[EL] Dysfunctional FEC
Mark Schmitt
schmitt.mark at gmail.com
Mon Jul 15 15:23:07 PDT 2013
This was a very good discussion at quite a high level.
Mark Schmitt
Senior Fellow, The Roosevelt Institute <http://www.rooseveltinstitute.org/>
202/246-2350
gchat or Skype: schmitt.mark
twitter: mschmitt9
On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 12:37 PM, Smith, Brad <BSmith at law.capital.edu>wrote:
> For those who need a mid-day nap but can't quite doze off, I'll be on
> HuffPo live at 1:10 Eastern discussing the Atlantic's article on the FEC.
> http://live.huffingtonpost.com/r/segment/fec-dysfunction/51e027bc2b8c2a7aeb000244
>
>
> *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*
>
> *http://law.capital.edu/faculty/bios/bsmith.aspx*
> ------------------------------
> *From:* law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu [
> law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu] on behalf of Rick Hasen [
> rhasen at law.uci.edu]
> *Sent:* Monday, July 15, 2013 12:01 PM
> *To:* law-election at UCI.edu
> *Subject:* [EL] ELB News and Commentary 7/15/13
>
> “Three Wrong Progressive Approaches (and One Right One) to Campaign
> Finance Reform” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=52955>
> Posted on July 15, 2013 8:59 am <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=52955> by Rick
> Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>
> I have posted this draft<http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2293979>on SSRN (forthcoming in the Winter 2013 “Elections in America” symposium
> issue of the *Harvard Law and Policy Review* <http://harvardlpr.com/>).
> Here is the abstract:
>
> These are tough times to be a progressive in support of campaign finance
> reform. Through a series of cases, most importantly Citizens United v.
> Federal Election Commission, the Supreme Court has taken key steps toward
> deregulating campaign finance law. Since Citizens United, outside spending
> in federal elections has increased markedly, such as a 245 percent increase
> in outside spending on presidential elections, a 512 percent increase in
> outside spending on House elections and a 1,438 percent increase in outside
> spending on Senate elections, raising dangers of corruption and increasing
> political inequality. The Court could well take further steps toward
> deregulation in its new term, when it considers the constitutionality of
> aggregate limits on campaign contributions. While Citizens United leaves
> ample constitutional space for the enactment of effective disclosure laws,
> disclosure is a poor substitute for more serious and effective campaign
> regulation including limits on outside spending and ample public funding.
> Even worse, Congress has not fixed holes in our disclosure laws exploited
> by clever campaign finance lawyers which not only increase the danger of
> corruption but also deprive the public of important information to make
> intelligent voting decisions. The prospect for legislative responses in the
> near term are bleak, when Democrats cannot get Republicans to sign on even
> to disclosure fixes. The Federal Election Commission has become mired in
> ideological struggle, with three Republican Commissioners marching lockstep
> to disable what remains of campaign finance enforcement. President Obama,
> who campaigned as a reformer, has done nothing significant to help the
> cause of reasonable campaign regulation, and in fact his own new 501(c)(4),
> Organizing for America, will push politics further toward deregulation.
> The current reality is far from progressive ideal campaign finance
> regulation for the 21st century: strong protections for robust political
> debate, a free press, and multi-dimensional partisan competition; programs
> such as voucher-based public financing fostering the voice and power of all
> voters; a strong disclosure regime, deterring corruption and providing
> valuable information to voters; and sensible limits on contributions and
> spending to inhibit political corruption and promote political equality.
> What are progressives to do to move from bleak reality closer to this
> ideal? In this short essay, I argue against three misguided approaches to
> reform: seek to amend the Constitution to overrule Citizens United; pay lip
> service to the cause of reform but take no concrete steps against the worst
> problems with the system; and throw in the towel, giving up the fight to
> limit money in politics. Each of these approaches likely will make things
> worse rather than promote the progressive ideal. Instead, I argue that
> progressives should seek to preserve and protect what remains of campaign
> finance law today, especially contribution limitations, public financing,
> and disclosure laws, and progressive thinkers and lawyers should lay the
> intellectual groundwork for effective campaign reform proposals and
> constitutional arguments to be presented to a future, more progressive
> Supreme Court majority.
>
> Comments welcome!
> [image: Share]<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D52955&title=%E2%80%9CThree%20Wrong%20Progressive%20Approaches%20%28and%20One%20Right%20One%29%20to%20Campaign%20Finance%20Reform%E2%80%9D&description=>
> Posted in campaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>, federal
> election commission <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=24> | Comments Off
> “Speak Softly….and Carry a Nuclear Stick”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=52953>
> Posted on July 15, 2013 8:54 am <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=52953> by Rick
> Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>
> Sarah Binder<http://themonkeycage.org/2013/07/14/speak-softly-and-carry-a-nuclear-stick/>on the filibuster fight.
> [image: Share]<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D52953&title=%E2%80%9CSpeak%20Softly%E2%80%A6.and%20Carry%20a%20Nuclear%20Stick%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
> “Both Sides in Filibuster Fight See Twisting of Senate Rules”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=52950>
> Posted on July 15, 2013 8:52 am <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=52950> by Rick
> Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>
> NYT reports<http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/16/us/politics/democrats-seeing-precedent-press-on-to-curb-filibuster.html?hp>
> .
> [image: Share]<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D52950&title=%E2%80%9CBoth%20Sides%20in%20Filibuster%20Fight%20See%20Twisting%20of%20Senate%20Rules%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
> “Web of relations belies aide’s denial: Connecting Montana’s former
> governor to dark money” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=52948>
> Posted on July 15, 2013 8:51 am <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=52948> by Rick
> Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>
> News from Montana<http://www.greatfallstribune.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=2013307130022&gcheck=1>:
> “Two weeks after news reports first linked former Gov. Brian Schweitzer to
> a pair of mysterious dark money political groups, a Tribune investigation
> shows Schweitzer’s ties to those groups are deeper than a top political
> consultant let on.”
> [image: Share]<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D52948&title=%E2%80%9CWeb%20of%20relations%20belies%20aide%E2%80%99s%20denial%3A%20Connecting%20Montana%E2%80%99s%20former%20governor%20to%20dark%20money%E2%80%9D&description=>
> Posted in Uncategorized <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1> | Comments
> Off
> “This Is Why We Can’t Have Nice Elections: The Dysfunctional FEC”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=52945>
> Posted on July 15, 2013 8:40 am <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=52945> by Rick
> Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>
> The Atlantic reports<http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2013/07/this-is-why-we-cant-have-nice-elections-the-dysfunctional-fec/277639/>
> .
> [image: Share]<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D52945&title=%E2%80%9CThis%20Is%20Why%20We%20Can%E2%80%99t%20Have%20Nice%20Elections%3A%20The%20Dysfunctional%20FEC%E2%80%9D&description=>
> Posted in campaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>, federal
> election commission <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=24> | Comments Off
> “Pennsylvania Voter ID Law Being Argued Anew in Court”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=52943>
> Posted on July 15, 2013 8:40 am <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=52943> by Rick
> Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>
> Bloomberg reports<http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-07-15/pennsylvania-voter-id-law-being-argued-anew-in-court.html?alcmpid=politics>
> .
