[EL] Push polling

Smith, Brad BSmith at law.capital.edu
Wed May 1 13:19:14 PDT 2013 

I'm thinking of doing my own push poll on money in politics. It will go something like this:

- What would you think of the FEC if I told you it "regularly deadlocks." (in fact, even at current record levels, it deadlocks relatively infrequently, and most "deadlocks" actually decide the issue involved).

- Would you be more inclined to support new restrictions on campaign finance and new disclosure rules if I told you that the political system was being swamped with dark money? (In fact, "dark money" - no push nomenclature there - amounts to less than 5% of 2012 spending in federal races).

- What would you think if I told you that the FEC can't function because all of the commissioners' terms have expired? (in fact, commissioners can remain and retain full powers after the expiration of their terms).

- Would you be more likely to support SEC mandating disclosure of corporate trade association dues if I told you that shareholders wanted such information? (in fact, in 12 shareholder votes this proxy season, disclosure is 0-12, with an average vote less than 20%.).

- Do you support sham political advocacy?

- Would you be more or less inclined to support more disclosure laws if I told you that the use of "shell" corporations to hide the sources of political funding was now a common tactic? (in fact, there is no evidence it is a common tactic).




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: Wednesday, May 01, 2013 10:14 AM
To: law-election at uci.edu
Subject: [EL] ELB News and Commentary 5/1/13

¡°No Vote of Confidence for FEC¡±<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=49782>
Posted on May 1, 2013 7:11 am<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=49782> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Melanie Sloan Politico oped<http://www.politico.com/story/2013/04/no-vote-of-confidence-for-fec-90783.html?hp=l13>.

[Share]<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D49782&title=%E2%80%9CNo%20Vote%20of%20Confidence%20for%20FEC%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted in campaign finance<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>, federal election commission<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=24> | Comments Off
¡°DIRTY TRICKS: Mysterious Conservative Group Sending Out Push Polls In South Carolina Special Election¡±<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=49778>
Posted on May 1, 2013 7:07 am<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=49778> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Alleged nasty push poll<http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2013/05/01/1945751/south-carolina-push-poll/?mobile=nc>:

- ¡°What would you think of Elizabeth Colbert Busch if I told you she had had an abortion?¡±

- ¡°What would you think of Elizabeth Colbert Busch if I told you a judge held her in contempt of court at her divorce proceedings?

- ¡°What would you think of Elizabeth Colbert Busch if she had done jail time?¡±

- ¡°What would you think of Elizabeth Colbert Busch if I told you she was caught running up a charge account bill?¡±

- ¡°What would you think of Elizabeth Colbert Busch if she supported the failed stimulus plan?¡±

- ¡°What would you think of Elizabeth Colbert Busch if I told you unions contributed to her campaign?¡±

If you are thinking we should just ban false campaign speech, read this<http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2151618>.

[Share]<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D49778&title=%E2%80%9CDIRTY%20TRICKS%3A%20Mysterious%20Conservative%20Group%20Sending%20Out%20Push%20Polls%20In%20South%20Carolina%20Special%20Election%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted in campaigns<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59>, chicanery<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=12> | Comments Off
¡°Sandra Day O¡¯Connor: H.W. Bush Victory Was ¡®Vital for the Court¡¯; An old letter suggests she too once saw the Supreme Court as a political body.¡±<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=49775>
Posted on May 1, 2013 7:04 am<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=49775> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Linda Hirshman writes<http://www.newrepublic.com/article/113079/sandra-day-oconnor-barry-goldwater-letter-bush-vital-court> for TNR.

