[EL] Treating voters
Dan Meek
dan at meek.net
Mon Sep 22 16:07:12 PDT 2014
The "exchange of something of value to encourage people to vote in
non-federal elections" is definitely illegal in Oregon. The first part
of ORS 270.665 states:
*260.665 Undue influence to affect registration, voting, candidacy,
signing petitions; solicitation of money or other benefits.*(1) As used
in this section, "undue influence" means force, violence, restraint or
the threat of it, inflicting injury, damage, harm, loss of employment or
other loss or the threat of it, or giving or promising to give money,
employment or other thing of value.
(2) A person, acting either alone or with or through any other
person, may not directly or indirectly subject any person to undue
influence with the intent to induce any person to:
(a) Register or vote;
(b) Refrain from registering or voting;
(c) Register or vote in any particular manner;
(d) Be or refrain from or cease being a candidate;
(e) Contribute or refrain from contributing to any candidate,
political party or political committee;
(f) Render or refrain from rendering services to any candidate,
political party or political committee;
(g) Challenge or refrain from challenging a person offering to vote;
(h) Apply or refrain from applying for a ballot as an absent
elector; or
(i) Sign or refrain from signing a prospective petition or an
initiative, referendum, recall or candidate nominating petition.
Dan Meek
503-293-9021 dan at meek.net <mailto:dan at meek.net> 866-926-9646 fax
On 9/22/2014 3:46 PM, Larry Levine wrote:
>
> In a campaign in 1975 we sent targeted voters a 2-for-1 chicken dinner
> offer at a local coffee shop. They needed to bring the card we sent in
> the mail and their voting stub to the restaurant to collect. The offer
> was good for one week. They gave away 1,500 chicken dinners and 1,500
> rain checks the first day. The three city council districts within
> which we targeted the offer were the second, third and fourth highest
> turnout districts out of the 15 in the city that day and they did not
> have a city council election to help drive turnout. We won the election.
>
> Larry
>
> *From:*law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu
> [mailto:law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu] *On Behalf Of
> *Lance Olson
> *Sent:* Monday, September 22, 2014 3:02 PM
> *To:* Ray La Raja
> *Cc:* law-election at department-lists.uci.edu
> *Subject:* Re: [EL] Treating voters
>
> Ray: I don't think the offered consideration has to be directed to all
> voters, but as a practical matter anyone who may know about the
> "treats" can partake. For example, a campaign may offer free donuts
> to anyone who shows their voting receipt at participating donut
> shops. The message announcing the free donuts may be targeted
> (possibly to known supporters), but not always, and in any event if
> someone shows up with their receipt, they get a donut. I should note
> this method is rarely used in my experience, and would be permitted
> only in non-federal elections, e.g., a special election to fill a
> legislative seat.
>
> Lance H. Olson
>
> Olson Hagel & Fishburn
>
> 555 Capitol Mall, Suite 1425
>
> Sacramento, CA 95814
>
> Telephone: 916 442-2952
>
> ________________________________________
>
> PLEASE NOTE: In order to comply with IRS Circular 230, we must advise
> that, unless specifically indicated otherwise, any tax advice
> contained in this communication (including any attachments) was not
> intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of
> either avoiding tax-related penalties under the Internal Revenue Code,
> or promoting, marketing, or recommending to another party any
> tax-related matter addressed in this communication.
>
> CAUTION: THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS E-MAIL AND ANY ACCOMPANYING
> DOCUMENT(S) IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE AND MAY BE
> CONFIDENTIAL, MAY BE PRIVILEGED (ATTORNEY-CLIENT, ATTORNEY WORK
> PRODUCT, RIGHT TO PRIVACY) AND MAY CONSTITUTE INSIDE INFORMATION.
>
> *From:*Ray La Raja [mailto:laraja at polsci.umass.edu]
> *Sent:* Monday, September 22, 2014 2:53 PM
> *To:* Lance Olson
> *Cc:* law-election at department-lists.uci.edu
> <mailto:law-election at department-lists.uci.edu>
> *Subject:* Re: [EL] Treating voters
>
> Thanks Lance. Okay, so treating is allowed so long as you don't push
> a preference at the ballot box. That raises interesting questions
> because it is fairly easy to target voters who are likely to vote for
> your candidate or measure. I assume it's not required that treating
> must be parceled out equally to all comers.
>
> On Sep 22, 2014, at 5:40 PM, Lance Olson <Lance at olsonhagel.com
> <mailto:Lance at olsonhagel.com>> wrote:
>
> Actually, California does impose restrictions in connection with
> non-federal California elections. See Elections Code sections 18521
> and 18522. The difference from federal law is the California
> restriction applies when the consideration is given in exchange for
> voting for a "particular person or measure."
>
> Lance H. Olson
>
> Olson Hagel & Fishburn
>
> 555 Capitol Mall, Suite 1425
>
> Sacramento, CA 95814
>
> Telephone: 916 442-2952
>
> ________________________________________
>
> PLEASE NOTE: In order to comply with IRS Circular 230, we must advise
> that, unless specifically indicated otherwise, any tax advice
> contained in this communication (including any attachments) was not
> intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of
> either avoiding tax-related penalties under the Internal Revenue Code,
> or promoting, marketing, or recommending to another party any
> tax-related matter addressed in this communication.
>
> CAUTION: THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS E-MAIL AND ANY ACCOMPANYING
> DOCUMENT(S) IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE AND MAY BE
> CONFIDENTIAL, MAY BE PRIVILEGED (ATTORNEY-CLIENT, ATTORNEY WORK
> PRODUCT, RIGHT TO PRIVACY) AND MAY CONSTITUTE INSIDE INFORMATION.
>
> *From:*law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu
> <mailto:law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu>[mailto:law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu
> <mailto:election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu>]*On Behalf Of*Ray
> La Raja
> *Sent:*Monday, September 22, 2014 2:34 PM
> *To:*law-election at department-lists.uci.edu
> <mailto:law-election at department-lists.uci.edu>
> *Subject:*[EL] Treating voters
>
> Does anyone know which states do not restrict the exchange of
> something of value to encourage people to vote in non-federal
> elections? I understand that California does not bar such campaign
> practices, but I do not know about other states. Thanks.
>
> Ray La Raja
>
> Associate Professor
>
> Department of Political Science
>
> University of Massachusetts, Amherst
>
> (413) 545-6182
>
> http://polsci.umass.edu/profiles/la-raja_ray/home
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Law-election mailing list
> Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu
> http://department-lists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/law-election
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20140922/3effcf5d/attachment.html>
View list directory