[EL] ELB News and Commentary 11/12/14
Rick Hasen
rhasen at law.uci.edu
Wed Nov 12 07:37:09 PST 2014
"Supreme Court Case Seeks Source Of Alabama Gerrymandering"
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=68273>
Posted onNovember 12, 2014 7:35 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=68273>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Nina Totenberg reports
<http://www.npr.org/2014/11/12/363375057/supreme-court-case-seeks-source-of-alabama-gerrymandering>for
NPR.
More fromBloomberg News
<http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-11-12/landmark-voting-law-creates-role-reversal-in-court-clash.html>andGoverning.
<http://www.governing.com/topics/politics/gov-supreme-court-gerrymandering.html>
See also myearlier SCOTUSBlog preview
<http://www.scotusblog.com/?p=220511>andmy Slate piece
<http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2014/11/alabama_redistricting_supreme_court_did_legislators_redraw_district_lines.html>.
I will have more analysis after oral argument.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D68273&title=%E2%80%9CSupreme%20Court%20Case%20Seeks%20Source%20Of%20Alabama%20Gerrymandering%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted inUncategorized <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>
"Undo Citizens United? We'd Only Scratch the Surface"
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=68283>
Posted onNovember 12, 2014 7:34 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=68283>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Jedediah Purdy
<http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/11/12/undo-citizens-united-we-d-only-scratch-the-surface.html>for
the Daily Beast.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D68283&title=%E2%80%9CUndo%20Citizens%20United%3F%20We%E2%80%99d%20Only%20Scratch%20the%20Surface%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>
"At Last, a Chance to Get to the Bottom of the IRS Mess"
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=68281>
Posted onNovember 12, 2014 7:33 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=68281>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Cleta Mitchell WSJ oped
<http://online.wsj.com/articles/cleta-mitchell-at-last-a-chance-to-get-to-the-bottom-of-the-irs-mess-1415666025?KEYWORDS=%22irs%22>.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D68281&title=%E2%80%9CAt%20Last%2C%20a%20Chance%20to%20Get%20to%20the%20Bottom%20of%20the%20IRS%20Mess%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>,tax law
and election law <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=22>
"Top Campaign-Finance Cases to Watch"
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=68279>
Posted onNovember 12, 2014 7:32 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=68279>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Politico reports
<http://www.politico.com/story/2014/11/top-campaign-finance-cases-to-watch-112784.html?hp=r2_3>.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D68279&title=%E2%80%9CTop%20Campaign-Finance%20Cases%20to%20Watch%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>
Read the Full Text of FEC Commissioner Ravel's Letter on New Media
Regulation to WSJ <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=68277>
Posted onNovember 12, 2014 7:29 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=68277>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Here.
<http://www.fec.gov/members/ravel/statements/Text_of_AMRs_Letter_to_WSJ.pdf>
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D68277&title=Read%20the%20Full%20Text%20of%20FEC%20Commissioner%20Ravel%E2%80%99s%20Letter%20on%20New%20Media%20Regulation%20to%20WSJ&description=>
Posted inUncategorized <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>
"Opinion: Christie provokes serious debate on campaign finance"
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=68275>
Posted onNovember 12, 2014 7:23 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=68275>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Carl Golden
<http://www.nj.com/opinion/index.ssf/2014/11/opinion_christie_provokes_serious_debate_on_campaign_finance.html>at
NJ.com.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D68275&title=%E2%80%9COpinion%3A%20Christie%20provokes%20serious%20debate%20on%20campaign%20finance%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>
"Colorado Ousts Pro-Gun Republicans, Showing Effect of Turnout"
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=68271>
Posted onNovember 11, 2014 7:46 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=68271>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
NYT
<http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/12/us/colorado-ousts-pro-gun-republicans-showing-effect-of-turnout.html?smprod=nytcore-iphone&smid=nytcore-iphone-share>:
After two Colorado lawmakers who supported strict new gun-control
laws were voted out of office in a special recall election last
year, the National Rifle Association and its allies celebrated their
huge win in the battle over gun laws in state capitols. But that
particular victory did not last.
Even as Coloradans elected a Republican senator for the first time
in a dozen years and handed Republicans control of one chamber of
the state legislature, voters did an abrupt about-face when it came
to the recalls. The two pro-gun Republicans elected during the
recalls were handily beaten this month by Democratic candidates ---
one of whom once worked for the gun-control group founded by former
Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg of New York City.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D68271&title=%E2%80%9CColorado%20Ousts%20Pro-Gun%20Republicans%2C%20Showing%20Effect%20of%20Turnout%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>,campaigns
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59>
Interesting Ed Blum WSJ Oped on Alabama Redistricting Case at SCOTUS
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=68267>
Posted onNovember 11, 2014 6:50 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=68267>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
In my Slate
piece<http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2014/11/alabama_redistricting_supreme_court_did_legislators_redraw_district_lines.html>andSCOTUSBlog
preview<http://www.scotusblog.com/?p=220511>of the Alabama redistricting
case the Supreme Court hears Wednesday morning, I described the
interesting position conservative Justices are put in by this case: it
is not clear to me how the conservatives will view this case: through
the lens of race or party, or whether they will reverse or uphold the
2-1 ruling in favor of the Alabama legislature.
