[EL] ELB News and Commentary 7/81/5

Rick Hasen rhasen at law.uci.edu
Wed Jul 8 08:14:40 PDT 2015


    “Voting rights become a proxy war in the 2016 presidential election”
    <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74141>

Posted onJuly 8, 2015 8:12 am 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74141>byRick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Frank Askin writes 
<https://theconversation.com/voting-rights-become-a-proxy-war-in-the-2016-presidential-election-43431>for 
The Conversation.

Share 
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D74141&title=%E2%80%9CVoting%20rights%20become%20a%20proxy%20war%20in%20the%202016%20presidential%20election%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted inelection administration 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>,The Voting Wars 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60>


    “FAN 67 (First Amendment News) En Banc Unanimous Ruling from DC
    Circuit Upholds Federal Ban on Contributions by Federal Contractors”
    <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74139>

Posted onJuly 8, 2015 8:08 am 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74139>byRick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Ron Collins blogs 
<http://concurringopinions.com/archives/2015/07/fan-67-first-amendment-news-en-banc-unanimous-ruling-from-dc-circuit-upholds-federal-ban-on-contributions-by-federal-contractors.html>. 
My earlier analysis of the Wagner case ishere 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74090> and thoughts on the Super PAC 
question ishere <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74113>.

Share 
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D74139&title=%E2%80%9CFAN%2067%20%28First%20Amendment%20News%29%20En%20Banc%20Unanimous%20Ruling%20from%20DC%20Circuit%20Upholds%20Federal%20Ban%20on%20Contributions%20by%20Federal%20Contractors%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>


    “Today’s Wagner Decision Encourages an Obama Order on Campaign
    Contributions by Federal Contractors”
    <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74137>

Posted onJuly 8, 2015 7:48 am 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74137>byRick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Charles Tiefer writes for Forbes. 
<http://www.forbes.com/sites/charlestiefer/2015/07/07/todays-wagner-decision-encourages-an-obama-order-on-campaign-contributions-by-federal-contractors/2/>

Share 
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D74137&title=%E2%80%9CToday%E2%80%99s%20Wagner%20Decision%20Encourages%20an%20Obama%20Order%20on%20Campaign%20Contributions%20by%20Federal%20Contractors%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>


    “Humphrey School Launches First Of Its Kind Online Program To Train
    Election Administrators Throughout U.S.”
    <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74135>

Posted onJuly 8, 2015 7:37 am 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74135>byRick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Doug Chapin 
<http://editions.lib.umn.edu/electionacademy/2015/07/08/humphrey-school-launches-first-of-its-kind-online-program-to-train-election-administrators-throughout-u-s/>with 
an exciting announcement:

    I’m very excited to share that we recently received Regents’
    approval for an online graduate Certificate in Election
    Administration that will begin accepting students in the Fall.
    Here’s the University’s press release:

    /A new online certificate program at the Humphrey School of Public
    Affairs recently approved by the University of Minnesota Board of
    Regents is the first of its kind to prepare the next generation of
    creative and committed leaders of election administration. The
    Certificate in Election Administration program will provide relevant
    and rigorous professional training to those who run election systems
    throughout the United States as well college graduates who wish to
    learn more about the field. It is the only certificate program in
    election administration offered online, and will be offering
    enrollment beginning fall 2015./

    /“With this new program, the Humphrey School is poised to train
    leaders of election administration, at a time when there is an
    urgent national need to professionalize election systems,” says
    Humphrey School Dean Eric Schwartz. “This exciting new initiative
    will build on the School’s top-ranked standing and build on our
    commitment to inspiring and training leaders for public service.” /

    /Across the United States, there are more than 8,000 local election
    jurisdictions and more than 50,000 people employed in election
    positions. Until now, numerous barriers including geography and work
    schedules have prevented professional development and training. At
    the same time, political and media scrutiny on elections has
    intensified and the demands on election administrators have
    increased because of new legislation, court rulings and technology./

