that does, in fact, prevent legislative action even when
    the constitutional conditions for action are met: the Senate
    filibuster. Attentiveness to the ways in which the filibuster plays
    out in the public sphere --- specifically, the high degree of public
    support for efforts to circumvent the filibuster --- demonstrate its
    democratic dysfunctionality.

    The conclusion tentatively suggests a few reasons that observers may
    be perceiving unusually high levels of gridlock today and considers
    which of these explanations, if correct, would indicate actual
    institutional dysfunction.

Looking forward to this!

Share 
<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D46229&title=%E2%80%9CThe%20Phenomenology%20of%20Gridlock%E2%80%9D&description=>
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


    "Christie won't seek state matching funds for primary election"
    <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=46227>

Posted on January 15, 2013 10:49 am 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=46227> by Rick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

News 
<http://blog.northjersey.com/thepoliticalstate/6257/christie-wont-seek-state-matching-funds-for-primary-election/> 
from New Jersey.

Share 
<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D46227&title=%E2%80%9CChristie%20won%E2%80%99t%20seek%20state%20matching%20funds%20for%20primary%20election%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted in campaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10> | 
Comments Off


    "Rigging Democracy: Why the people won't pick the next president or
    Congress---unless we act now." <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=46225>

Posted on January 15, 2013 10:48 am 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=46225> by Rick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Rob Richie cover story 
<http://www.inthesetimes.com/article/14410/rigging_democracy/> for /In 
These Times./

Share 
<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D46225&title=%E2%80%9CRigging%20Democracy%3A%20%20Why%20the%20people%20won%E2%80%99t%20pick%20the%20next%20president%20or%20Congress%E2%80%94unless%20we%20act%20now.%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted in campaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>, 
electoral college <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=44>, redistricting 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=6>, The Voting Wars 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60> | Comments Off


    "New York State Attorney General Proposes Regulations to Require
    Disclosure of Electioneering Activities by Nonprofits"
    <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=46222>

Posted on January 15, 2013 10:46 am 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=46222> by Rick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Public Citizen press release. 
<http://www.citizen.org/pressroom/pressroomredirect.cfm?ID=3796>

Share 
<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D46222&title=%E2%80%9CNew%20York%20State%20Attorney%20General%20Proposes%20Regulations%20to%20Require%20Disclosure%20of%20Electioneering%20Activities%20by%20Nonprofits%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted in campaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>, tax law 
and election law <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=22> | Comments Off


    "NRA fights campaign finance reform, disclosure"
    <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=46220>

Posted on January 15, 2013 10:44 am 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=46220> by Rick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Sunlight reports 
<http://reporting.sunlightfoundation.com/2013/nra-fights-campaign-finance-reform-disclosure/>.

Share 
<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D46220&title=%E2%80%9CNRA%20fights%20campaign%20finance%20reform%2C%20disclosure%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted in campaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10> | 
Comments Off


    "The Gaping Hole in the Conservative Case Against the Voting Rights
    Act" <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=46218>

Posted on January 15, 2013 10:44 am 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=46218> by Rick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

David Gans blogs. 
<http://theusconstitution.org/text-history/1770/gaping-hole-conservative-case-against-voting-rights-act>

<http://theusconstitution.org/text-history/1770/gaping-hole-conservative-case-against-voting-rights-act> 

Share 
<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D46218&title=%E2%80%9CThe%20Gaping%20Hole%20in%20the%20Conservative%20Case%20Against%20the%20Voting%20Rights%20Act%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted in Supreme Court <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>, Voting 
Rights Act <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=15> | Comments Off


    "Faulkner's Voting Rights Act: The Sound and Fury of Section Five"
    <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=46215>

Posted on January 15, 2013 10:41 am 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=46215> by Rick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Joel Heller 
<http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1932504>has posted 
this draft on SSRN /(Hofstra Law Review/).  Here is the abstract:

    In its most recent examination of the Voting Rights Act, the Supreme
    Court told a story about the South. Although the Court ultimately
    did not rule on the continued constitutionality of § 5, the VRA
    provision that singles out certain jurisdictions with a history of
    racially discriminatory voting practices for additional regulation,
    its opinion expressed significant doubt that the measure was still
    justified. In this tale of progress and redemption, the Court
    concluded that "things have changed in the South."

    One body of commentary that was not considered in this story was the
    region's literature. Yet many of these works, in particular the
    novels of William Faulkner, address some of the same thematic and
    sociological concerns that animate § 5. Specifically, Faulkner's
    novels explore the power of memory in the South and the ongoing
    influence of the past on present actions and attitudes. In his
    depiction of the burden of memory, Faulkner suggests a distinct role
    for § 5 that policymakers and commentators should consider in the
    debate over its continued necessity. Rather than punishing the sons
    for the sins of the fathers, the provision can be seen as targeting
    the independent concern of a past-haunted society and the uncertain
    results which the unchecked power of memory can produce in the present.

