[EL] Ohio election glitches/more news

Rick Hasen rhasen at law.uci.edu
Tue Nov 3 16:46:31 PST 2015


    Glad Ohio Election Glitches are Tonight and Not in 2016!
    <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=77250>

Posted onNovember 3, 2015 4:44 pm 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=77250>byRick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

This 
<http://www.cleveland.com/open/index.ssf/2015/11/hamilton_county_polls_to_stay.html#incart_maj-story-2>would 
be an explosive story if the presidency were on the line:

    Hamilton County polling places will have to stay open until 9 p.m
    after supporters of Ohio’s marijuana legalization measure filed a
    lawsuit late Tuesday to extend voting hours because of several
    voting problems reported there.

    ResponsibleOhio
    <http://topics.cleveland.com/tag/responsibleohio/posts.html>, the
    political action committee backing stateIssue 3
    <http://topics.cleveland.com/tag/ohio-issue-3-2015/posts.html>,
    filed an injunction in the Hamilton County Court of Common Pleas.
    Former state Sen. Eric Kearney, as a consultant for ResponsibleOhio,
    argued to keep the polls later before Judge Robert P. Ruehlman, who
    granted the extension.

    Polling places were scheduled to close at 7:30 p.m. statewide. State
    law requires poll workers to let any voter in line at closing time
    to cast a ballot.

    Ohio Secretary of State Jon Husted directed all county boards of
    election to embargo results until 9 p.m.

    Among the issues reported at Hamilton County polling places:

      * Polling places had problems using new electronic poll books,
        which created long lines and may have caused voters to leave
        without casting a ballot.
      * Polling places did not have or did not use backup paper poll
        books when problems arose with electronic pollbooks.
      * Poll workers did not have provisional ballots on hand or failed
        to provide provisional ballots to qualified voters.

There is now anembargo on election returns 
<https://twitter.com/chrisgeidner/status/661702512811053057>throughout 
Ohio until polls close at 9 pm.

Share 
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D77250&title=Glad%20Ohio%20Election%20Glitches%20are%20Tonight%20and%20Not%20in%202016%21&description=>
Posted inelection administration <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>


    “Bush, Clinton benefit from lobbying gray area; Influence industry
    plays key role in raising funds for the campaigns”
    <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=77248>

Posted onNovember 3, 2015 3:52 pm 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=77248>byRick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Politico 
<http://www.politico.com/story/2015/10/jeb-bush-hillary-clinton-lobbying-fundraising-215380#ixzz3qSOudhYn>:

    The influence industry is playing a larger role than meets the eye
    in raising money for Hillary Clinton and Jeb Bush.
    Campaigns are required to file reports detailing registered
    lobbyists who round up donations, but that number is only a small
    slice of the fundraisers who work in some

    A quarter of the “Hillblazers” who bundled $100,000 or more for
    Clinton work at lobbying firms or public affairs agencies lobby at
    the state level or otherwise make their living from influencing the
    government on behalf of special interests, even though they aren’t
    themselves registered to lobby Congress. For Bush, 58 of the 342
    people who raised at least $17,600 are advocates and operatives
    linked to the influence industry, although they aren’t reported as
    federal lobbyists.
    The reliance on these power brokers — to an extent not fully
    revealed in Federal Election Commission filings alone — shows how
    much both candidates are drawing on family and party networks forged
    over decades in politics to bankroll their presidential bids. It
    also illustrates the weaknesses in the rules meant to subject
    lobbyists to more public scrutiny.

Share 
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D77248&title=%26%238220%3BBush%2C%20Clinton%20benefit%20from%20lobbying%20gray%20area%3B%20Influence%20industry%20plays%20key%20role%20in%20raising%20funds%20for%20the%20campaigns%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>,campaigns 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59>,lobbying 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=28>


    Did Kansas SOS Kobach Attend a Racist Meeting Last Week?
    <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=77246>

Posted onNovember 3, 2015 3:48 pm 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=77246>byRick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Southern Poverty Law Center,What’s the Matter with Kansas’s Kris Kobach? 
<https://www.splcenter.org/hatewatch/2015/11/02/what%E2%80%99s-matter-kansas%E2%80%99-kris-kobach>:

    On Oct. 25, Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach was a featured
    speaker at a “writers’ workshop” put on by the white nationalist The
    Social Contract Press (TSCP), according to areport
    <http://imagine2050.newcomm.org/2015/10/30/kobach-heads-to-dc-for-white-nationalist-social-contracts-writers-workshop/>from
    the Center for New Community. For an elected official, this is a
    problem.

    The Social Contract Press
    <https://www.splcenter.org/fighting-hate/extremist-files/group/social-contract-press>is
    a Michigan-based publishing house that routinely puts out
    race-baiting articles penned by well known white nationalists. The
    press is a program of U.S., Inc., the foundation created byJohn
    Tanton
    <https://www.splcenter.org/fighting-hate/extremist-files/individual/john-tanton>,
    the racist founder and principal ideologue of the modern nativist
    movement and TSCP’s publisher. Tanton has assiduously cultivated
    relationships with Holocaust deniers, eugenicists and various other
    extremists over the years. And he’s clear about his racism:  “I’ve
    come to the point of view that for European-American society and
    culture to persist requires a European-American majority, and a
    clear one at that.”