>
> The case is before a different judge than the judge who initially refused
> to block the voter id law before the November election, and then reversed
> his decision after the Pa. Supreme Court remanded the case for him to take
> another look.
> [image: Share]<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D52943&title=%E2%80%9CPennsylvania%20Voter%20ID%20Law%20Being%20Argued%20Anew%20in%20Court%E2%80%9D&description=>
> 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
> “Reid-McConnell clash latest evidence that genteel Senate has turned
> into a fight club” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=52940>
> Posted on July 15, 2013 8:37 am <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=52940> by Rick
> Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>
> WaPo reports<http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/reid-mcconnell-clash-latest-evidence-genteel-senate-has-turned-into-a-fight-club/2013/07/14/4b0d69ae-d85a-11e2-a9f2-42ee3912ae0e_story.html>
> .
> [image: Share]<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D52940&title=%E2%80%9CReid-McConnell%20clash%20latest%20evidence%20that%20genteel%20Senate%20has%20turned%20into%20a%20fight%20club%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
> “The FEC’s wrong-headed proposal to change rules”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=52938>
> Posted on July 15, 2013 8:36 am <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=52938> by Rick
> Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>
> WaPo editorial<http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/fecs-wrong-headed-proposal-to-change-rules/2013/07/13/1ad59f8c-e3e9-11e2-a11e-c2ea876a8f30_story.html>
> .
> [image: Share]<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D52938&title=%E2%80%9CThe%20FEC%E2%80%99s%20wrong-headed%20proposal%20to%20change%20rules%E2%80%9D&description=>
> Posted in campaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>, federal
> election commission <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=24> | Comments Off
> “Counties reorganize precincts to help reduce voting lines”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=52936>
> Posted on July 15, 2013 8:35 am <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=52936> by Rick
> Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>
> The Miami Herald reports.<http://www.miamiherald.com/2013/07/14/v-fullstory/3499848/counties-reorganize-precincts.html>
>
> (h/t Doug Chapin<http://blog.lib.umn.edu/cspg/electionacademy/2013/07/a_solution_for_long_lines_52_p.php>
> )
> [image: Share]<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D52936&title=%E2%80%9CCounties%20reorganize%20precincts%20to%20help%20reduce%20voting%20lines%E2%80%9D&description=>
> Posted in election administration <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18> | Comments
> Off
> “The Republican Party and the Federal Election Commission At the Present
> Time” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=52934>
> Posted on July 15, 2013 8:33 am <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=52934> by Rick
> Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>
> Bob Bauer blogs<http://www.moresoftmoneyhardlaw.com/2013/07/republican-party-federal-election-commission/>
> .
> [image: Share]<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D52934&title=%E2%80%9CThe%20Republican%20Party%20and%20the%20Federal%20Election%20Commission%20At%20the%20Present%20Time%E2%80%9D&description=>
> Posted in campaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>, federal
> election commission <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=24> | Comments Off
> “Pennsylvania’s Voter ID Gets Its Day in Court”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=52931>
> Posted on July 14, 2013 5:10 pm <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=52931> by Rick
> Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>
> NPR’s All Things Considered offers this report<http://www.npr.org/2013/07/14/202081107/pennsylvanias-voter-id-law-gets-its-day-in-court>
> .
> [image: Share]<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D52931&title=%E2%80%9CPennsylvania%E2%80%99s%20Voter%20ID%20Gets%20Its%20Day%20in%20Court%E2%80%9D&description=>
> 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
> “Redistricting Wars; The hidden story of the 2012 elections”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=52928>
> Posted on July 14, 2013 1:12 pm <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=52928> by Rick
> Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>
> Steven Malanga <http://www.city-journal.org/2012/22_2_redistricting.html>:
>
> Every ten years, after the U.S. Census releases its latest population
> reports, most of the 50 states begin the complicated process of drawing new
> election districts. As you might expect, partisan bickering and maneuvering
> inevitably distort things. So a decade ago, Arizona voters decided to end
> the partisanship by removing the redistricting process from the state
> legislature and placing it in the hands of an independent commission. Last
> year, the new commission, consisting of two Democrats, two Republicans, and
> a nonpartisan chair, got to work on its first set of maps after the 2010
> census.
>
> Unfortunately, the results were anything but nonpartisan. The independent
> chair sided consistently with the two Democrats, essentially giving them
> control over the makeup of the congressional and state legislative maps.
> Lawsuits were launched, along with a push by Arizona’s Republican governor,
> Jan Brewer, to impeach the chair. The new maps, if let stand, “could
> reshape the state’s political landscape” in the Democrats’ favor, the *Arizona
> Republic* reported. Already, state lawmakers are looking at doing away
> with the commission or significantly changing it.
>
> Arizona isn’t alone. In many states, including those where reformers had
> tried to make the process less political, redistricting has already
> determined the outcome of this year’s races for Congress and state
> legislature. In part, blame naivety for the reformers’ failure:
> redistricting isn’t easily drained of partisanship. But federal election
> law—especially the Voting Rights Act, which mandates a certain amount of
> legal gerrymandering to reach preferred racial outcomes—shares some of the
> blame. Though some states are inching toward ways of carving out fairer,
> less politicized electoral maps, reform is slow, and scheming over election
> districts remains nearly as important as it ever was to politicians’
> fortunes, the composition of state legislatures, and even control of the
> U.S. House of Representatives.
>
> [image: Share]<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D52928&title=%E2%80%9CRedistricting%20Wars%3B%20The%20hidden%20story%20of%20the%202012%20elections%E2%80%9D&description=>
> Posted in citizen commissions <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=7>,
> redistricting <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=6>, Voting Rights Act<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=15>
> | Comments Off
> “Hudson County balks at $2.4 million US Senate special election costs”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=52925>
> Posted on July 14, 2013 1:07 pm <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=52925> by Rick
> Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>
> County may refuse to pay costs
> <http://www.hudsonreporter.com/view/full_story/23117499/article--Hudson-County-balks-at-$2-4-million-US-Senate-special-election-costs-?instance=up_to_the_minute_jersey>of
> New Jersey special election for U.S. Senate.
>
> I don’t think that will go well for the county.
> [image: Share]<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D52925&title=%E2%80%9CHudson%20County%20balks%20at%20%242.4%20million%20US%20Senate%20special%20election%20costs%E2%80%9D&description=>
> Posted in election administration <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18> | Comments
> Off
> “Photo ID, Provisional Balloting, and Indiana’s 2012 Primary Election”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=52923>
> Posted on July 14, 2013 1:05 pm <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=52923> by Rick
> Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>
> Michael Pitts has posted this draft<http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2277858>on SSRN (
> *University of Richmond Law Review*). Here is the abstract:
>
> This article represents the continuation of a series of studies that
> measure the impact of photo identification on the electorate by examining
> provisional ballots cast and not counted because prospective voters lacked
> photo identification. Prior studies examined provisional balloting at
> Indiana’s 2008 primary and 2008 general elections. This article presents
> results from the 2012 primary and proceeds in two parts. Part I briefly
> discusses the details of Indiana’s photo identification law, the various
> methods used to measure the impact of photo identification laws generally,
> and the research methods employed for this study. Part II presents and
> analyzes the empirical data generated in this study and, notably, compares
> the impact of the photo identification law at Indiana’s 2008 primary
> election with the impact of the photo identification law at Indiana’s 2012
> primary election.