[Share]<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D49775&title=%E2%80%9CSandra%20Day%20O%E2%80%99Connor%3A%20H.W.%20Bush%20Victory%20Was%20%E2%80%98Vital%20for%20the%20Court%E2%80%99%3B%20An%20old%20letter%20suggests%20she%20too%20once%20saw%20the%20Supreme%20Court%20as%20a%20political%20body.%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted in Bush v. Gore reflections<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=5>, Supreme Court<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29> | Comments Off
Give the People What They Want<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=49771>
Posted on May 1, 2013 6:59 am<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=49771> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

In my forthcoming Drake Law Review symposium piece<http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2243798> on political dysfunction and constitutional change, I take on a number of arguments about whether the current federal government is dysfunctional. Among the arguments I consider is Jonathan Rauch¡¯s argument that the people prefer divided government.  I look at both Gallup and NES data to show that the country is actually divided on this question too¡ªand those who are not in the president¡¯s party tend to be more likely to want divided government (as a check on the president) than those who are in the president¡¯s party.  A new poll<http://www.quinnipiac.edu/institutes--centers/polling-institute/national/release-detail?ReleaseID=1890> out from Quinnipiac (h/t TPM<http://livewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/entry/poll-plurality-wants-one-party-to-control-white?ref=fpb>) supports this view, though the numbers differ significantly from both Gallup and NES (likely because of the different wording of the questions):

[quin-poll]<http://electionlawblog.org/wp-content/uploads/quin-poll.png>

[Share]<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D49771&title=Give%20the%20People%20What%20They%20Want&description=>
Posted in political parties<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=25>, political polarization<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=68> | Comments Off
¡°Koch Brothers Plan More Political Involvement for Their Conservative Network¡±<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=49768>
Posted on April 30, 2013 9:32 pm<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=49768> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

NYT<http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/01/us/politics/koch-brothers-plan-more-political-involvement-for-their-conservative-network.html?ref=politics&_r=0>:

While awaiting an internal audit headed by a top Koch Industries executive, the brothers have rejected any notion of stepping back from electoral politics. Strikingly, after years of nurturing a political network and donor base largely independent from traditional Republican circles, the Kochs are planning to substantially increase their involvement in party affairs.

They have not yet decided whether to intervene in Republican primaries, people involved in the discussions say. But the brothers want their network to play a bigger role in cultivating and promoting Republican candidates who hew to their vision of conservatism, emphasizing smaller government and deregulation more than immigration and social issues. They are also seeking closer control over groups within their network, purging or downgrading those that did not deliver last year and expanding financing for those that performed well.

[Share]<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D49768&title=%E2%80%9CKoch%20Brothers%20Plan%20More%20Political%20Involvement%20for%20Their%20Conservative%20Network%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted in campaign finance<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>, campaigns<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59> | Comments Off
¡°San Gabriel political leaders to voice opposition to Chin Ho Liao hearing¡±<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=49765>
Posted on April 30, 2013 9:26 pm<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=49765> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Pasadena Star-News: ¡°<http://www.pasadenastarnews.com/news/ci_23141794/san-gabriel-political-leaders-voice-opposition-chin-ho>SAN GABRIEL¨C Local and state political leaders will come together Friday to publicly oppose the City Council¡¯s decision to hold an administrative hearing last week to determine whether Councilman-elect Chin Ho Liao meets residency requirements to serve on the council. Congresswoman Judy Chu, D-Pasadena, Assemblyman Ed Chau, D-Alhambra, State Sen. Ed Hernandez, D-West Covina, and former State Assemblyman and Los Angeles Community College Trustee-Elect Mike Eng will attend a press conference Friday at 11 a.m. The event is organized by the newly formed Coalition to Save San Gabriel, which a Facebook page says is comprised of concerned residents. The coalition also has begun to circulate a petition to seat Liao.¡±

[Share]<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D49765&title=%E2%80%9CSan%20Gabriel%20political%20leaders%20to%20voice%20opposition%20to%20Chin%20Ho%20Liao%20hearing%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted in residency<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=38> | Comments Off
¡°Wonkbook: The hopey-changey thing isn¡¯t working out so well¡±<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=49762>
Posted on April 30, 2013 9:23 pm<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=49762> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Ezra Klein<http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/04/30/wonkbook-the-hopey-changey-thing-isnt-working-out-so-well/>: ¡°Under Obama, today¡¯s Democratic Party is not the party of campaign-finance reform in any serious way. They favor it abstractly, but with the exception of relatively modest laws meant to roll back the effects of Citizens United and its related rulings, they expend no political capital or intellectual energy on the topic. Washington is safe. Democracy less so.¡±

Common Cause<http://www.commonblog.com/2013/04/30/13875/> responds to Ezra.



