[EL] Why the Selfie is a Threat to Democracy”

[Michael McDonald]

We should apply the same standard to voter id laws as to ballot selfies. What evidence can you provide Rick that there has been vote buying enabled by ballot selfies (not with mail ballots, specifically ballot selfies)? Why criminalize a behavior, forcing law enforcement to expend valuable resources to police it, when there are more pressing matters for them to focus on? It strikes me that existing laws regulating vote buying are sufficient. A candidate stupid enough to use ballot selfies as a way to verify votes will likely find people posting their selfies on social media with the caption “I just made $20!”
 
============
Dr. Michael P. McDonald
Associate Professor
University of Florida
Department of Political Science
223 Anderson Hall
P.O. Box 117325
Gainesville, FL 32611
 
phone:   352-273-2371 (office)
e-mail:  dr.michael.p.mcdonald at gmail.com                
web:      <http://www.electproject.org/> www.ElectProject.org 
twitter: @ElectProject
 
From: law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu [mailto:law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu] On Behalf Of Rick Hasen
Sent: Tuesday, August 18, 2015 10:21 AM
To: law-election at uci.edu
Subject: [EL] ELB News and Commentary 8/18/15
 

 <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=75414> Why the Selfie is a Threat to Democracy”

Posted on  <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=75414> August 18, 2015 7:20 am by  <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3> Rick Hasen
I have written  <http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2015/08/17/why-the-selfie-is-a-threat-to-democracy/> this commentary for Reuters Opinion.
What could be more patriotic in our narcissistic social-media age than posting a picture of yourself on Facebook with your marked ballot for president? Show off your support for former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, Donald Trump, Senator Bernie Sanders (D-Vt.) or former Florida Governor Jeb Bush.  Last week, a federal court in New Hampshire  <http://www.buzzfeed.com/adolfoflores/new-hampshires-ban-on-ballot-selfies-is-struck-down-as-uncon?bftwnews&utm_term=4ldqpgc#.vsPZMbG18> struck down that state’s ban on ballot selfies as a violation of the First Amendment right of free-speech expression.
That might seem like a victory for the American Way. But the judge made a huge mistake because without the ballot-selfie ban, we could see the reemergence of the buying and selling of votes — and even potential coercion from employers, union bosses and others.
The case is more fallout from the Supreme Court’s <http://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/18/us/politics/courts-free-speech-expansion-has-far-reaching-consequences.html?ref=politics>  surprising blockbuster decision of  <http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/14pdf/13-502_9olb.pdf> Reed v. Town of Gilbert.  The piece concludes:
Barbadoro also said the law was not narrowly tailored, given that nothing would stop someone from posting on Facebook, or elsewhere, information about how he or she voted. What this analysis misses is that a picture of a valid voted ballot, unlike a simple expression of how someone voted, is unique in being able to prove how someone voted.
Indeed, it is hard to imagine a more narrowly tailored law to prevent vote buying. Tell the world you voted for Trump! Use skywriting. Scream it to the heavens. We just won’t give you the tools to sell your vote or get forced to vote one way or another.
The social-media age gives people plenty of tools for political self-expression. New Hampshire’s law is a modest way to make sure that this patriotic expression does not give anyone the tools to corrupt the voting process. Perhaps the judges of the 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals or the U.S. Supreme Court will see the error of Barbadoro’s ways.
 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20150818/b41c6b3d/attachment.html>