>
> As with Pitts’ earlier study<http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1465529>of Indiana’s implementation of its voter id law, this is a must read. He
> finds much less disenfranchisement likely caused by Indiana’s i.d. law than
> opponents of the law usually claim.
> [image: Share]<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D52923&title=%E2%80%9CPhoto%20ID%2C%20Provisional%20Balloting%2C%20and%20Indiana%E2%80%99s%202012%20Primary%20Election%E2%80%9D&description=>
> 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 Today’s Political Party Dynamics Eviscerate Conventional Separation
> of Powers <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=52919>
> Posted on July 14, 2013 7:44 am <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=52919> by Richard
> Pildes <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=7>
>
> In the traditional view, the unique American system of diffusing political
> power across the House, Senate, and Presidency creates an exceptional
> structure of checks and balances. In Madison’s vision, each of these
> institutions would have “a will of its own” so that “ambition [would]
> counteract ambition” to produce better outcomes. But whether the system
> ever worked this way, the nature of modern political party competition has
> completely overwhelmed that original vision. If you have any doubt about
> that, see Ezra Klein’s piece in yesterday’s Washington Post (here<http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/07/12/is-obamas-biggest-problem-obama/>
> ).
>
> Presidents are the most significant representatives and leaders of one
> political party; when they make a policy issue theirs, it becomes a
> partisan political issue; through the linkage of partisan affiliation, the
> electoral fates of members of Congress are powerfully tied to the perceived
> success or failure of the President; thus, members of Congress are driven
> by partisan incentives and “wills,” not by any “institutional will” of the
> Senate or House. This is dramatically accentuated in our era by the
> hyperpolarized nature of the political parties: The President creates the
> cues and the political parties function, for the most part, as blocs.
>
> Daryl Levinson and I explored in detail how the rise and polarization of
> the political parties has completely transformed the separation of powers
> system, in a Harvard Law Review article titled *Separation of Parties,
> Not Powers. *For the details, see here<http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=890105>
> .
>
> Here’s the key passages from Klein’s piece:
>
> This is perhaps the most important and least understood fact in today’s
> Washington: Presidents polarize. As the effective leader of one of two
> political parties, the president is inevitably a polarizing figure. . .
> That effect is not, from the president’s perspective, all bad. It makes it
> easier for him to corral members of his own party, as Obama discovered from
> 2009 to 2010, when Democrats controlled the House and Senate and passed the
> stimulus, health-care reform, Dodd-Frank financial regulations and much
> more. . . . But today’s intense polarization means that most any bill
> associated with Obama is automatically targeted for defeat by Republicans.
> Policy compromise, as the White House has found out again and again, isn’t
> enough to overcome the zero-sum world of modern politics.
>
>
>
>
> [image: Share]<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D52919&title=How%20Today%E2%80%99s%20Political%20Party%20Dynamics%20Eviscerate%20Conventional%20Separation%20of%20Powers&description=>
> Posted in Uncategorized <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1> | Comments
> Off
> “FEC engulfed in power struggle over staff independence”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=52916>
> Posted on July 13, 2013 5:53 pm <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=52916> by Rick
> Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>
> Must-read @MateaGold piece<http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/fec-engulfed-in-power-struggle-over-staff-independence/2013/07/13/72134cae-e8d5-11e2-a301-ea5a8116d211_story.html>for WaPo.
> [image: Share]<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D52916&title=%E2%80%9CFEC%20engulfed%20in%20power%20struggle%20over%20staff%20independence%E2%80%9D&description=>
> Posted in campaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>, federal
> election commission <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=24> | Comments Off
> “A Spitzer Petitioner’s Tale: $1,600 To Get Signatures For ‘A Schmuck’”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=52913>
> Posted on July 12, 2013 4:43 pm <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=52913> by Rick
> Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>
> Love this image of democracy in action:
> <http://gothamist.com/2013/07/12/mothers_are_the_toughest_a_spitzer.php>
>
> Due to the high pay, I felt obligated to get at many signatures as I
> could. The West Village has many aging Jewish women and gay couples. These
> are my people. I realized the trick was to start with the most potent part
> to draw people in. “Hi, I’m with Eliot Spitzer for Comptroller of the City
> of New York. Would you like to sign our petition to put him on the ballot?”
> has a LOT of syllables. So I tried innumerable permutations of my pitch.
>
> “Sign for Spitzer?”
>
> “I’m with Eliot Spitzer. Sign our petition please?”
>
> “Eliot Spitzer for office. Sign please?”
>
> Then I started barking, “SPITZER! SIGN FOR SPITZER!” It worked. Many
> people stopped and signed. Others told me I was crazy.
>
> “NO”
>
> “Heaven’s no.”
>
> “Heck no.”
>
> “You must be kidding.”
>
> “You’re joking right?”
>
> “You must be joking.”
>
> “That schmuck!”
>
> “What nerve!”
>
> “I’d never vote for a hellion!”
>
> I was also insulted with what seemed like 30 different Yiddish words. Who
> knew Yiddish could be so versatile?
>
> [image: Share]<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D52913&title=%E2%80%9CA%20Spitzer%20Petitioner%E2%80%99s%20Tale%3A%20%241%2C600%20To%20Get%20Signatures%20For%20%E2%80%98A%20Schmuck%E2%80%99%E2%80%9D&description=>
> Posted in petition signature gathering<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=39>
> | Comments Off
> Thanks to Wonk Wire <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=52907>
> Posted on July 12, 2013 4:41 pm <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=52907> by Rick
> Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>
> for naming my APSA paper, Shelby County and the Illusion of Minimalism<http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2291612>its Abstract
> of the Week<http://wonkwire.rollcall.com/2013/07/12/abstract-of-the-week-58/>
> .
> [image: Share]<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D52907&title=Thanks%20to%20Wonk%20Wire&description=>
> Posted in Supreme Court <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>, Voting
> Rights Act <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=15> | Comments Off
> “Federal judge hears case on Ohio ballot, ID rules”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=52905>
> Posted on July 12, 2013 2:49 pm <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=52905> by Rick
> Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>
> AP<http://www.daytondailynews.com/news/news/federal-judge-hears-case-on-ohio-ballot-id-rules/nYpKn/>:
> “Voter advocates asked a federal judge Friday to extend a court order that
> they say ensures that broad definitions of voter identification
> requirements would remain in place in the perennial presidential
> battleground of Ohio.”
