[EL] Ferguson voting

Mon Aug 18 08:23:31 PDT 2014

If anyone responds to Sean's post, please use this (or another) subject
heading rather than the generic one.
Thanks.

On 8/18/14, 8:14 AM, Sean Parnell wrote:
>
> The issue of white dominance of the political system of Ferguson, MO
> is an interesting one. ThinkProgress had an interesting (and I think
> reasonable) assessment
> (http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2014/08/18/3472278/this-is-the-most-important-reform-ferguson-can-enact-to-prevent-another-standoff/)
> that provides a bit more information than Matt Yglesias. It all boils
> down, apparently, to the fact that Ferguson elects its local
> government in April of odd-numbered years. Here’s what ThinkProgress
> concludes:
>
> /So the solution to the fact that Ferguson’s black majority is nearly
> unrepresented in its government could be as simple as rescheduling its
> municipal elections so that they are held in November of even-numbered
> years ― the same time that federal elections are held.///
>
> I don’t have any strong feelings one way or the other on this, but I
> am curious if any other municipal government in the country currently
> holds elections on the same day as federal elections? I know many
> (most? all?) counties do, but to the best of my recollection I’ve
> never lived in an area where municipal elections (or school board)
> were held on the same day as federal elections. Anybody have any
> insights on this?
>
> Sean Parnell
>
> President
>
> Impact Policy Management, LLC
>
> 6411 Caleb Court
>
> Alexandria, VA 22315
>
> 571-289-1374 (c)
>
> sean at impactpolicymanagement.com
>
> *From:*law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu
> [mailto:law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu] *On Behalf Of
> *Rick Hasen
> *Sent:* Monday, August 18, 2014 11:03 AM
> *To:* law-election at UCI.edu
> *Subject:* [EL] ELB News and Commentary 8/18/14
>
>
>     The Perry Indictment <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=64388>
>
> Posted onAugust 18, 2014 7:59 am
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=64388>by*Rick Hasen*
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>
> You can read ithere.
> <http://www.scribd.com/doc/236936143/Rick-Perry-Indictment>
>
> Eugene Volokh analyzed count I
> <http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2014/08/16/does-a-governor-have-custody-or-possession-of-funds-the-legislature-wants-to-appropriate-in-a-bill-that-he-vetoes/>
> and count II
> <http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2014/08/16/is-the-indictment-of-texas-gov-rick-perry-inconsistent-with-a-texas-court-of-appeals-precedent-as-to-the-coercion-count/>
> separately.
>
> I’ve written to put the indictment into a broader context ofthe
> criminalization of politics <http://t.co/K5yWcNzt9E>.
>
> I am scheduled to be on MSNBC’s The Cycle today at 3:20 pm
> pacific/12:20 pm eastern to talk about this. As always TV appearances
> on these news shows are always tentative.
>
> Share
> <http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D64388&title=The%20Perry%20Indictment&description=>
>
> Posted inUncategorized <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>
>
>
>     “How whites have retained political power in Ferguson, and why
>     they’ll lose it soon” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=64386>
>
> Posted onAugust 18, 2014 7:52 am
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=64386>by*Rick Hasen*
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>
> Matt Yglesias writes
> <http://www.vox.com/2014/8/18/6029141/why-ferguson-government-is-so-white?utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter&utm_campaign=ezraklein&utm_content=monday>for
> Vox.
>
> Share
> <http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D64386&title=%E2%80%9CHow%20whites%20have%20retained%20political%20power%20in%20Ferguson%2C%20and%20why%20they%E2%80%99ll%20lose%20it%20soon%E2%80%9D&description=>
>
> Posted invoting <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=31>
>
>
>     “Empirically Measuring the Impact of Photo ID Over Time and Its
>     Impact on Women” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=64384>
>
> Posted onAugust 18, 2014 7:50 am
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=64384>by*Rick Hasen*
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>
> Mike Pitts has postedthis draft
> <http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2479500>on SSRN
> (forthcoming, /Indiana Law Review/). Here is the abstract:
>
>     /This article is part of a series of studies related to the impact
>     of Indiana’s photo identification law during the two presidential
>     election cycles at which it has been implemented ― 2008 and 2012.
>     This article tracks the number of provisional ballots cast and not
>     counted because of a lack of voter identification at Indiana’s
>     2012 general election. Importantly, this article also addresses an
>     argument against photo identification laws that has became more
>     prominent in recent years ― the idea that photo identification
>     laws disparately disfranchise female voters. This article
>     addresses that argument by tracking the gender of those persons
>     who cast provisional ballots due to a lack of valid photo
>     identification ― something that does not seem to have been
>     previously done anywhere in the literature. While the research
>     presented here allows for several conclusions, the most important
>     of those conclusions are as follows. First, Indiana’s photo