[Share]<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D49762&title=%E2%80%9CWonkbook%3A%20The%20hopey-changey%20thing%20isn%E2%80%99t%20working%20out%20so%20well%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted in campaign finance<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>, lobbying<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=28> | Comments Off
¡°Two New Nominees to FEC Possible But Reformers Press Obama for More¡±<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=49759>
Posted on April 30, 2013 9:21 pm<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=49759> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Bloomberg BNA<http://news.bna.com/mpdm/MPDMWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=30834135&vname=mpebulallissues&jd=a0d8b3g6c7&split=0>: ¡°Word that the White House is studying two new appointments to the Federal Election Commission does not fully respond to criticism that President Obama has failed to provide leadership on the FEC or campaign finance issues in general, according to campaign reform supporters. The possible announcement of new nominees to the FEC in the coming weeks would not necessarily be a ¡°breakthrough,¡± veteran campaign reformer Fred Wertheimer of Democracy 21 told BNA April 30. Wertheimer, along with other reformers, has stepped up criticism of Obama over the failure to appoint new FEC commissioners and other campaign finance issues.¡±

I agree.  Replacing a Democratic and Republican Commissioner on the FEC, without more, would do nothing to improve the agency.

[Share]<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D49759&title=%E2%80%9CTwo%20New%20Nominees%20to%20FEC%20Possible%20But%20Reformers%20Press%20Obama%20for%20More%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted in campaign finance<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>, federal election commission<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=24> | Comments Off
The Onion Talks to ¡°Real¡± People About Justice O¡¯Connor¡¯s Regrets Over Bush v. Gore<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=49757>
Posted on April 30, 2013 9:03 pm<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=49757> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Here<http://www.theonion.com/articles/sandra-day-oconnor-regrets-bush-v-gore,32266/>.  My favorite: ¡°She should give herself a break. I mean, who hasn¡¯t made a mistake when adjudicating a landmark case?¡±

[Share]<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D49757&title=The%20Onion%20Talks%20to%20%E2%80%9CReal%E2%80%9D%20People%20About%20Justice%20O%E2%80%99Connor%E2%80%99s%20Regrets%20Over%20Bush%20v.%20Gore&description=>
Posted in Bush v. Gore reflections<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=5>, election law "humor"<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=52> | Comments Off
¡°FairVote Maps the 2012 Presidential Campaign¡±<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=49754>
Posted on April 30, 2013 9:01 pm<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=49754> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Read<http://www.fairvote.org/fairvote-maps-the-2012-presidential-campaign#.UYCTJoLuezt> about this:

[cid:part82.04030606.04090001 at law.uci.edu]

[Share]<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D49754&title=%E2%80%9CFairVote%20Maps%20the%202012%20Presidential%20Campaign%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted in campaigns<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59>, electoral college<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=44> | Comments Off
Colorado Republican Senators Fiilibustering Elections Bill<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=49750>
Posted on April 30, 2013 8:58 pm<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=49750> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Watch<http://www.coloradochannel.net/colorado-senate-2013-legislative-day-112-part-2>.

Denver Post<http://www.denverpost.com/breakingnews/ci_23142288/election-bill-debate-expected-last-late-into-night>: ¡°Republicans, arguing the bill is being ¡®crammed¡¯ through the legislature, asked that the 120-plus page bill be read in its entirety, taking up more than two hours of debate time.¡±

Colorado now ground zero in the voting wars.