    /​ “Effectiveness and trust are indispensable for the operation of
    elections,” says Professor Larry Jacobs, director of the Humphrey
    School’s Center for the Study of Politics and Governance, who
    developed the program with Doug Chapin, one of the country’s most
    prominent proponents of professionalization in election
    administration. “The Humphrey School is excited to work with Doug to
    build a pioneering program to train professionals in election
    administration and to strengthen the foundation of America’s
    democracy.”/

    /In its 2014 report, the Presidential Commission on Election
    Administration (PCEA) urged “the integration of election
    administration in university curriculums of public administration.”
    The Certificate in Election Administration program is a direct
    response to that call. A total of 12 credits are required for
    completion, and all courses will be offered in an online format,
    covering such topics as election law, election design, and voter
    participation. The program will provide students with a deeper
    understanding of election administration as well as the ability to
    identify—and resolve—key tensions that run throughout the field today./

    /PCEA member Tammy Patrick welcomed the Humphrey School’s program,
    saying it meets a “key recommendation to prepare tomorrow’s
    professionals to conduct elections in an environment that requires a
    comprehensive skill set in order to be successful,” adding “Our
    democracy depends on it.”/

    If you want more details on the program including curriculum and
    admission requirements, please visit
    http://www.hhh.umn.edu/electioncertificate.

    I want to thank the Humphrey School but particularly colleagues
    Associate Dean Laura Bloomberg, Professor Larry Jacobs, Kate Conners
    – and especially Lea Chittenden who has kept this effort afloat and
    steaming ahead for several years. We’re excited about what’s next –
    and we hope you are, too.

    Stay tuned!

Share 
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D74135&title=%E2%80%9CHumphrey%20School%20Launches%20First%20Of%20Its%20Kind%20Online%20Program%20To%20Train%20Election%20Administrators%20Throughout%20U.S.%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted inelection administration 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>,election law biz 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=51>


    “What the Supreme Court’s Arizona Redistricting Ruling Means for
    Presidential (Not Just Congressional) Election Reform”
    <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74133>

Posted onJuly 8, 2015 7:34 am 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74133>byRick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Vik Amar 
writes<https://verdict.justia.com/2015/07/08/what-the-supreme-courts-arizona-redistricting-ruling-means-for-presidential-not-just-congressional-election-reform>for 
Justia’s Verdict. (I discussed the connection between the AZ case and 
Article II/Bush v. Gore in this piece forSlate) 
<http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2015/06/arizona_supreme_court_decision_redistricting_ruling_undermines_bush_v_gore.html>.

And congraulations to Vik, who isgoing to be the new dean at Illinois 
law <http://www.law.illinois.edu/news/article/3023?src=fpb>. He’s not 
only a first rate scholar and excellent teacher but also one of the 
nicest people you’ll ever meet.

Share 
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D74133&title=%E2%80%9CWhat%20the%20Supreme%20Court%E2%80%99s%20Arizona%20Redistricting%20Ruling%20Means%20for%20Presidential%20%28Not%20Just%20Congressional%29%20Election%20Reform%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted inUncategorized <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>


    “Inside the GOP’s Effort to Close the Campaign-Science Gap With
    Democrats” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74131>

Posted onJuly 8, 2015 7:31 am 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74131>byRick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Fascinating Sasha Issenberg look. 
<http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/features/2015-07-08/inside-the-gop-s-effort-to-close-the-campaign-science-gap-with-democrats?cmpid=BBD070815_POL>

Share 
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D74131&title=%E2%80%9CInside%20the%20GOP%E2%80%99s%20Effort%20to%20Close%20the%20Campaign-Science%20Gap%20With%20Democrats%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted incampaigns <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59>


    “Instant runoff voting could improve Boston elections”
    <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74129>

Posted onJuly 8, 2015 7:29 am 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74129>byRick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

James Sutherland writes. 
<http://commonwealthmagazine.org/politics/instant-runoff-voting-could-improve-boston-elections/>

Share 
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D74129&title=%E2%80%9CInstant%20runoff%20voting%20could%20improve%20Boston%20elections%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted inalternative voting systems <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=63>


    “Democrats sue state election officials over 2011 redistricting”
    <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74127>

Posted onJuly 8, 2015 7:27 am 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74127>byRick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

News 
<http://www.jsonline.com/news/democrats-sue-state-election-officials-over-2011-redistricting-b99533804z1-312495891.html>from 
Wisconsin:

    A group of Democrats sued state election officials Wednesday over
    election maps Republicans drew in 2011 thathelped give them a firm
    grip
    <http://www.jsonline.com/news/statepolitics/control-of-state-legislature-will-be-tough-for-democrats-1075fi5-173198241.html>on
    the Legislature.