So I was very interested in seeing what race warrior (and voting rights
act and affirmative action opponent) Ed Blum
<http://www.projectonfairrepresentation.org/>had to say in hisnew WSJ
oped
<http://online.wsj.com/articles/edward-blum-racial-gerrymandering-switcheroo-1415749920> on
the case. And surprisingly, he doesn't really say what the Court should
do. This is the closest he comes:
The real question to ask here is about the transformation of civil-
and voting-rights laws from shields to protect individuals against
racial discrimination into swords to further racial partisan
empowerment. While it may be wrong to overpack districts with
minorities, it is just as wrong to use them as tools to pick off
political opponents. Congress, the courts, and both Republicans and
Democrats share the blame for this state of affairs.
Here's a way out: Redistricting must create districts that connect
compact, contiguous neighborhoods and, in the process, ignore the
racial results these districts may produce. Think of a process that
uses elementary-school attendance zones as the building blocks to
create election districts in cities like Mobile, Houston or Los
Angeles. Those districts may not have the racial percentages sought
by political parties, but candidates for office and elected
representatives would likely be forced to find more middle ground on
many issues than they do now.
Until the Supreme Court fixes the baffling jurisprudence it has
created over the past 40 years regarding race and ethnicity, lower
courts will be forced to grapple with this confusion. Perhaps the
Alabama case would be a good place for the justices to start.
UPDATE:Roger Clegg's contribution
<http://www.nationalreview.com/bench-memos/392233/thoughts-alabama-redistricting-case-roger-clegg-meriem-l-hubbard>seems
to want the Supreme Court to use this case as an occasion to declare
that the Voting Rights Act cannot require the creation of
majority-minority districts (which would of course render the act a
nullity in the context of redistricting.)
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D68267&title=Interesting%20Ed%20Blum%20WSJ%20Oped%20on%20Alabama%20Redistricting%20Case%20at%20SCOTUS&description=>
Posted inredistricting <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=6>,Supreme Court
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>,Voting Rights Act
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=15>
"Barber-McSally vote total likely to trigger recount"
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=68265>
Posted onNovember 11, 2014 5:20 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=68265>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
The /Arizona Republic/reports.
<http://www.azcentral.com/story/news/arizona/politics/2014/11/10/barber-mcsally-race-heads-toward-potential-recount/18833963/?hootPostID=%5B%2719840b760f2b555683f0f6f0a19eb230%27%5D>
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D68265&title=%E2%80%9CBarber-McSally%20vote%20total%20likely%20to%20trigger%20recount%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted inelection administration
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>,provisional ballots
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=67>,recounts
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=50>
"(should we cite the crappy Gabor paper here?)"
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=68262>
Posted onNovember 11, 2014 3:42 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=68262>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Poor Gabor <https://twitter.com/davidjayharris/status/531927801037729792>.
and poorer proofreading.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D68262&title=%E2%80%9C%28should%20we%20cite%20the%20crappy%20Gabor%20paper%20here%3F%29%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted inUncategorized <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>
"Allegations of voter fraud surface in Illinois Treasurer's race"
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=68260>
Posted onNovember 11, 2014 3:33 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=68260>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
See here.
<http://www.cinewsnow.com/news/local/Allegations-of-voter-fraud-surface-in-Illinois-Treasurers-race-282340621.html>
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D68260&title=%E2%80%9CAllegations%20of%20voter%20fraud%20surface%20in%20Illinois%20Treasurer%E2%80%99s%20race%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted inelection administration
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>,The Voting Wars
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60>
"How many voters were disenfranchised by Texas' ID law?"
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=68258>
Posted onNovember 11, 2014 2:45 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=68258>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Zack Roth
<http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/how-many-voters-were-disenfranchised-texass-id-law>for
MSNBC:
Both sides are already making claims and counterclaims about the
impact of Texas <http://www.msnbc.com/topics/texas>' strict voter ID
law <http://www.msnbc.com/topics/voter-id> in last week's election.
There's no question that some legitimate voters were disenfranchised
by the law. But how many? Perhaps a large number --- but the truth
is, nobody knows.