[Share]<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D49750&title=Colorado%20Republican%20Senators%20Fiilibustering%20Elections%20Bill&description=>
Posted in election administration<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>, The Voting Wars<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60> | Comments Off
Quote of the Day<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=49747>
Posted on April 30, 2013 8:54 pm<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=49747> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

¡°When the Supreme Court first got involved I was shocked because Bush¡¯s petition was moot. He had been certified the winner. I thought the justices would simply abate their action, and I was surprised they did not.¡±

¡ªFormer Florida Supreme Court Justice Charley Wells<http://www.dailyreportonline.com/PubArticleDRO.jsp?id=1202598167363&thepage=1>, on the first U.S. Supreme Court decision to intervene in the Bush/Gore dispute.

[Share]<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D49747&title=Quote%20of%20the%20Day&description=>
Posted in Bush v. Gore reflections<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=5> | Comments Off
Prop 8 and the Possible DIG: Evidence From This Week That It¡¯s Possible.<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=49741>
Posted on April 30, 2013 3:03 pm<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=49741> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

On March 28, I posted<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=48806> on the possibility that the Court in the Prop 8 case might dismiss the case as improvidently granted (or ¡°DIG¡±) the case, thereby allowing the lower court ruling barring enforcement of Prop. 8 to stand, but not setting any precedent on the gay marriage issue.  This would allow likely swing Justice Kennedy to avoid the issue, at least for a while.  But I noted a catch:

  The issue arises because it takes only four Justices to hear the case but five to reach a majority on the merits.  Tom [Goldstein] writes:

If Justice Kennedy did decline to vote on the merits, then the Ninth Circuit¡¯s judgment would be affirmed.  Either the judgment would formally be affirmed by an equally divided court, or he would nominally cast a vote to ¡°affirm¡± that would produce the same result ¨C see, for example, Justice Stevens¡¯s 1983 opinion concurring in the judgment in Connecticut v. Johnson<http://www.bloomberglaw.com/public/document/Connecticut_v_Johnson_460_US_73_103_S_Ct_969_74_L_Ed_2d_823_1983_>.

But whether a Justice can decline to decide a case on the ground that it should be dismissed, when no development has occurred since certiorari has been granted, is a difficult and debated question in the Court.  See, e.g., Richard L. Revesz & Pamela S. Karlan, Nonmajority Rules and the Supreme Court, 136 U. Pa. L. Rev. 1067 (1987-1998), and Michael E. Solimine & Rafael Gely, The Supreme Court and the DIG:  An Empirical and Institutional Analysis, 2005 Wis. L. Rev. 1421 (2005).  (Ironically, one of the most relevant authorities is an early predecessor to gay rights litigation, New York v. Uplinger<http://www.bloomberglaw.com/public/document/New_York_v_Uplinger_467_US_246_104_S_Ct_2332_81_L_Ed_2d_201_1984_>.)  If Justices were perfectly free to do so, then in theory the Court¡¯s ¡°rule of four¡± ¨C that four members of the Court can vote to grant certiorari ¨C would be in jeopardy:  five Justices who did not grant certiorari could simply refuse to decide the case.  On the other hand, a Justice could reserve the power not to decide the merits for extraordinary cases.

So the thinking is we would not have four Justices voting against a DIG.  Yet that¡¯s precisely what happened this week in Boyer. v. Louisiana<http://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/boyer-v-louisiana/?wpmp_switcher=desktop>, a case involving a speedy trial.  As Rory Little explains<http://www.scotusblog.com/2013/04/the-court-digs-in-boyer-v-louisiana-and-sometimes-silence-can-speak-volumes/>, ¡°four of the [Justices] dissented from the [DIG] order at length (Justice Sotomayor, joined by Justices Ginsburg, Breyer, and Kagan), while another three (Justice Alito concurring in the order, joined by Justices Scalia and Thomas) expressed their supportive rationale¡­¡±

So it could certainly happen again in the Prop. 8 case, though I would expect that the dissenters there would be Jusices Scalia, Alito, Thomas [corrected], and possibly the Chief.