    The lawsuit comes two years after a panel of three federal judges in
    separate litigation redrew two Assembly districts andblasted GOP
    lawmakers
    <http://www.jsonline.com/news/statepolitics/judges-close-redistricting-fight-with-admonition-b9925646z1-210006311.html>for
    drawing the maps in secret. That panel found the two districts on
    Milwaukee’s south sideviolated the voting rights of Latinos
    <http://www.jsonline.com/news/statepolitics/panel-rules-south-side-districts-must-be-redrawn-others-approved-bn4mlpo-143811306.html>,
    but it left in place all the other legislative maps, allowing
    Republicans to keep their advantage in elections.

    The new lawsuit seeks to change that by arguing the maps are so
    partisan as to be unconstitutional….

    The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled overly partisan maps can be
    unconstitutional, but the justices have never agreed on what
    standard to use to determine that. The latest lawsuit proposes a way
    of doing that.

    Partisan gerrymandering is achieved by “cracking” and “packing”
    districts. Cracking districts involves breaking up voters of one
    party across multiple districts so they don’t have a majority of
    votes in the districts. Packing districts amounts to stuffing large
    number of like-minded voters into a small number of districts.

    In both cases, those districts produce large numbers of “wasted”
    votes — that is, excess votes that aren’t needed to elect a
    candidate. Those bringing the lawsuit contend partisan
    gerrymandering can be measured by using those wasted votes to
    calculate a redistricting plan’s “efficiency gap.”

    The gap is the difference between the two parties’ wasted votes
    divided by the total number of votes cast. The gap determines the
    percentage of seats a party receives that it would not have received
    under a plan in which both sides receive roughly equal numbers of
    wasted votes.

    Using that measure, the Assembly maps gave Republicans an efficiency
    gap of 13% in 2012 and 10% in 2014. That makes the maps one of the
    most partisan in American history, according to the lawsuit.

Share 
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D74127&title=%E2%80%9CDemocrats%20sue%20state%20election%20officials%20over%202011%20redistricting%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted inredistricting <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=6>


    Lyle Denniston’s Take on Today’s DC Circuit Campaign Finance
    Decision <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74125>

Posted onJuly 7, 2015 2:04 pm 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74125>byRick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

He concludes 
<http://lyldenlawnews.com/2015/07/07/ban-on-contractors-political-donations-upheld/>:

    Aside from its direct impact on the flat ban on contractor
    contributions, the new decision’s rejection of the First Amendment
    challenge may have a legal and political effect on two other
    potential campaign law controversies that have been developing in
    the Obama administration for several years.

    Both of those potential initiatives have been strongly challenged on
    First Amendment grounds, as potential restrictions on the
    free-speech aspects of campaign financing.

    The first of those possible changes has been under study by
    President Obama and his White House aides for some time: a plan to
    issue a presidential order to force business firms doing business
    with the federal government to disclose publicly all of their
    political activity.  Although contractors are banned from making
    direct political contributions to candidates or campaign
    organizations, they may channel money into politics in other ways..

    The second possible revision was a study by the Internal Revenue
    Service — now suspended, perhaps for an indefinite period, because
    of political opposition — to revise the rules on eligibility fo
    tax-exempt status of private groups that are active in funding
    federal election campaigns.   Current IRS rules allow many such
    groups to gain tax-exempt status on the theory that they are doing
    “charitable” work.  The IRS had draft plans to severely restrict
    that status for such groups.