> [image: Share]<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D52905&title=%E2%80%9CFederal%20judge%20hears%20case%20on%20Ohio%20ballot%2C%20ID%20rules%E2%80%9D&description=>
> 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
> “A Day of Friction Notable Even for a Fractious Congress”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=52902>
> Posted on July 12, 2013 2:46 pm <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=52902> by Rick
> Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>
> NYT:
> <http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/13/us/politics/a-day-of-friction-notable-even-for-a-fractious-congress.html?ref=politics&_r=0>
>
> Even in a Congress where bipartisanship and comity are now officially the
> exceptions to the regular order, the near implosion on Capitol Hill on
> Thursday was notable, as both chambers erupted in a furor that went on for
> much of the day.
>
> In the Senate, leaders fought bitterly over proposed changes to Senate
> rules that would limit the filibuster<http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/12/us/politics/showdown-nears-in-senate-over-filibusters-change.html>,
> with Senator Harry Reid of Nevada, the Democratic leader, trading barbs
> with Senator Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, the Republican leader, several
> times on the Senate floor.
>
> “These are dark days in the history of the Senate,” Mr. McConnell said
> ominously, adding that the rule change suggested by Mr. Reid would lead to
> the Democrat’s being remembered as “the worst leader of the Senate ever.”
> The two men, both crafty lawmakers and once seemingly friends, seem now
> barely able to countenance each other’s presence.
>
> Over in the House, Republicans — without the help of a single Democrat — passed
> perhaps the most partisan farm bill<http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/12/us/politics/house-bill-would-split-farm-and-food-stamp-programs.html>in recent history, stripping out the food stamp program to attract enough
> support from conservatives. Just passing the bill, which was prepared in
> the House Rules Committee in the dark of night Wednesday, proved an unusual
> chore as furious Democrats pulled one procedural move after another to
> delay the inevitable, taking turns to disparage the bill from the floor.
>
> [image: Share]<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D52902&title=%E2%80%9CA%20Day%20of%20Friction%20Notable%20Even%20for%20a%20Fractious%20Congress%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
> “Clinton Supporter Suspected of Illegal Donations”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=52900>
> Posted on July 12, 2013 2:43 pm <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=52900> by Rick
> Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>
> CPI reports.<http://www.publicintegrity.org/2013/07/12/12943/clinton-supporter-suspected-illegal-donations>
> [image: Share]<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D52900&title=%E2%80%9CClinton%20Supporter%20Suspected%20of%20Illegal%20Donations%E2%80%9D&description=>
> Posted in campaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>,
> chicanery <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=12> | Comments Off
> “Carl Levin Can Save the Filibuster”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=52897>
> Posted on July 12, 2013 2:27 pm <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=52897> by Rick
> Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>
> Jonathan Bernstein writes.<http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-partisan/wp/2013/07/12/carl-levin-can-save-the-filibuster/>
> [image: Share]<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D52897&title=%E2%80%9CCarl%20Levin%20Can%20Save%20the%20Filibuster%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
> “Democrats offer new evidence that IRS targeted progressive groups”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=52894>
> Posted on July 12, 2013 2:23 pm <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=52894> by Rick
> Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>
> WaPo reports<http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/federal-eye/wp/2013/07/12/democrats-offer-new-evidence-that-irs-targeted-progressive-groups/>
> .
> [image: Share]<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D52894&title=%E2%80%9CDemocrats%20offer%20new%20evidence%20that%20IRS%20targeted%20progressive%20groups%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
> “President Obama’s advocacy arm collects $8.2 million”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=52891>
> Posted on July 12, 2013 1:48 pm <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=52891> by Rick
> Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>
> USA Today reports<http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2013/07/12/organization-for-action-donors--president-obama-fundraising/2511993/>
> .
> [image: Share]<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D52891&title=%E2%80%9CPresident%20Obama%E2%80%99s%20advocacy%20arm%20collects%20%248.2%20million%E2%80%9D&description=>
> Posted in campaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10> | Comments
> Off
> Redistricting Versus Access to the Ballot Box: A Republican View on
> Potential Bipartisan VRA Reform <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=52882>
> Posted on July 12, 2013 10:53 am <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=52882> by Richard
> Pildes <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=7>
>
> As mentioned in a prior post <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=52780>, a lot
> of good discussion came out of the recent Brookings conference on the
> aftermath of the Court’s **decision on the Voting Rights Act. With
> respect to the prospects of any kind of legislation that might be able to
> attract bipartisan support in Congress, I thought it worth quoting the
> perspective of Mark Braden, whose credentials as a redistricting and
> election-law expert for the Republican Party I described earlier.
>
> Mark suggested that focusing Sections 4/5 on access to the ballot box, by
> taking redistricting out of the pre-clearance regime and leaving that to be
> handled by ordinary Section 2 litigation, would open up greater opportunity
> for Republican support of post-*Shelby County *VRA reform. I don’t know
> how much Mark speaks for Republicans in Congress, or whether Democrats
> would be willing to accept any compromise along these lines. But I thought
> Mark’s comments were worth reporting (without endorsing) in full:
>
> MR. BRADEN: . . . I don’t see any difficulty whatsoever in drawing a
> trigger standard that would be Constitutional. I do see a huge problem
> with drawing one that would be Constitutional and would, in fact, pass
> Congress. I think the question here is what can pass Congress. The
> starting point, I would suggest to you, is going back — my own view of the
> world, obviously — going back and bifurcating what we’re talking about here
> that Section 5 deals with.
>
> There’s a big piece which is reapportionment, redistricting, and then just
> let me call it the election administration piece. If you fill the need to
> not bifurcate and have to come up with a system that would get through
> Congress that would deal with both those pieces, good luck. I don’t see
> how that’s going to happen, but if you were to bifurcate it, I think
> there’s a possibility that you could. You have to deal with Abigail. You
> have to realize that if you don’t break out redistricting, then if you
> break out redistricting, suddenly you’ve freed up a huge portion of the
> Republican caucus who is opposed to what they would view as racial quotas
> and redistricting based upon race, even though, of course, redistricting
> based upon race has been vital to the creation of the Republican party
> itself. I mean, there’s no question about that throughout the ‘80s, ‘90s.
> People that were working with me was the minority community in the South,
> and that’s what permitted the Republican party to become the majority party
> in those states at the local and legislative level.
>
> Okay, but the whole notion of creating those majority minority districts
> is very difficult with most of the Republican caucus in the House of
> Representatives. So, if you want to break that piece off and say, okay,
> we’re not going to have any effort to replace Section 5 is going to deal
> with redistricting. We’ll depend upon Section 2 or something else to deal
> with redistricting litigation. But we’re going to deal with — what I heard
> in a variety of discussions here — things that are really important going
> forward. First of all, with the exception of a few odds and ends,
> everything in redistricting is a long way from now, 2012.
>
> So, if you want to deal with what you perceive to be problems in the near,
> near term, which are election administration problems, you break those out,
> you’ve suddenly freed up a lot of Republicans who wouldn’t consider this
> because they say this is based upon racial-based redistricting. If you
> take that piece out, then all we’re talking about is election
> administration practices, whether or not they’re discriminatory.
>
> No matter what, we have different views about early voting and voter ID or
> whatever, but at least intellectually the caucus is going to vote
> rhetorically, and I would suggest intellectually, want to take the position
> that they’re not in favor of anything that discriminates, any type of
> election procedure that discriminates against a minority community. Now,
> we’re going to have lots of arguments as to what that means, but at least
> rhetorically they will take that position, and I believe actually take that
> position.