[Share]<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D49741&title=Prop%208%20and%20the%20Possible%20DIG%3A%20%20Evidence%20From%20This%20Week%20That%20It%E2%80%99s%20Possible.&description=>
Posted in Supreme Court<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29> | Comments Off
¡°How Sandra Day O¡¯Connor¡¯s Vote In Bush v. Gore Helped Unravel Her Own Legacy¡±<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=49738>
Posted on April 30, 2013 2:29 pm<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=49738> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

TPM reports<http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2013/04/sandra-day-oconnor-bush-gore-legacy.php?ref=fpblg>.

[Share]<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D49738&title=%E2%80%9CHow%20Sandra%20Day%20O%E2%80%99Connor%E2%80%99s%20Vote%20In%20Bush%20v.%20Gore%20Helped%20Unravel%20Her%20Own%20Legacy%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted in Bush v. Gore reflections<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=5>, Supreme Court<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29> | Comments Off
¡°LANDMARK FILM DIGITAL RELEASE TO COINCIDE WITH U.S. SUPREME COURT DECISION¡±<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=49735>
Posted on April 30, 2013 2:16 pm<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=49735> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

The following press release arrived via email:

New York, N.Y.¨C¡°Home of the Brave,¡± a powerful, award-winning 2004 documentary about murdered civil rights activist Viola Liuzzo will be released digitally as the U.S. Supreme Court considers overturning critical aspects of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, the ground-breaking legislation that outlaws discriminatory voting practices. SundanceNow and New Video have scheduled widespread digital distribution with dates that overlap with this significant Supreme Court decision being made in June.

¡°The most potent weapon in fighting discrimination at the ballot box is before the Supreme Court in a case that weighs the nation¡¯s enormous progress in civil rights against the need to continue to protect minority voters,¡± says Stockard Channing, narrator of ¡°Home of the Brave.¡± ¡°Viola Liuzzo¡¯s story needs to be part of America¡¯s social consciousness for many reasons, but is especially critical now, as the Supreme Court justices make their decision this June.¡±
The lawsuit from Shelby County, Ala. addresses Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act and says that federal oversight of elections is no longer needed. Section 5 requires 16 states with a history of racial discrimination in voting, primarily in the South, to clear election-related changes with the federal government. Section 5 is widely regarded as the most effective provision of the country¡¯s most important civil rights law.
¡°She wanted equal rights for everyone, no matter what the cost!¡±  14-year-old Tommy Liuzzo, 1965



Viola Liuzzo
Liuzzo, the 39-year-old wife of a Detroit Teamster and mother of five, joined thousands of civil rights protesters in Selma, Ala. for the Voting Rights March in 1965, only to be gunned down in a drive-by shooting on a deserted highway as she shuttled marchers back and forth to the airport.  The murderers were members of the Ku Klux Klan, one of whom, Gary Thomas Rowe, was an FBI informant.  Despite a slanderous investigation headed by J. Edgar Hoover, Liuzzo¡¯s death ¨C the only white woman killed during this long struggle ¨C became the catalyst for President Lyndon Johnson¡¯s push to pass the Voting Rights Act of 1965.
Many Americans have never heard Liuzzo¡¯s name or story, making ¡°Home of the Brave¡± extremely timely and relevant. Amazon Instant Video, PlayStation, Xbox Video, Vudu, YouTube Rentals and SundanceNow will release ¡°Home of the Brave¡± on May 7. The documentary¡¯s release will expand to include Netflix, SnagFilms and Hulu on June 7. The educational distributor Bullfrog Films, Inc., a long-time advocate for the film, is actively promoting the documentary to their broad list of libraries and universities.
¡°The entire struggle of that era was about the Voting Rights Acts, says Mary Lilleboe, daughter of Viola Liuzzo. ¡°American citizens have and had the Constitutional right to vote. All the bloodshed, tears and lives lost were in a struggle to get the federal government to ensure this right was not tampered with by anyone in any way. This movie is about the struggle to exercise our right, the cost to guarantee it and the people who paid the price. The very attempt to repeal this legislation forewarns of the danger in doing so and tears at the hearts of those who lived through it.¡±