    This Article explores how Faulkner's novels can contribute to a
    better understanding of the role § 5 serves in the modern South and
    thus inform the debate over whether the law remains constitutional.
    In doing so, it also considers the role literature can play in legal
    analysis beyond the uses typically identified by the law and
    literature movement.

Share 
<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D46215&title=%E2%80%9CFaulkner%E2%80%99s%20Voting%20Rights%20Act%3A%20The%20Sound%20and%20Fury%20of%20Section%20Five%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted in Voting Rights Act <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=15> | 
Comments Off


    "The GOP's big electoral vote gambit, explained"
    <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=46213>

Posted on January 15, 2013 10:39 am 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=46213> by Rick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

The Fix reports 
<http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2013/01/15/the-gops-big-electoral-vote-gambit-explained/>.

Share 
<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D46213&title=%E2%80%9CThe%20GOP%E2%80%99s%20big%20electoral%20vote%20gambit%2C%20explained%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted in electoral college <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=44> | 
Comments Off


    "Include Me Out: Arizona Seeks to Reduce Provisional Ballots by
    Cleaning Up Permanent Early Voting Lists"
    <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=46211>

Posted on January 15, 2013 10:38 am 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=46211> by Rick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

A ChapinBlog 
<http://blog.lib.umn.edu/cspg/electionacademy/2013/01/include_me_out_arizona_seeks_t.php>.

Share 
<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D46211&title=%E2%80%9CInclude%20Me%20Out%3A%20Arizona%20Seeks%20to%20Reduce%20Provisional%20Ballots%20by%20Cleaning%20Up%20Permanent%20Early%20Voting%20Lists%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted in election administration <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>, 
provisional ballots <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=67> | Comments Off


    "EXCLUSIVE: Vote fraud charges expected"
    <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=46209>

Posted on January 15, 2013 10:36 am 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=46209> by Rick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Cincinnati Enquirer 
<http://news.cincinnati.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/201301142155/NEWS0106/301150012&nclick_check=1>: 
"Hamilton County officials are prepared to refer five cases of potential 
vote fraud in November's election to prosecutors and have ordered 
further investigation into about two dozen other voters' actions that 
also could result in criminal charges."

The five incidents appear to involve double voting but not voter 
impersonation, but it is hard to tell for sure from the article.

UPDATE: I missed this near the bottom of the article:

"[A]n Avondale woman voted absentee at the Board of Elections office 
Nov. 1, but her signature also appeared in her precinct's poll book, 
indicating an Election Day vote in her name also was cast. The poll book 
signature, however, does not match her signature on other documents, and 
the woman denied voting at her precinct polling place."

This could be a case of impersonation fraud---I will follow up to see if 
more details become available, and if in fact the person signing in 
signed the name of this voter or it was a case of someone simply signing 
the wrong line of the poll book.

Share 
<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D46209&title=%E2%80%9CEXCLUSIVE%3A%20Vote%20fraud%20charges%20expected%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted in chicanery <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=12>, election 
administration <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>, The Voting Wars 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60> | Comments Off


    "Reid Expresses Support for More Modest Filibuster Reforms"
    <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=46207>

Posted on January 15, 2013 10:33 am 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=46207> by Rick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

TPM reports. 
<http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2013/01/harry-reid-filibuster-plan.php?ref=fpblg>

<http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2013/01/harry-reid-filibuster-plan.php?ref=fpblg> 

Share 
<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D46207&title=%E2%80%9CReid%20Expresses%20Support%20for%20More%20Modest%20Filibuster%20Reforms%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted in legislation and legislatures 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=27> | Comments Off


    "Ex-IRS Director on Dark-Money Groups: 'Investigate Them and
    Prosecute Them'" <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=46204>

Posted on January 14, 2013 7:54 pm <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=46204> 
by Rick Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Mother Jones reports. 
<http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2013/01/irs-crossroads-gps-dark-money-karl-rove-investigate>

<http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2013/01/irs-crossroads-gps-dark-money-karl-rove-investigate> 

Share 
<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D46204&title=%E2%80%9CEx-IRS%20Director%20on%20Dark-Money%20Groups%3A%20%E2%80%98Investigate%20Them%20and%20Prosecute%20Them%E2%80%99%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted in campaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>, 
campaigns <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59>, tax law and election law 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=22> | 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/20130116/9920770d/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: share_save_171_16.png
Type: image/png
Size: 1504 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20130116/9920770d/attachment.png>


View list directory