>
> So, if you’re talking about creating a system that might permit some type
> of pre-approval or easier access to challenging election administration
> pieces, that’s doable. If you’re doing the whole thing, that’s not
> politically doable, period.
>
> [image: Share]<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D52882&title=Redistricting%20Versus%20Access%20to%20the%20Ballot%20Box%3A%20%20A%20Republican%20View%20on%20Potential%20Bipartisan%20VRA%20Reform&description=>
> Posted in Uncategorized <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1> | Comments
> Off
> “A Decade After McCain-Feingold, Election Spending Spikes”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=52883>
> Posted on July 12, 2013 10:49 am <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=52883> by Rick
> Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>
> Must-Reid<http://www.nationaljournal.com/columns/on-the-trail/a-decade-after-mccain-feingold-election-spending-spikes-20130711>(Wilson) piece. And for those who don’t think the Supreme Court’s
> deregulation of outside money matters, check out this chart from the piece:
>
> [image: outside-nj]<http://electionlawblog.org/wp-content/uploads/outside-nj.png>
> [image: Share]<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D52883&title=%E2%80%9CA%20Decade%20After%20McCain-Feingold%2C%20Election%20Spending%20Spikes%E2%80%9D&description=>
> Posted in campaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10> | Comments
> Off
> “Watchdog Groups Challenge Illegitimate Attempt by Republican FEC
> Commissioners to Sabotage Campaign Finance”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=52879>
> Posted on July 12, 2013 10:24 am <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=52879> by Rick
> Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>
> See this press release<http://www.democracy21.org/money-in-politics/letters-to-the-fec/watchdog-groups-challenge-illegitimate-attempt-by-republican-fec-commissioners-to-sabotage-campaign-finance/>
> .
> [image: Share]<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D52879&title=%E2%80%9CWatchdog%20Groups%20Challenge%20Illegitimate%20Attempt%20by%20Republican%20FEC%20Commissioners%20to%20Sabotage%20Campaign%20Finance%E2%80%9D&description=>
> Posted in campaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10> | Comments
> Off
> “Voter ID Trial Gets Underway In Pennsylvania”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=52876>
> Posted on July 12, 2013 10:17 am <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=52876> by Rick
> Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>
> HuffPo reports<http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/07/12/voter-id-trial-pennsylvania_n_3586546.html?utm_hp_ref=tw>
> .
> [image: Share]<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D52876&title=%E2%80%9CVoter%20ID%20Trial%20Gets%20Underway%20In%20Pennsylvania%E2%80%9D&description=>
> Posted in The Voting Wars <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60>, voter id<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=9>
> | Comments Off
> “A Not-So-Bright ‘Fix’ for the IRS | Commentary”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=52873>
> Posted on July 12, 2013 8:24 am <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=52873> by Rick
> Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>
> Eric Wang<http://www.rollcall.com/news/a_not_so_bright_fix_for_the_irs_commentary-226245-1.html?pg=1>Roll Call oped. More from
> CCP.<http://www.campaignfreedom.org/2013/07/12/bright-lines-project-fails-to-live-up-to-its-name/>
> [image: Share]<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D52873&title=%E2%80%9CA%20Not-So-Bright%20%E2%80%98Fix%E2%80%99%20for%20the%20IRS%20%7C%20Commentary%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
> “Blame Voting Rights Act for Dem Troubles”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=52871>
> Posted on July 12, 2013 8:22 am <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=52871> by Rick
> Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>
> Jonathan Tobin<http://www.commentarymagazine.com/2013/07/11/blame-voting-rights-act-for-democrat-troubles-south/>replies to Tom
> Edsall.<http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/07/10/the-decline-of-black-power-in-the-south/?ref=opinion>
> [image: Share]<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D52871&title=%E2%80%9CBlame%20Voting%20Rights%20Act%20for%20Dem%20Troubles%E2%80%9D&description=>
> Posted in Supreme Court <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>, Voting
> Rights Act <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=15> | Comments Off
> Justice Ginsburg’s Vigor, as Evidenced by Her Shelby County Dissent<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=52866>
> Posted on July 11, 2013 9:09 pm <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=52866> by Rick
> Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>
> [This is one of a series of posts <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=52774>on issues related to the
> *Shelby County *<http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/12pdf/12-96_6k47.pdf>voting
> rights case flagged, but not fully developed, in my draft paper, Shelby
> County and the Illusion of Minimalism<http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2291612>
> .]
>
> One of the last major opinions Justice Stevens wrote for the Supreme
> Court, his dissent <http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/08-205.ZX.html>in the
> *Citizens United* <http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/08-205.ZS.html>campaign finance case, was a disappointment. Rather than being a strong and
> crisp statement of principles to support reasonable campaign finance
> regulation under anti-corruption, egalitarian principles, or both, the
> opinion was meandering and unfocused (so much so that I dedicated a law
> review article<http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1737938>to its weaknesses). I had always been a fan of Justice Stevens and found
> this disappointing. Justice Stevens too expressed concern about his oral
> dissent in *Citizens United* in explaining why he decided it was time to
> retire<http://www.abajournal.com/news/article/justice_stevens_decided_to_retire_after_stumbling_during_citizens_united_di/>
> .
>
> I bring up the Stevens issue because there has been talk too that Justice
> Ginsburg should retire soon<http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/05/24/is-justice-ginsburg-risking-the-future-of-the-supreme-court.html>given her age and the chance that the next President might be Republican,
> giving Republicans the chance to put a young new conservative on the Court.
> In an interview last week with Joan Biskupic<http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/07/04/us-usa-court-ginsburg-idUSBRE9630C820130704>,
> Justice Ginsburg rejected retirement talk, putting the kibosh on
> conventional wisdom that she would retire at the end of the Court’s next
> term.
>
> The question whether the 80-year-old Ginsburg should retire is a difficult
> one, and I will likely leave this debate for others. The issue is
> difficult because, unlike Stevens, Ginsburg is still at the top of her
> game. If Justice Ginsburg started missing a step, the case for her quick
> retirement would be an easy one.
>
> Her dissent in the landmark voting rights ruling last month, *Shelby
> County v. Holder*, is crisp and directed, pointed and clear. With a couple<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=52774>of exceptions (most importantly its
> attempt <http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2291612> to
> paint a happy picture of Congress’s 2006 renewal), it is an exemplary
> dissent.
