[EL] Uh oh, Rick...
Rick Hasen
rhasen at law.uci.edu
Fri Oct 24 16:47:09 PDT 2014
and what I don't favor is having states administer voter id plans often
with significant costs on voters to get the underlying documents and
travel to get the ids, with poor planning and implementation which, in
the case of texas, apparently is leaving more than 500,000 eligible
voters without the ability to vote
On 10/24/14, 4:45 PM, Rick Hasen wrote:
> There is no question that in many states the voting rolls are a mess
> and include lots of no longer eligible voters. Various means of
> cleaning the rolls, including a few to compare names etc. across
> states, have made things somewhat better.
> I still favor a national voter registration database, where each
> individual, upon confirmation of citizenship, is supplied a unique
> voter identification number which is used for the voter's whole life.
> The voter is automatically registered (if eligible, e.g., under felon
> rules) to the state where he or she resides. The federal government
> would bear all of the costs of this registration process.
> Voters would then produce either an id to vote or their thumbprint,
> which they can voluntarily give as proof of identity when being
> registered by the government.
> That plan is laid out more fully in the book. I don't expect to see
> anything like it in the US in my lifetime.
>
>
> On 10/24/14, 4:41 PM, Steve Hoersting wrote:
>> Thanks for the reply. (To clarify for the List, by "departed voter,"
>> I meant dead and/or moved-out-of-state).
>>
>> On Fri, Oct 24, 2014 at 7:36 PM, Rick Hasen <rhasen at law.uci.edu
>> <mailto:rhasen at law.uci.edu>> wrote:
>>
>> In actuality I have seen many more instances of the departed
>> having votes cast for them via absentee ballot (usually the
>> widow/er or child of the deceased) than examples of people
>> showing up at polling places claiming to be a dead person. When
>> these claims are investigated, the most common explanation is
>> that a person signed on the wrong line in the poll book.
>>
>>
>> On 10/24/14, 4:32 PM, Steve Hoersting wrote:
>>> * The last sentence means Drudge and others are getting the word
>>> out: There is another side to the predominant meme.
>>>
>>> * I will check out your book (again. I skimmed parts a year ago,
>>> or so. Well written; again, congrats).
>>>
>>> And a question, which you must have addressed in your book, and
>>> may hit out of the park, if you can: If a departed voter remains
>>> on the rolls, and an individual is presented to the poll worker
>>> as the listed voter, and the poll worker cannot or does not ask
>>> the individual for ID, how would that fraud be detected? By what
>>> mechanism would we ever detect *significant* fraudulent
>>> transactions of that kind? (Please don't say signature match).
>>>
>>> And wouldn't vote-by-mail and absentee balloting make matching
>>> the departed-voter-name and a-live-ballot easy beyond words?
>>> Easy enough to turn battleground states across the land.
>>>
>>> Steve
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, Oct 24, 2014 at 5:20 PM, Rick Hasen <rhasen at law.uci.edu
>>> <mailto:rhasen at law.uci.edu>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Not sure I understand your snark. When I looked into the
>>> question of non-citizen voting for my book, the rates of
>>> proven non-citizen voting appeared very low. Now along
>>> comes a study which has a higher number. I don't have an
>>> opinion yet on how strong the study is because (1) I haven't
>>> yet read it and (2) those who have much greater
>>> methodological sophistication about these things than I do
>>> will surely weigh in on the question. I think that is a
>>> prudent response to this study.
>>>
>>> In terms of outright dissembling, you can read chapter 2 of
>>> my book, which gives some examples.
>>>
>>> I do not understand your final sentence.
>>>
>>> Rick
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 10/24/14, 2:15 PM, Steve Hoersting wrote:
>>>> So "new stud[ies] appear[] to find a much higher incidence
>>>> of non-citizen voting than you've previously seen" and you
>>>> "look forward" to hearing what others think of the
>>>> methodology, and still you allege "outright dissembling"?
>>>>
>>>> Okay. I see. Just trying to keep up.
>>>>
>>>> But if members of the Anti-Fraud Squad have dared
>>>> dissemble, they had better discover they are rapidly losing
>>>> control of conventional wisdom and the public debate.
>>>>
>>>> Good weekend. Best,
>>>>
>>>> Steve
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, Oct 24, 2014 at 4:57 PM, Rick Hasen
>>>> <rhasen at law.uci.edu <mailto:rhasen at law.uci.edu>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I linked to the the story Drudge links to earlier today
>>>> on my blog. (See the end of this message). I have
>>>> always said (and say in my book) that non-citizen
>>>> voting is a real, though relatively small, problem
>>>> (unlike impersonation fraud, which is essentially a
>>>> blip). For this reason I have supported efforts to
>>>> remove non-citizens from voting rolls, though not in
>>>> the period right before an election when errors are
>>>> more likely to disenfranchise voters.
>>>>
>>>> The new study appears to find a much higher incidence
>>>> of non-citizen voting than I've previously seen, and I
>>>> look forward to hearing whether people think the
>>>> methodology in this paper is sound. But even if it is
>>>> sound, this would not justify the hysteria and nonsense
>>>> (and in some cases outright dissembling) coming from
>>>> some of the people you have listed below.
>>>>
>>>> Rick
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> "Could non-citizens decide the November
>>>> election?" <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67408>
>>>>
>>>> Posted onOctober 24, 2014 12:27 pm
>>>> <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67408>byRick Hasen
>>>> <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>>>>
>>>> Jesse Richman and David Earnes
>>>> <http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/monkey-cage/wp/2014/10/24/could-non-citizens-decide-the-november-election/>t
>>>> at the Monkey Cage with some provocative findings
>>>> on the extent of non-citizen voting. I will be very
>>>> interested to hear what others think of the
>>>> methodology in thisforthcoming article
>>>> <http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0261379414000973>in
>>>> Electoral Studies.
>>>>
>>>> Share
>>>> <https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D67408&title=%E2%80%9CCould%20non-citizens%20decide%20the%20November%20election%3F%E2%80%9D&description=>
>>>> Posted inelection administration
>>>> <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>,The Voting
>>>> Wars <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 10/24/14, 1:51 PM, Steve Hoersting wrote:
>>>>> It's getting tougher and tougher to dismiss and
>>>>> discredit John Fund, Hans van Spakovsky, James
>>>>> O'Keefe, J. Christian Adams, Catherine Engelbrecht and
>>>>> Rush Limbaugh:
>>>>>
>>>>> http://drudgereport.com/
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Stephen M. Hoersting
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Law-election mailing list
>>>>> Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu <mailto:Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu>
>>>>> http://department-lists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/law-election
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> 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 <tel:949.824.3072> - office
>>>> 949.824.0495 <tel: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
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Stephen M. Hoersting
>>>
>>> --
>>> 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 <tel:949.824.3072> - office
>>> 949.824.0495 <tel: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
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Stephen M. Hoersting
>>
>> --
>> 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 <tel:949.824.3072> - office
>> 949.824.0495 <tel: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
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Stephen M. Hoersting
>
> --
> 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
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Law-election mailing list
> Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu
> http://department-lists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/law-election
--
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/20141024/f1a07f50/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/20141024/f1a07f50/attachment.png>
View list directory