¡°Home of the Brave¡± premiered in competition at Sundance in 2004. The film was distributed theatrically by Emerging Pictures and on television by Court TV.  Image Entertainment handled DVD sales and Bullfrog Films distributes to the educational market, including schools and museums.  The critically acclaimed documentary was short-listed for the 2005 Academy Awards. The film won the Chicago International Film Festival Silver Lion Award as well as the Social Justice Award at the Santa Barbara International Film Festival. It also received a Writer¡¯s Guild nomination for Best Documentary Screenplay, Best Documentary Award at the Port Townsend Film Festival, Best Feature Documentary nomination for the 2004 International Documentary Association Awards, the Joan Phillips-Sandy Award for excellent film with social message in Maine and 1st runner-up for the Audience Choice at the Cleveland International Film Festival.

TRAILER: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0389009/
IMAGES: https://plus.google.com/photos/102122638710638255846/albums/5872258597343161121?banner=pwa

Sundance and iTunes has ¡°Home of the Brave¡± available for pre-orders:

http://www.sundance.org/nowplaying/film/home-of-the-brave/
https://itunes.apple.com/us/movie/home-of-the-brave/id632002683

[Share]<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D49735&title=%E2%80%9CLANDMARK%20FILM%20DIGITAL%20RELEASE%20TO%20COINCIDE%20WITH%20U.S.%20SUPREME%20COURT%20DECISION%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted in Supreme Court<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>, Voting Rights Act<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=15> | Comments Off
¡°Should We Kill the Federal Election Commission?¡±<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=49732>
Posted on April 30, 2013 9:47 am<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=49732> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Bloomberg View.<http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-04-30/should-we-kill-the-federal-election-commission-.html>

[Share]<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D49732&title=%E2%80%9CShould%20We%20Kill%20the%20Federal%20Election%20Commission%3F%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted in campaign finance<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>, federal election commission<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=24> | Comments Off
¡°Infographic: Online Lookup Tools For Voters 2012¡å<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=49729>
Posted on April 30, 2013 8:28 am<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=49729> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

New Pew<http://www.pewstates.org/research/data-visualizations/infographic-online-lookup-tools-for-voters-2012-85899471399>.

[Share]<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D49729&title=%E2%80%9CInfographic%3A%20Online%20Lookup%20Tools%20For%20Voters%202012%E2%80%B3&description=>
Posted in election administration<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18> | Comments Off
¡°Assembly and Petition (Book Review)¡±<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=49726>
Posted on April 30, 2013 8:16 am<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=49726> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Aaron Caplan has posted this draft<http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2248434> on SSRN (forthcoming, Journal of Legal Education).  Here is the abstract;

Two books published in 2012 ¨C Liberty¡¯s Refuge: The Forgotten Freedom of Assembly by John D. Inazu and Reclaiming The Petition Clause by Ronald J. Krotoszynski, Jr. ¨C are devoted to explaining the final clauses of the First Amendment. They share a central complaint: namely, that current doctrine fails to give much independent force to either clause, instead channeling all inquiries into a speech clause that does not effectuate the distinct goals of the assembly and petition clauses. Yet the two books have curiously little to say to each other. The cases the authors cite and the slices of legal and social history they explore have almost no overlap.

This joint review (forthcoming in the Journal of Legal Education) describes the two books, identifying some of the more intriguing puzzles identified by each. It closes with some ideas about what it means for two nearly simultaneous books about ¡°forgotten¡± clauses of the First Amendment to pass silently like ships in the night.



[Share]<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D49726&title=%E2%80%9CAssembly%20and%20Petition%20%28Book%20Review%29%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted in petition clause<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=30> | Comments Off
¡°The State of Maine vs. anonymous blogging¡±<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=49723>
Posted on April 30, 2013 7:48 am<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=49723> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Dylan Byers (non-anonymously) blogs<http://www.politico.com/blogs/media/?ml=bl_db>.