>
> Most impressive about the dissent is that Justice Ginsburg offers a
> nascent new theory of federal power to regulate state elections in the name
> of promoting democracy.This is hardly the stuff of a Justice going through
> the motions. The opinion puts forward the theory and at the same time
> explains what I’ve considered<http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/06/17/the-supreme-court-gives-states-new-weapons-in-the-voting-wars.html>to be a curious
> decision<http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2013/07/are_the_liberals_on_the_supreme_court_savvy_or_suckers.html>of Justice
> Ginsburg and the other liberals <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=51773> to
> join in full Justice Scalia’s opinion in the *Arizona Inter-Tribal*
> <http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/12pdf/12-71_7l48.pdf>case. Part of
> that opinion seems to give states new ammunition to fight *against*federal oversight of elections. So why did Ginsburg sign it? Here’s the
> relevant discussion from my draft paper<http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2291612>
> :
>
> The dissent offers a muscular and integrated vision of the five
> constitutional amendments mentioning the right to vote and, coupled with
> its view of the Elections Clause in Article 4, the Constitution gives
> Congress broad power to protect the franchise and democratic processes
> against state encroachment.[1] <http://electionlawblog.org/#_ftn1>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> [1] <http://electionlawblog.org/#_ftnref1> Id at *24 n 2 (“The
> Constitution uses the words ‘right to vote’ in five separate places: the
> Fourteenth, Fifteenth, Nineteenth, Twenty–Fourth, and Twenty–Sixth
> Amendments. Each of these Amendments contains the same broad empowerment of
> Congress to enact “appropriate legislation” to enforce the protected right.
> The implication is unmistakable: Under our constitutional structure,
> Congress holds the lead rein in making the right to vote equally real for
> all U.S. citizens. These Amendments are in line with the special role
> assigned to Congress in protecting the integrity of the democratic process
> in federal elections. U.S. Const., Art. I, § 4 (“[T]he Congress may at any
> time by Law make or alter” regulations concerning the “Times, Places and
> Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives.”); *Arizona
> v. Inter Tribal Council of Ariz., Inc.,* –––U.S., ––––, –––– – ––––, 133
> S.Ct. 2247, –––– – ––––, ––– L.Ed.2d –––– (2013)).
>
> This footnote may help explain why the *Shelby County *dissenters were
> willing to sign on to Justice Scalia’s majority opinion in *Arizona v.
> Inter Tribal Council* despite language in the opinion which could be used
> later by states to fight federal election legislation by claiming such
> legislation impedes state power to set voter qualifications. *See*Richard L. Hasen,
> *The Supreme Court Gives States New Weapons in the Voting Wars*, The
> Daily Beast, Jun. 17, 2013,
> http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/06/17/the-supreme-court-gives-states-new-weapons-in-the-voting-wars.html.
> In a future case involving a state’s qualifications power being raised
> against a federal election rule, the dissenters likely would seek to
> distance themselves from the voter qualifications dicta in *Inter Tribal
> Council* just as they distanced themselves from the *NAMUDNO *dicta in *Shelby
> County*. Instead, the dissenters offer a nascent theory of broad
> congressional power to assure equality in voting.
>
> So say what you will about whether Justice Ginsburg should retire given
> her age, giving President Obama a sure chance to appoint a young new
> liberal Justice to the Court. But don’t think for a moment that Justice
> Ginsburg isn’t up to the task of continuing at full (and impressive for any
> age) strength for the near term.
> [image: Share]<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D52866&title=Justice%20Ginsburg%E2%80%99s%20Vigor%2C%20as%20Evidenced%20by%20Her%20Shelby%20County%20Dissent&description=>
> Posted in Supreme Court <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>, Voting
> Rights Act <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=15> | Comments Off
> “Sen. Nelson blasts Supreme Court on voting rights”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=52863>
> Posted on July 11, 2013 4:23 pm <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=52863> by Rick
> Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>
> The Sun-Sentinel reports<http://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/local/florida/politics-blog/sfl-sen-nelson-blasts-supreme-court-on-voting-rights-20130711,0,6947270.story>
> .
> [image: Share]<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D52863&title=%E2%80%9CSen.%20Nelson%20blasts%20Supreme%20Court%20on%20voting%20rights%E2%80%9D&description=>
> Posted in Supreme Court <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>, Voting
> Rights Act <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=15> | Comments Off
> “Another IRS Scandal Waiting to Happen; Federal Elections Commissioner
> Donald McGahn wants to rein in the bureaucracy of this sensitive agency.
> The political left is furious. “ <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=52861>
> Posted on July 11, 2013 3:53 pm <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=52861> by Rick
> Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>
> Kimberly Strassel *WSJ
> <http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324879504578599783139351080.html>
> *column.<http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324879504578599783139351080.html>
> [image: Share]<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D52861&title=%E2%80%9CAnother%20IRS%20Scandal%20Waiting%20to%20Happen%3B%20Federal%20Elections%20Commissioner%20Donald%20McGahn%20wants%20to%20rein%20in%20the%20bureaucracy%20of%20this%20sensitive%20agency.%20The%20political%20left%20is%20furious.%20%E2%80%9C&description=>
> Posted in campaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>, federal
> election commission <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=24> | Comments Off
> Filibuster Reform Coming? <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=52858>
> Posted on July 11, 2013 3:51 pm <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=52858> by Rick
> Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>
> NY Times: Democrats Poised to Limit Filibusters, Angering GOP<http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/12/us/politics/showdown-nears-in-senate-over-filibusters-change.html?hp>
>
> Ezra Klein: Mitch McConnell’s problem: How can he threaten to obstruct
> the Senate even more?<http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/07/11/mitch-mcconnells-problem-how-can-he-threaten-to-obstruct-the-senate-even-more/>
>
> Jonathan Bernstein: Why Senate Reform is Needed<http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-partisan/wp/2013/07/11/why-senate-reform-is-needed/>
> [image: Share]<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D52858&title=Filibuster%20Reform%20Coming%3F&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
> “News Analysis: Macon-Bibb’s on again, off again election; VRA ruling
> gives election a green light, but not so fast”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=52853>
> Posted on July 11, 2013 3:10 pm <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=52853> by Rick
> Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>
> That’s the lead story in this week’s Electionline Weekly.<http://www.electionline.org/index.php/electionline-weekly>
> [image: Share]<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D52853&title=%E2%80%9CNews%20Analysis%3A%20Macon-Bibb%E2%80%99s%20on%20again%2C%20off%20again%20election%3B%20VRA%20ruling%20gives%20election%20a%20green%20light%2C%20but%20not%20so%20fast%E2%80%9D&description=>
> Posted in election administration <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>, Voting
> Rights Act <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=15> | Comments Off
> Shuchman on Corsi Case <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=52850>
> Posted on July 11, 2013 3:07 pm <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=52850> by Rick
> Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>
> Here<http://www.forbes.com/sites/realspin/2013/07/11/in-todays-america-consult-your-attorney-before-speaking-freely/>,
> in Forbes.
> [image: Share]<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D52850&title=Shuchman%20on%20Corsi%20Case&description=>
> Posted in campaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10> | Comments
> Off
> Extensive Sen. McConnell Profile Discusses His Anti-Campaign Finance Law
> Stance, Alliance with Jim Bopp <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=52847>
> Posted on July 11, 2013 3:06 pm <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=52847> by Rick
> Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>
> Fascinating read<http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/07/11/mitch-mcconnell-profile_n_3550173.html>
> .