>     identification law has a relatively small (in relation to the
>     total number of ballots cast) overall actual disfranchising impact
>     on the electorate. Second, Indiana’s photo identification law’s
>     actual disfranchising impact seems to be headed in a downward
>     direction when one compares data from the 2012 general election to
>     the 2008 general election. Third, Indiana’s photo identification
>     law appears to have a disparate impact on women./
>
> Mike’s work is careful and important. I look forward to reading this!
>
> Share
> <http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D64384&title=%E2%80%9CEmpirically%20Measuring%20the%20Impact%20of%20Photo%20ID%20Over%20Time%20and%20Its%20Impact%20on%20Women%E2%80%9D&description=>
>
> Posted inelection administration
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>,The Voting Wars
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60>,voter id
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=9>
>
>
>     “Election Spending 2014: Nine Toss-Up Senate Races”
>     <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=64382>
>
> Posted onAugust 18, 2014 7:47 am
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=64382>by*Rick Hasen*
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>
> Brennan Center
> <http://www.brennancenter.org/analysis/election-spending-2014-nine-toss-up-senate-races>:
>
>     /With control of the Senate at play in the 2014 election, tight
>     races have seen astronomical spending from outside groups. Even
>     with almost three months left until Election Day, an analysis of
>     outside spending in the nine most competitive Senate races found
>     several trends. Like previous Brennan Center analyses
>     <http://www.brennancenter.org/analysis/election-spending-2014-13-toss-house-districts>,
>     we observed inadequate transparency and single-candidate spenders
>     providing opportunities to avoid contribution limits. We also
>     discovered two key findings:/
>
>     /1.//These nine Senate races have seen $72 million worth of
>     independent expenditures thus far. As a point of comparison, in
>     the 2010 midterms, nonparty outside spending reached only $97
>     million ― and that was for the /whole election in all 37 Senate
>     races/. The highest levels of independent expenditures in our
>     sample were seen in North Carolina, with $14 million, and
>     Kentucky, with $12 million./
>
>     /2.//The competitive Senate races also reveal a potential new
>     trend ― organizations that benefit a single candidate and hide
>     their donors. These single-candidate, dark-money groups make it
>     impossible to know whether candidate contributors are attempting
>     to curry favor by also making large donations to
>     candidate-specific spenders./
>
> Share
> <http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D64382&title=%E2%80%9CElection%20Spending%202014%3A%20Nine%20Toss-Up%20Senate%20Races%E2%80%9D&description=>
>
> Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>
>
>
>     “Political Activity Limits and Tax Exemption: A Gordian’s Knot”
>     <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=64380>
>
> Posted onAugust 18, 2014 7:44 am
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=64380>by*Rick Hasen*
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>
> Roger Colinvaux has postedthis draft
> <http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2476435>on SSRN
> (forthcoming, /Virginia Tax Review/). Here is the abstract:
>
>     /The article considers the correct tax treatment of political
>     activity by the tax system and discusses the problems that have
>     arisen from political activity depending on whether the
>     organization is a charity, a noncharitable exempt, or a political
>     organization. The article then examines administrative and
>     legislative options to the problems raised by political activity.
>     Quantum-based solutions to the problem of political activity by
>     noncharitable exempts do not provide a clear advantage over
>     present law. Formally quantifying the “primarily” test would
>     result in more certainty, but would also require that the Service
>     be more, not less, involved in the regulation of political
>     activity. If the policy goal is to curb political activity by
>     noncharitable exempts, changing the test from “primarily” to
>     something more restrictive like “substantially” or “exclusively”
>     would be effective, but would create new categories of taxable
>     nonprofits that are treated worse than political organizations for
>     engaging in less political activity, which is irrational. Further,
>     it is not clear, especially after the Citizens United decision,
>     why as a matter of tax exemption the regulations decree that
>     political activity may not further noncharitable exempt purposes.
>     Before Citizens United, the political activity limits were not
>     especially relevant, but at least helped to differentiate
>     organization types. However, Citizens United largely rendered
>     existing tax law limitations obsolete by making a new kind of
>     multi-purpose organization possible. As a result, definitional
>     political activity limits are no longer justified and should be
>     eliminated, but only if the 527(f) tax on investment income
>     remains vital and the differences in the disclosure regimes
>     between political organizations and noncharitable exempts are
>     erased. In addition, Congress should affirm that the gift tax does
>     not apply with respect to political contributions, but also extend
