[EL] Uh oh, Rick...
Rick Hasen
rhasen at law.uci.edu
Fri Oct 24 17:05:34 PDT 2014
Uh, check your constitution. I believe congress has the power to set
the time place and manner for congressional elections, and the states
can act only if Congress does not.
On 10/24/14, 5:01 PM, Steve Hoersting wrote:
> Under the Constitution, the States are responsible for the time, place
> and manner of elections. To those of us who still hold out hopes for a
> renewed federalism (an embrace of the Ninth Amendment and a repeal of
> the Seventeenth) would expect friction on adopting your proposal, as
> you surmise.
>
> ***
>
> Regarding your next: I don't think anyone proposing ID to vote would
> object to subsidies, etc. for voters to obtain the identifications.
>
> But all this will be moot soon enough, anyway. If the coming executive
> amnesty holds, IDs will be issued, the will of people will have been
> disregarded through such creative methods as we're discussing. And
> groups now dedicating their budgets to preventing vote dilution will
> perhaps retool to teach immigrants Aristotle and Jefferson, instead.
> We'll have no other choice.
>
> Ah well... Mark me a sucker for popular sovereignty (no matter -- by
> the way -- the nonsense about "plutocracy" that Paul Krugman is spewing).
>
> Steve
>
>
>
>
>
> On Fri, Oct 24, 2014 at 7:45 PM, Rick Hasen <rhasen at law.uci.edu
> <mailto:rhasen at law.uci.edu>> 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 <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
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20141024/060af1c3/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/20141024/060af1c3/attachment.png>
View list directory