> [image: Share]<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D52847&title=Extensive%20Sen.%20McConnell%20Profile%20Discusses%20His%20Anti-Campaign%20Finance%20Law%20Stance%2C%20Alliance%20with%20Jim%20Bopp&description=>
> Posted in campaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10> | Comments
> Off
> “G.A.B. Issues Polling Place Accessibility Report”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=52843>
> Posted on July 11, 2013 2:58 pm <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=52843> by Rick
> Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>
> Press Release <http://gab.wi.gov/node/2866>:
>
> MADISON, WI – Wisconsin’s polling places are becoming more accessible, but
> some people with disabilities and the elderly still face significant
> obstacles when they vote, according to a new report from the Government
> Accountability Board….
>
> The report is available on the G.A.B. website:
> http://gab.wi.gov/publications/reports/2013-accessibility-report.
>
> The Board’s website also has voting accessibility resource pages for
> people with disabilities (http://gab.wi.gov/voters/accessibility) and for
> clerks who are responsible for making sure polling places are accessible (
> http://gab.wi.gov/clerks/guidance/accessibility).
>
> [image: Share]<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D52843&title=%E2%80%9CG.A.B.%20Issues%20Polling%20Place%20Accessibility%20Report%E2%80%9D&description=>
> Posted in voters with disabilities <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=71> | Comments
> Off
> “Supreme Court rules against Legislature in redistricting case”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=52841>
> Posted on July 11, 2013 2:56 pm <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=52841> by Rick
> Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>
> The Buzz
> <http://www.tampabay.com/blogs/the-buzz-florida-politics/supreme-court-rules-against-legislature-in-redistricting-case/2130935?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter>(Tampa
> Bay Times):
>
> The Florida Supreme Court on Thursday handed a legal setback to the state
> Legislature, ruling that a legal challenge to the remapping of Senate
> districts can go forward in a lower court. The 5-2 decision is a victory
> for the League of Women Voters of Florida, which is seeking to prove that
> the GOP Senate majority drew districts in violation of the two “fair
> districts” amendments to the state Constitution that prohibit favoritism
> toward incumbents or political parties.
>
> [image: Share]<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D52841&title=%E2%80%9CSupreme%20Court%20rules%20against%20Legislature%20in%20redistricting%20case%E2%80%9D&description=>
> Posted in redistricting <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=6> | Comments
> Off
> “FEC nominations moving forward Officials: Senate Rules Committee
> planning hearing for July 24″ <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=52839>
> Posted on July 11, 2013 2:54 pm <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=52839> by Rick
> Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>
> CPI reports.<http://www.publicintegrity.org/2013/07/11/12948/fec-nominations-moving-forward>
> [image: Share]<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D52839&title=%E2%80%9CFEC%20nominations%20moving%20forward%20Officials%3A%20Senate%20Rules%20Committee%20planning%20hearing%20for%20July%2024%E2%80%B3&description=>
> Posted in campaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>, federal
> election commission <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=24> | Comments Off
> “Groups File Brief Supporting Challenge to Contractor Donation Ban”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=52836>
> Posted on July 11, 2013 8:59 am <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=52836> by Rick
> Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>
> CCP issued this press release<http://www.campaignfreedom.org/2013/07/10/groups-file-brief-supporting-challenge-to-contractor-donation-ban/>
> .
> [image: Share]<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D52836&title=%E2%80%9CGroups%20File%20Brief%20Supporting%20Challenge%20to%20Contractor%20Donation%20Ban%E2%80%9D&description=>
> Posted in campaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10> | Comments
> Off
> Linda Greenhouse on Why Liberal Justices Compromised in NAMUDNO and Why
> Justice Ginsburg Dissented in Fisher <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=52831>
> Posted on July 10, 2013 8:29 pm <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=52831> by Rick
> Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>
> Linda in NYT<http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/07/10/the-cost-of-compromise/>
> :
>
> Why did the liberal justices sign on to the Northwest Austin opinion in
> 2009? Clearly, it was the price of the compromise to buy the Voting Rights
> Act a little more time. They must have expected — or desperately hoped —
> that Congress would take the hint and update the formula that determines
> which states and localities are covered by the Section 5 preclearance
> requirement. A near-unanimous opinion, they may have thought, would make a
> Congressional response more likely; that the court was speaking with close
> to one voice seemingly put the issue beyond partisanship. Only in hindsight
> is it clear that this expectation was doomed by Congressional dysfunction,
> leaving the liberal justices on a limb they had knowingly, if reluctantly,
> climbed.
>
> Was the price of compromise too high back in 2009? In retrospect, the
> answer is yes. The liberal justices’ acquiescence to near-unanimity placed
> a fig leaf on a truly radical project to curb the civil-rights enforcement
> authority that the framers of the 14th and 15th amendments explicitly gave
> to Congress. It’s admittedly a long shot even in hindsight, but a powerful
> dissent four years ago might have been the clarion call that just might
> have shaken Congress out of its torpor and persuaded it to immunize the
> Voting Rights Act from the charge that the application of Section 5 was, in
> the chief justice’s words, “based on decades-old data and eradicated
> practices.”
>
> I offer a somewhat different take on the liberal Justices in this Slate
> piece<http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2013/07/are_the_liberals_on_the_supreme_court_savvy_or_suckers.html>and my draft
> APSA paper <http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2291612>.
> [image: Share]<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D52831&title=Linda%20Greenhouse%20on%20Why%20Liberal%20Justices%20Compromised%20in%20NAMUDNO%20and%20Why%20Justice%20Ginsburg%20Dissented%20in%20Fisher&description=>
> Posted in Uncategorized <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1> | Comments
> Off
> “The Decline of Black Power in the South”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=52828>
> Posted on July 10, 2013 8:24 pm <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=52828> by Rick
> Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>
> Tom Edsall
> <http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/07/10/the-decline-of-black-power-in-the-south/?ref=politics>(NYT)
> with a very interesting perspective post-Shelby County.
> [image: Share]<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D52828&title=%E2%80%9CThe%20Decline%20of%20Black%20Power%20in%20the%20South%E2%80%9D&description=>
> Posted in Voting Rights Act <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=15> | Comments
> Off
> “Miami-Dade should take steps to thwart absentee-ballot fraudsters,
> advisory group says” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=52825>
> Posted on July 10, 2013 2:59 pm <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=52825> by Rick
> Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>
> The Miami Herald reports.<http://www.miamiherald.com/2013/07/10/3494208/miami-dade-should-take-steps-to.html>
> [image: Share]<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D52825&title=%E2%80%9CMiami-Dade%20should%20take%20steps%20to%20thwart%20absentee-ballot%20fraudsters%2C%20advisory%20group%20says%E2%80%9D&description=>
> Posted in absentee ballots <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=53>,
> chicanery <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=12>, election administration<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>,
> The Voting Wars <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60> | Comments Off
> “More voter-fraud allegations evaporate into nothing”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=52822>
> Posted on July 10, 2013 2:03 pm <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=52822> by Rick
> Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>
> Steve Benen blogs<http://maddowblog.msnbc.com/_news/2013/07/10/19396665-more-voter-fraud-allegations-evaporate-into-nothing?lite>
> .