>     the income tax to transfers of appreciated property to
>     noncharitable exempts. Further, Congress should acknowledge that
>     the increase in political speech by noncharitable exempts will
>     lead to abuse of charitable organizations, and take steps to
>     prevent the laundering of independent expenditures through the
>     charitable form. Congress also should recognize that Citizens
>     United has led to a need to develop a new tax baseline for
>     political activity conducted “for profit” or outside of section 527./
>
> Share
> <http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D64380&title=%E2%80%9CPolitical%20Activity%20Limits%20and%20Tax%20Exemption%3A%20A%20Gordian%E2%80%99s%20Knot%E2%80%9D&description=>
>
> Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>,tax law
> and election law <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=22>
>
>
>     “Rob Richie: How Florida can hold elections in fair districts in
>     2014″ <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=64378>
>
> Posted onAugust 18, 2014 7:42 am
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=64378>by*Rick Hasen*
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>
> Gainesville Sun oped.
> <http://www.gainesville.com/article/20140815/OPINION/140819673?Title=Rob-Richie-How-Florida-can-hold-elections-in-fair-districts-in-2014->
>
> Share
> <http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D64378&title=%E2%80%9CRob%20Richie%3A%20How%20Florida%20can%20hold%20elections%20in%20fair%20districts%20in%202014%E2%80%B3&description=>
>
> Posted inredistricting <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=6>
>
>
>     “Trying to Ensure the Fundamental Right to Vote”
>     <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=64376>
>
> Posted onAugust 18, 2014 7:41 am
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=64376>by*Rick Hasen*
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>
> NYT Letters to the
> editor<http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/18/opinion/trying-to-ensure-the-fundamental-right-to-vote.html?partner=rssnyt&emc=rss>from
> Rob Ritchie and Barry Feldman.
>
> Share
> <http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D64376&title=%E2%80%9CTrying%20to%20Ensure%20the%20Fundamental%20Right%20to%20Vote%E2%80%9D&description=>
>
> Posted invoting <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=31>
>
>
>     “Black groups tell Supreme Court Ala. districts biased”
>     <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=64374>
>
> Posted onAugust 17, 2014 8:44 pm
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=64374>by*Rick Hasen*
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>
> Mary Troyan reports
> <http://www.montgomeryadvertiser.com/story/news/local/alabama/2014/08/17/black-groups-tell-supreme-court-ala-districts-biased/14190749/>for
> Gannett: “The Alabama Legislature will be further racially polarized
> by new district boundaries that pack more black voters into certain
> districts than the law requires, state black political groups told the
> Supreme Court last week.”
>
> Share
> <http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D64374&title=%E2%80%9CBlack%20groups%20tell%20Supreme%20Court%20Ala.%20districts%20biased%E2%80%9D&description=>
>
> Posted inredistricting <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=6>,Voting
> Rights Act <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=15>
>
>
>     “Arizona Free Enterprise Club violated election law”
>     <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=64372>
>
> Posted onAugust 17, 2014 7:50 pm
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=64372>by*Rick Hasen*
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>
> AP reports.
> <http://www.azfamily.com/news/Arizona-Free-Enterprise-Club-violated-election-law-271540271.html>
>
> Share
> <http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D64372&title=%E2%80%9CArizona%20Free%20Enterprise%20Club%20violated%20election%20law%E2%80%9D&description=>
>
> Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>
>
>
>     Jill LePore on Campaign Finance Reform, Corruption, Lessig,
>     Teachout, Mutch, and Post <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=64369>
>
> Posted onAugust 17, 2014 7:46 pm
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=64369>by*Rick Hasen*
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>
> Here
> <http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:NqFUthMvNBoJ:www.newyorker.com/magazine/2014/08/25/crooked-dead+%22buying+the+vote%22+mutch&cd=15&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us>,
> in the New Yorker.
>
> Share
> <http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D64369&title=Jill%20LePore%20on%20Campaign%20Finance%20Reform%2C%20Corruption%2C%20Lessig%2C%20Teachout%2C%20Mutch%2C%20and%20Post&description=>
>
> Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>
>
> -- 
> 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://www.law.uci.edu/faculty/full-time/hasen/
> http://electionlawblog.org

-- 
Rick Hasen
Chancellor's Professor of Law and Political Science
UC Irvine School of Law
401 E. Peltason Dr., Suite 1000
Irvine, CA 92697-8000
949.824.3072 - office
949.824.0495 - fax
rhasen at law.uci.edu
http://www.law.uci.edu/faculty/full-time/hasen/
http://electionlawblog.org

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20140818/0dc19d31/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/png
Size: 1504 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20140818/0dc19d31/attachment.png>