[Share]<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D49723&title=%E2%80%9CThe%20State%20of%20Maine%20vs.%20anonymous%20blogging%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted in campaign finance<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>, campaigns<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59> | Comments Off
¡°James O¡¯Keefe Wannabe Botches Denver Elections ¡®Sting¡¯¡±<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=49720>
Posted on April 30, 2013 7:46 am<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=49720> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Interesting<http://coloradopols.com/diary/41353/james-okeefe-wannabe-botches-denver-elections-sting>.

[Share]<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D49720&title=%E2%80%9CJames%20O%E2%80%99Keefe%20Wannabe%20Botches%20Denver%20Elections%20%E2%80%98Sting%E2%80%99%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted in chicanery<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=12>, The Voting Wars<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60> | Comments Off
¡°Why don¡¯t Americans care more about campaign finance reform?¡±<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=49718>
Posted on April 30, 2013 7:44 am<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=49718> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

WaPo follow-up<http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2013/04/30/why-dont-americans-care-more-about-campaign-finance-reform/>.

[Share]<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D49718&title=%E2%80%9CWhy%20don%E2%80%99t%20Americans%20care%20more%20about%20campaign%20finance%20reform%3F%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted in campaign finance<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10> | Comments Off
¡°White House to set president¡¯s election commission in motion next month¡±<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=49715>
Posted on April 30, 2013 7:35 am<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=49715> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Yahoo! News reports<http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/white-house-set-president-election-commission-motion-next-195230091.html>.

[Share]<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D49715&title=%E2%80%9CWhite%20House%20to%20set%20president%E2%80%99s%20election%20commission%20in%20motion%20next%20month%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted in election administration<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>, The Voting Wars<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60> | Comments Off
¡°Did Backlash Against GOP Voter Suppression Increase Black Turnout?¡±<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=49712>
Posted on April 30, 2013 7:33 am<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=49712> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Brendan Fischer ponders<http://www.prwatch.org/news/2013/04/12088/did-backlash-against-gop-voter-suppression-increase-black-turnout>.  I explored this potential for backlash last August in chapter 3 of 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>.

[Share]<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D49712&title=%E2%80%9CDid%20Backlash%20Against%20GOP%20Voter%20Suppression%20Increase%20Black%20Turnout%3F%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted in election administration<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>, The Voting Wars<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60> | Comments Off
¡°FEC Expired Terms Prompt Calls for Obama to Keep Promise¡±<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=49710>
Posted on April 30, 2013 7:31 am<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=49710> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Bloomberg reports<http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-04-30/fec-expired-terms-prompt-calls-for-obama-to-keep-promise.html?alcmpid=politics>.

[Share]<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D49710&title=%E2%80%9CFEC%20Expired%20Terms%20Prompt%20Calls%20for%20Obama%20to%20Keep%20Promise%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted in campaign finance<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>, federal election commission<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=24> | Comments Off
--
Rick Hasen
Chancellor's Professor of Law and Political Science
UC Irvine School of Law
401 E. Peltason Dr., Suite 1000
Irvine, CA 92697-8000
949.824.3072 - office
949.824.0495 - fax
rhasen at law.uci.edu<mailto:rhasen at law.uci.edu>
http://law.uci.edu/faculty/page1_r_hasen.html
http://electionlawblog.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20130501/1de44242/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: share_save_171_16.png
Type: image/png
Size: 1504 bytes
Desc: share_save_171_16.png
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20130501/1de44242/attachment.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: quin-poll.png
Type: image/png
Size: 61243 bytes
Desc: quin-poll.png
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20130501/1de44242/attachment-0001.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: ResizedImage600309-event-map.png
Type: image/png
Size: 337223 bytes
Desc: ResizedImage600309-event-map.png
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20130501/1de44242/attachment-0002.png>

View list directory