> [image: Share]<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D52822&title=%E2%80%9CMore%20voter-fraud%20allegations%20evaporate%20into%20nothing%E2%80%9D&description=>
> Posted in fraudulent fraud squad <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=8>, The
> Voting Wars <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60> | Comments Off
> “Obama tells black lawmakers he’ll help rebuild Voting Rights Act”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=52819>
> Posted on July 10, 2013 1:39 pm <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=52819> by Rick
> Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>
> The *Dallas Morning News* reports.<http://www.dallasnews.com/news/politics/headlines/20130709-obama-tells-black-lawmakers-hell-help-rebuild-voting-rights-act.ece>
> [image: Share]<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D52819&title=%E2%80%9CObama%20tells%20black%20lawmakers%20he%E2%80%99ll%20help%20rebuild%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
> “Looking to Tech for Help With Life After the Voting Rights Act”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=52816>
> Posted on July 10, 2013 1:29 pm <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=52816> by Rick
> Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>
> Interesting post<http://techpresident.com/news/24114/technology-key-weapon-voting-rights-advocacy>at TechPresident.
> [image: Share]<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D52816&title=%E2%80%9CLooking%20to%20Tech%20for%20Help%20With%20Life%20After%20the%20Voting%20Rights%20Act%E2%80%9D&description=>
> Posted in Uncategorized <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1> | Comments
> Off
> The Effects of Racial Redistricting on Southern Politics: A View From
> the Republican Side <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=52780>
> Posted on July 10, 2013 1:20 pm <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=52780> by Richard
> Pildes <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=7>
>
> For the past several decades, E. Mark Braden (here<http://www.bakerlaw.com/emarkbraden/>)
> has been one of the leading redistricting lawyers in the country working on
> the Republican side. He has successfully argued in the redistricting area
> before the U.S. Supreme Court and has been involved in redistricting
> litigation throughout the country. For 10 years, he was Chief Counsel to
> the Republican National Committee.
>
> In the wake of the Supreme Court’s **VRA decision, I was fortunate to be
> part of a first-rate conference at the Brookings Institution to assess the
> decision and the future of voting rights law and policy. The conference
> (for a webcast, see here<http://www.brookings.edu/events/2013/07/01-voting-rights-shelby-holder>),
> hosted by Tom Mann and Nate Persily, was so good precisely because it
> included such a productively diverse array of experts and participants in
> the voting-rights field — including lawyers who were on opposite sides of
> the *Shelby County *case, academics, journalists, voting rights
> activists, and others.
>
> Many fascinating insights and comments were offered at this conference.
> For now, I wanted to quote this observation from Mark Braden about how the
> system of racial redistricting that began in full in the 1990s (in the wake
> of the 1982 Amendments to the VRA and the Supreme Court’s 1986
> interpretation of those amendments in the *Gingles *case) contributed to
> the rise of the Republican Party at the state and local level in the South:
>
> *Mark Braden:*
>
> . . . of course, redistricting based upon race has been vital to the
> creation of the Republican Party itself. I mean, there’s no question about
> that throughout the ‘80s, ‘90s. People that were working with me was the
> minority community in the South, and* that’s what permitted the
> Republican party to become the majority party in those states at the local
> and legislative level. **(emphasis added)
> *
>
> There has been much discussion over recent years about whether, and how
> much, the required creation of majority-minority districts, as a result of
> the VRA, also had the additional consequence of creating more conservative
> districts as well. But I am not sure I have ever seen anyone so directly
> involved in the redistricting process acknowledge these consequences as
> directly and dramatically as Mark Braden does in this statement.
>
> In the mid-1990s, when VRA-required racial redistricting began, I recall
> how difficult it was even to discuss whether one of the effects this
> redistricting was to enable the election of more Republicans and to make
> political bodies more conservative overall. Indeed, in an article<http://www.jstor.org/stable/1341860>in the Harvard Law Review in 1995, I quoted a prominent civil rights
> activist who called it “pure racism” to raise such issues. By the decade
> of the 2000s, political figures on the ground in some parts of the South
> recognized that this tradeoff was indeed taking place; that’s why
> Congressman John Lewis testified in favor of Georgia’s post-2000
> redistricting plan, put together by a coalition of black and white
> Democratic state legislators, that the Supreme Court ultimately upheld in
> the 5-4 *Georgia v. Ashcroft *decision. By now, I think it’s widely
> accepted factually, at least by politically knowledgeable players, that
> there is what might be called a tragic tension between creating more
> African-American majority districts in the South and creating more
> Democratic districts (a pending lawsuit<http://www.newsobserver.com/2013/07/08/3016723/nc-three-judge-panel-lets-gop.html>in North Carolina argues that a strategy of this sort was behind the most
> recent, Republican-controlled redistricting of that state). Mark Braden’s
> recent comments are a public confirmation of that from the Republican point
> of view.
>
> For my own views on how the VRA affected the rise of the Republican Party
> in the South, see *Why the Center Does Not Hold: The Causes of
> Hyperpolarized Democracy in America*<http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1646989>.
> As noted above, the webcast of the Brookings conference is now available.
> I will update with a link to the full transcript when it is available.
> [image: Share]<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D52780&title=The%20Effects%20of%20Racial%20Redistricting%20on%20Southern%20Politics%3A%20%20A%20View%20From%20the%20Republican%20Side&description=>
> Posted in redistricting <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=6>, Voting
> Rights Act <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=15> | Comments Off
> “Claim Citizens United Attorney Broke Charity Tax Law Doesn’t Hold Up”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=52807>
> Posted on July 10, 2013 12:00 pm <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=52807> by Rick
> Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>
> Interesting perspective<http://www.forbes.com/sites/peterjreilly/2013/07/10/crew-embarrasses-itself-with-bopp-whistleblower-claim/>on Bopp-CREW from Peter Reilly.
>
> MORE
> <http://www.theindianalawyer.com/attorney-says-washington-nonprofits-complaints-are-part-of-smear-campaign/PARAMS/article/31887>from
> *Indiana Lawyer.*
> [image: Share]<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D52807&title=%E2%80%9CClaim%20Citizens%20United%20Attorney%20Broke%20Charity%20Tax%20Law%20Doesn%E2%80%99t%20Hold%20Up%E2%80%9D&description=>
> Posted in Uncategorized <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1> | Comments
> Off
> “NC redistricting decision a setback for voting rights”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=52804>
> Posted on July 10, 2013 11:57 am <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=52804> by Rick
> Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>
> Brentin Mock<http://www.southernstudies.org/2013/07/nc-redistricting-decision-a-setback-for-voting-rig.html>writes for Facing South.
> [image: Share]<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D52804&title=%E2%80%9CNC%20redistricting%20decision%20a%20setback%20for%20voting%20rights%E2%80%9D&description=>
> Posted in redistricting <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=6> | 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 92697-8000949.824.3072 - office949.824.0495 - faxrhasen at law.uci.eduhttp://law.uci.edu/faculty/page1_r_hasen.htmlhttp://electionlawblog.org
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20130715/7a52ecdb/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: outside-nj.png
Type: image/png
Size: 117068 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20130715/7a52ecdb/attachment.png>
-------------- 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/20130715/7a52ecdb/attachment-0001.png>
View list directory