The difficulty of gauging the law's effect, at least in the
election's immediate aftermath, points to an irony that has
characterized the voter ID controversy nationally: Though lawyers
challenging ID measures have marshaled reams of compelling evidence
to show how they could keep voters from the polls, individual
elections are not well-suited to demonstrating the impact.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D68258&title=%E2%80%9CHow%20many%20voters%20were%20disenfranchised%20by%20Texas%E2%80%99%20ID%20law%3F%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>
"Supreme Court to consider political segregation"
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=68256>
Posted onNovember 11, 2014 1:35 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=68256>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
USA Today reports.
<http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2014/11/11/supreme-court-alabama-redistricting-black-white/18847991/>
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D68256&title=%E2%80%9CSupreme%20Court%20to%20consider%20political%20segregation%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted inredistricting <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=6>,Supreme Court
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>,Voting Rights Act
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=15>
"No, Voting Laws Didn't Doom Democrats"
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=68254>
Posted onNovember 11, 2014 12:50 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=68254>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Francis Barry
<http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2014-11-11/no-voting-laws-didnt-doom-democrats>for
Bloomberg View:
A day after the election, Wendy Weiser
<http://www.brennancenter.org/blog/how-much-difference-did-new-voting-restrictions-make-yesterdays-close-races> at
the Brennan Center for Justice argued that "in several key races,
the margin of victory came very close to the likely margin of
disenfranchisement." She cited the Senate race in North Carolina as
one example; here's the gist of her argument: Four years ago,
200,000 ballots were cast during seven days of early voting that the
state has since eliminated. The state also ended Election Day
registration, which 100,000 North Carolinians took advantage of in
2012, almost one-third of them black. In last week's election, since
Republican Thom Tillis's margin of victory over Democratic Senator
Kay Hagan was about 48,000 votes, Weiser implies that Hagan lost
because so many (Democratic) voters were kept away from the polls.
Weiser's argument has been picked up by other voting-rights
advocates
<http://www.thenation.com/blog/188697/how-new-voting-restrictions-impacted-2014-election> and
pundits
<http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/catherine-rampell-voter-suppression-laws-are-already-deciding-elections/2014/11/10/52dc9710-6920-11e4-a31c-77759fc1eacc_story.html>,
but it falls apart upon closer scrutiny. Even with seven fewer days,
early voting in North Carolina increased this year compared with
2010 -- by 35 percent
<http://www.dailytarheel.com/article/2014/11/early-voting-in-nc-midterm-election-tops-1-1-million>.
Statewide turnout also increased from the previous midterm election,
to 44.1 percent from 43.7 percent. Even if turnout was lower than it
would have been without the new voting law --- something that's
impossible to establish --- it was still higher than it had been in
four of the five previous midterm elections
<http://www.ncsbe.gov/ncsbe/voter-turnout>, going back to 1994.
In addition, based on exit polls and voter turnout data, the overall
share of the black vote increased
<http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/08/us/politics/republicans-beat-democrats-at-their-own-ground-game.html> slightly
compared with 2010.
Rick Hasen, an expert on election law, says he's skeptical
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=68164> about Weiser's analysis, and
rightly so. When voting-rights advocates fail to include any
balancing points in their discussion of the election, they undercut
their credibility and give ammunition to Republicans who suspect
that they are mostly interested in electing Democrats.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D68254&title=%E2%80%9CNo%2C%20Voting%20Laws%20Didn%E2%80%99t%20Doom%20Democrats%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted inelection administration
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>,The Voting Wars
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60>
"A vote of confidence for mail elections in Colorado"
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=68252>
Posted onNovember 11, 2014 10:22 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=68252>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Denver Post
<http://www.denverpost.com/editorials/ci_26909639/vote-confidence-mail-elections-colorado>editorial:
While Colorado's 2014 election was primarily about the candidates
and initiatives on the ballot, it was also a test of the state's
all-mail ballot and vote center system.
Our verdict: It was a success.