Share 
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D74125&title=Lyle%20Denniston%E2%80%99s%20Take%20on%20Today%E2%80%99s%20DC%20Circuit%20Campaign%20Finance%20Decision&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>


    Cert Petition Filed Arguing Exclusion of Independent Voters in NJ
    Primaries is Unconstitutional <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74122>

Posted onJuly 7, 2015 12:55 pm 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74122>byRick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Read the cert. petition inBalsam v. Secretary of State of New Jersey 
<http://electionlawblog.org/wp-content/uploads/balsam.pdf>.

Share 
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D74122&title=Cert%20Petition%20Filed%20Arguing%20Exclusion%20of%20Independent%20Voters%20in%20NJ%20Primaries%20is%20Unconstitutional&description=>
Posted inpolitical parties 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=25>,primaries 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=32>


    “The Rise and Fall of Mario Biaggi: Reminder of Why the Illegal
    Gratuities Statute Should be Revived “
    <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74120>

Posted onJuly 7, 2015 12:50 pm 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74120>byRick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Meredith McGehee blogs. 
<http://www.campaignlegalcenter.org/news/blog/clc-blog-rise-and-fall-mario-biaggi-reminder-why-illegal-gratuities-statute-should-be>

Share 
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D74120&title=%E2%80%9CThe%20Rise%20and%20Fall%20of%20Mario%20Biaggi%3A%20Reminder%20of%20Why%20the%20Illegal%20Gratuities%20Statute%20Should%20be%20Revived%20%E2%80%9C&description=>
Posted inbribery <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=54>


    “Blogging judge calls political candidate ‘unfit’ for office”
    <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74115>

Posted onJuly 7, 2015 11:15 am 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74115>byRick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Orin Kerr 
<https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2015/07/07/blogging-judge-calls-political-candidate-unfit-for-office/>on 
Judge Kopf.

Share 
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D74115&title=%E2%80%9CBlogging%20judge%20calls%20political%20candidate%20%E2%80%98unfit%E2%80%99%20for%20office%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted inUncategorized <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>


    The Status of the Federal Contractor Ban as Applied to Super PACs
    <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74113>

Posted onJuly 7, 2015 10:22 am 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74113>byRick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

As I noted inmy earlier post <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74090>on 
today’s Wagner v. FEC decision, the DC Circuit today did not address the 
question whether federal contractors have a constitutional right to make 
contributions to super PACs despite the contractor ban. It turns out the 
issue was raised in a matter involving Chevron at the FEC a few years 
ago, but the FEC did not resolve it.  Here’s aCovington Bulletin 
<http://www.insidepoliticallaw.com/2014/04/11/in-chevron-case-fec-brings-clarity-to-the-federal-contractor-ban-and-super-pacs/>(my 
emphasis):

    *In Chevron Case, FEC Brings Clarity to the Federal Contractor Ban
    and Super PACs*

    ByRobert Kelner
    <http://www.insidepoliticallaw.com/authors/#rkelner>,Robert Lenhard
    <http://www.insidepoliticallaw.com/authors/#rlenhard>andKevin
    Glandon <http://www.insidepoliticallaw.com/authors/#kglandon>onApril
    11th, 2014

    The rules on corporate contributions to Super PACs were made clearer
    today when the Federal Election Commission (FEC)released its finding
    <http://eqs.fec.gov/eqsdocsMUR/14044353483.pdf>that Chevron
    Corporation’s $2.5 million contribution in 2012 to the Congressional
    Leadership Fund (a Super PAC) had not violated the bar on government
    contractors making contributions in federal elections.

    Public Citizen and several environmental groups had alleged that
    Chevron Corporation and Chevron U.S.A. Inc. had numerous federal
    contracts, and consequently could not contribute to a Super PAC.  On
    abipartisan 5-1 vote
    <http://eqs.fec.gov/eqsdocsMUR/14044353409.pdf>, the FEC dismissed
    the charges, finding that Chevron Corporation—which made the
    contribution—was not a federal contractor at the time, and that
    federal contractor status could not be imputed to the company merely
    because it had a wholly-owned subsidiary that owned a subsidiary
    that in turn owned a subsidiary that owned a federal contractor.  In
    so doing, the FEC followed the agency’s longstanding practice of
    permitting a parent company with a federal contractor subsidiary to
    make a contribution as long as it has sufficient funds from sources
    other than the contractor subsidiary.  Nor is the federal contractor
    ban particularly stringent, permitting officers, shareholders, a
    corporate PAC, and subcontractors to contribute, even when the
    contractor cannot.

