[EL] impact of new voting laws

[David Ely]

I think this is a dangerous attitude for someone studying and teaching election law. Of course a researcher should be careful not to over claim, but there is no over claiming here.  What you are suggesting is that researchers censor legitimate questions and findings in order to avoid a particular political response. Political claims in our system generally have very limited relationship to empirical evidence.  Researchers should focus on the evidence, unless they are specifically studying the political claims.

 

From: law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu [mailto:law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu] On Behalf Of Rick Hasen
Sent: Wednesday, November 12, 2014 8:24 AM
To: Eric Marshall
Cc: law-election at UCI.edu
Subject: Re: [EL] impact of new voting laws

 

No, that's not what I said.  I said that from the Brennan Center "more caution is in order....I think more can be done to be careful in not overclaiming in this area, especially given the predictability of the political response."

On 11/12/14, 8:17 AM, Eric Marshall wrote:

I appreciate that response.  So is your concern less with Wendy's post and more how blogs on the left choose to cover it?  

 

On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 9:59 AM, Rick Hasen <rhasen at law.uci.edu> wrote:

I think very highly of the work of the Brennan Center, in terms of its research projects, its public outreach and much, and the quality of its litigation (although I don't always agree with the legal theories the Center advances).  I have filed briefs with the Center and worked on projects with them.

My trouble has been with the p.r. side on this particular issue---the effect of restrictive voting laws on disenfranchisement and election outcomes. It must be clear by now to the Brennan folks that asking suggestive questions in headlines and releases about the effect of these laws gets overhyped by the left, which suggests more caution is in order. That report from the Dish shows how the work of the Center on this issue is being interpreted: " Wendy Weiser of the Brennan Center for Justice  <http://www.brennancenter.org/blog/how-much-difference-did-new-voting-restrictions-make-yesterdays-close-races> even suggests that new restrictions may have suppressed enough votes to turn some close races."  

I think more can be done to be careful in not overclaiming in this area, especially given the predictability of the political response.

I illustrated this point as I toured for my book The Voting Wars, showing how a 2012 Brennan Center report noting that 5 million voters "may be impacted" by new restrictive voting rules was predictably hyped by the left (over 2 million of those voters, if I recall correctly were voters who could still vote early but had fewer early voting days to do so).  By the time the issue got to rolling stone, the GOP was disenfranching 5 million voters. Here are the slides:

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20141112/60ccb878/attachment.html>