Not only did Colorado buck a national trend of declining voter
participation compared to the 2010 midterm election, there were no
scandals involving voter fraud, which was a concern
<http://www.denverpost.com/ci_23157781/colorado-senate-oks-mail-ballot-voting-gop-maintains> expressed
by critics of mail balloting.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D68252&title=%E2%80%9CA%20vote%20of%20confidence%20for%20mail%20elections%20in%20Colorado%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted inabsentee ballots <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=53>,election
administration <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>,The Voting Wars
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60>
"Appeal hearing set for ex-Indiana elections chief"
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=68250>
Posted onNovember 11, 2014 10:15 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=68250>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
AP on Charlie White
<http://www.whio.com/news/ap/indiana/appeal-hearing-set-for-ex-indiana-elections-chief/nh5FH/>.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D68250&title=%E2%80%9CAppeal%20hearing%20set%20for%20ex-Indiana%20elections%20chief%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted inSupreme Court <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>
"Roberts at 10: Campaign Finance and Voting Rights: Easier to
Donate, Harder to Vote" <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=68248>
Posted onNovember 11, 2014 8:54 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=68248>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
David Gans
<http://theusconstitution.org/sites/default/files/briefs/Roberts-at-10-Easier-to-Donate-Harder-to-Vote.pdf>for
CAC.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D68248&title=%E2%80%9CRoberts%20at%2010%3A%20Campaign%20Finance%20and%20Voting%20Rights%3A%20%20Easier%20to%20Donate%2C%20Harder%20to%20Vote%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>,Supreme
Court <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>,Voting Rights Act
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=15>
"Fundraiser bags millions from conservatives, but owes taxes, child
support' <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=68246>
Posted onNovember 11, 2014 8:53 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=68246>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Washington Examiner <http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/article/2556004/>:
A fundraiser for conservative groups who has raised millions of
dollars
<http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2011/oct/30/operatives-raise-cash-for-cain-themselves/?page=all>by
invoking small-government rhetoric is delinquent on his taxes and
child support, despite having worked for a federal contractor and
the District of Columbia tax office.
Todd Zirkle is executive director of Freedom's Defense Fund, a
political action committee that has received more than $7.4 million
in contributions since 2010, most of which went to fundraising firms
to which he has close ties. The companies are Base Connect in
Washington, D.C., and a handful of other businesses that largely
share office space and clients.
FDF conducts little actual political activity. The only ad on its
website from this cycle attacks a Michigan candidate as a
"foreclosure king <http://www.freedomsdefensefund.com/initiatives>."
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D68246&title=%E2%80%9CFundraiser%20bags%20millions%20from%20conservatives%2C%20but%20owes%20taxes%2C%20child%20support%E2%80%99&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>,chicanery
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=12>
"Why Silicon Valley Can't Put a Techie in Congress"
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=68244>
Posted onNovember 11, 2014 8:24 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=68244>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Will Oremus writes
<http://www.slate.com/blogs/future_tense/2014/11/10/ro_khanna_larry_lessig_why_silicon_valley_can_t_put_a_techie_in_congress.html>for
Slate.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D68244&title=%E2%80%9CWhy%20Silicon%20Valley%20Can%E2%80%99t%20Put%20a%20Techie%20in%20Congress%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>,campaigns
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59>
"2014 midterm election turnout lowest in 70 years"
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=68242>
Posted onNovember 11, 2014 8:19 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=68242>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
PBS News Hour:
<http://www.pbs.org/newshour/updates/2014-midterm-election-turnout-lowest-in-70-years/>
Final numbers are still being tallied, but at this point it looks pretty
clear that turnout in these midterms was the lowest overall in 70 years.
Turnout of the voting-eligible population was just 36.4 percent,
according to the projection from the United States Elections Project
<http://www.electproject.org/national-1789-present>, run by Dr. Michael
McDonald at the University of Florida. That's down from the 41 percent
that turned out in 2010. You have to go all the way back to 1942 for
lower numbers when turnout in that midterm was just 33.9 percent. They
had a pretty good excuse back then --- many adult-age Americans were
preoccupied with fighting in a world war.
midterm election Turnout 1940-2014
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D68242&title=%E2%80%9C2014%20midterm%20election%20turnout%20lowest%20in%2070%20years%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted invoting <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=31>
"Catherine Rampell: Voter suppression laws are already deciding
elections" <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=68240>
Posted onNovember 11, 2014 7:50 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=68240>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
WaPo opinion.
<http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/catherine-rampell-voter-suppression-laws-are-already-deciding-elections/2014/11/10/52dc9710-6920-11e4-a31c-77759fc1eacc_story.html?wpmk=MK0000203> This
relies on Brennan Center data, andfor reasons I've given
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=68164>, I'm very skeptical.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D68240&title=%E2%80%9CCatherine%20Rampell%3A%20Voter%20suppression%20laws%20are%20already%20deciding%20elections%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted inelection administration
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>,The Voting Wars
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60>
"Campaign Finance Deadlock, Part I: 'Undue Influence' Theories and
the Cost-Benefit Calculation" <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=68238>
Posted onNovember 11, 2014 7:47 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=68238>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Bauer blogs.
<http://www.moresoftmoneyhardlaw.com/2014/11/campaign-finance-deadlock-part-undue-influence-theories-cost-benefit-calculation/>
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D68238&title=%E2%80%9CCampaign%20Finance%20Deadlock%2C%20Part%20I%3A%20%E2%80%98Undue%20Influence%E2%80%99%20Theories%20and%20the%20Cost-Benefit%20Calculation%E2%80%9D&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
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/20141112/453de239/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: share_save_171_16.png
Type: image/png
Size: 1504 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20141112/453de239/attachment.png>
View list directory