    *Having resolved the case by applying the facts to existing law, the
    FEC did not address an even more fundamental issueraised by Chevron
    <http://eqs.fec.gov/eqsdocsMUR/14044353375.pdf>:  Applying the
    federal contractor ban to contributions to a Super PAC is
    inconsistent with the Supreme Court’s limiting of campaign finance
    restrictions to the prevention of/quid pro quo/corruption or its
    appearance.  Last Wednesday’s decision in/McCutcheon v.
    FEC/highlights the doctrinal fragility of the federal contractor ban
    in cases like this.*

    Full disclosure: Covington represented Chevron before the FEC in
    this matter.

UPDATE:

Craig Holman sent the following message to the election law listserv 
(reprinted with permission):

    Every indication at this point is that the federal pay-to-play law
    applies to super PACs, though this question has yet to be litigated.
    The federal law explicitly prohibits federal contractors from making
    campaign contributions to federal candidates, parties and PACs, and
    super PACs are federal PACs.

    This was the basis of a “recent” FEC complaint filed by Public
    Citizen, in which Chevron made a $2.5 million contribution to
    Boehner’s super PAC, the Congressional Leadership Fund. The FEC
    dismissed the complaint on the grounds offered by Chevron:  that the
    campaign contribution to the super PAC was made by Chevron
    Corporation, while the federal contract was held by Chevron USA, a
    different division of the same corporate family. (This rationale of
    allowing one division of a company make campaign contributions while
    another division of the same corporate family holds the contracts is
    currently the subject of an FEC rulemaking petition).
    The issue of whether the federal pay-to-play law applies to super
    PACs was not questioned in that decision, and individual
    commissioners have on occasion said that they believe the law does
    indeed apply to super PACs.
    Public Citizen contends that the law does indeed apply to super
    PACs. It makes sense. Not only is the law clear that it does apply
    to all PACs, the very close association and coordination of super
    PACs with candidates and parties warrants such an interpretation.
    Such an interpretation is not only appropriate for the federal
    pay-to-play law, but also for SEC rule 206(4)-5. The SEC has not yet
    made it clear that the SEC pay-to-play rule applies to super PACs,
    but the agency has routinely applied the pay-to-play rule in other
    situations where it deemed appropriate to close evasion of the
    pay-to-play rule.

    Craig Holman, Ph.D.
    Government Affairs Lobbyist
    Public Citizen

See also pages 5 and 9 of this2011 MUR 
<http://eqs.fec.gov/eqsdocsMUR/11044304942.pdf>, in which the FEC says 
contractors cannot make contributions to Super PACs.

Share 
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D74113&title=The%20Status%20of%20the%20Federal%20Contractor%20Ban%20as%20Applied%20to%20Super%20PACs&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>,campaigns 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59>


    “The Age of Super PACs” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74111>

Posted onJuly 7, 2015 10:02 am 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74111>byRick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

NYT video. 
<http://www.nytimes.com/video/us/politics/100000003778583/the-age-of-super-pacs.html>

Share 
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D74111&title=%E2%80%9CThe%20Age%20of%20Super%20PACs%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>,campaigns 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59>


    “‘Super PACs’ Take On New Role, Organizing Voters”
    <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74109>

Posted onJuly 7, 2015 9:59 am 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74109>byRick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Trip Gabriel 
<http://www.nytimes.com/2015/07/08/us/politics/super-pacs-take-on-new-role-organizing-voters.html?_r=0>for 
the NYT on the ground in Iowa.

Share 
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D74109&title=%E2%80%9C%E2%80%98Super%20PACs%E2%80%99%20Take%20On%20New%20Role%2C%20Organizing%20Voters%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>,campaigns 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59>

-- 
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/20150708/2bb5e5ff/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: share_save_171_16.png
Type: image/png
Size: 1504 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20150708/2bb5e5ff/attachment.png>


View list directory