Share 
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D77246&title=Did%20Kansas%20SOS%20Kobach%20Attend%20a%20Racist%20Meeting%20Last%20Week%3F&description=>
Posted inchicanery <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=12>


    L.A. County Voting Systems Assessment Project (VSAP)
    <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=77244>

Posted onNovember 3, 2015 3:35 pm 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=77244>byRick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

I have now joined theAdvisory 
Committee<https://www.lavote.net/vsap/advisory-committees-project-team#>of 
the Los Angeles CountyVoting Systems Assessment Project 
<https://www.lavote.net/vsap/about>, which is designing and implementing 
a new voting system for Los Angeles County, the largest voting 
jurisdiction in the United States. I’m looking forward to working with 
LA County Registrar/Recorder Dean Logan and the VSAP teams.

Here’s a newBloomberg Business 
video<http://www.bloomberg.com/news/videos/2015-11-03/democracy-for-everyone-designing-a-better-voting-machine>about 
the work of the VSAP.

Share 
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D77244&title=L.A.%20County%20Voting%20Systems%20Assessment%20Project%20%28VSAP%29&description=>
Posted inelection administration 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>,voting technology 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=40>,VSAP 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=122>


    “Small Donors Are Clicking More With Democrats Than Republicans”
    <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=77242>

Posted onNovember 3, 2015 10:12 am 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=77242>byRick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

NYT: 
<http://www.nytimes.com/2015/11/04/us/politics/small-donors-are-clicking-more-with-democrats-than-republicans.html?smid=tw-share>

    The differing approaches between Mr. Sanders and Mr. Carson reflect
    a wider divide between the two parties. The Democrats, largely
    through ActBlue and the digital efforts of individual campaigns,
    have gained a cultural and technological edge in developing a
    low-cost, quick and seamless online operation — an advantage
    Republicans admit they largely have been unable to match.
    The one exception, at least of late, appears to be Senator Ted Cruz,
    who raised about half of his total of $12.2 million in the third
    quarter from donations of $200 or less, most of it — about $4.2
    million — through digital platforms. Mr. Cruz has been one of the
    most successful on the Republican side in building a broad
    fund-raising base, by bringing in big donations for groups
    supporting him from a few wealthy individuals while also tapping
    into grass-roots support networks like Tea Party conservatives and
    evangelicals.

    Other Republicans have struggled to keep up with the Democrats in
    attracting smaller donors in bulk. Jeb Bush, for instance, managed
    just $1.4 million in donations of $200 or less — a nickel for every
    dollar he has raised over all.

    This election cycle is something of a departure for Republicans, who
    were once the party of the small-dollar donor. President George W.
    Bush built his victories in 2000 and 2004 around small-dollar donors
    his campaign reached through direct mail. In his first election
    victory, Republican officials bragged of his support from more than
    600,000 donors contributing an average of about only $100 each, far
    outpacing the Democrats.

    But the roles are now reversed, with the Democrats — and Mr. Sanders
    in particular — capitalizing not only on digital technology, but
    also on voter demographics and cultural quirks.

Share 
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D77242&title=%26%238220%3BSmall%20Donors%20Are%20Clicking%20More%20With%20Democrats%20Than%20Republicans%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>,campaigns 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59>


    “Congressional Democrats Launch a New Strategy to Restore the Voting
    Rights Act” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=77240>

Posted onNovember 3, 2015 9:30 am 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=77240>byRick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Ari Berman writes. 
<http://www.thenation.com/article/congressional-democrats-launch-a-new-strategy-to-restore-the-voting-rights-act/>

Share 
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D77240&title=%26%238220%3BCongressional%20Democrats%20Launch%20a%20New%20Strategy%20to%20Restore%20the%20Voting%20Rights%20Act%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted inVoting Rights Act <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=15>,VRAA 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=81>


    “Money in Politics: A Bipartisan Discussion”
    <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=77238>

Posted onNovember 3, 2015 9:30 am 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=77238>byRick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

This 
event<http://bsos.umd.edu/academics-research/money-politics-bipartisan>will 
take place on Nov. 12 at the University of Maryland.

Share 
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D77238&title=%26%238220%3BMoney%20in%20Politics%3A%20A%20Bipartisan%20Discussion%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>


    “How Democrats Suppress The Vote: Off-year elections have much lower
    turnout, and Democrats prefer it that way”
    <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=77236>

Posted onNovember 3, 2015 8:10 am 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=77236>byRick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Eitan Hersh 
<http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/how-democrats-suppress-the-vote/>pens 
a provocative piece at 538:

    In the ongoing fight between Democrats and Republicans over election
    procedures like voter ID and early voting, the Democrats are
    supposedly thechampions
    <https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/hillary-clinton-calls-for-sweeping-expansion-of-voter-registration/2015/06/04/691f210c-0adb-11e5-9e39-0db921c47b93_story.html>of
    higher turnout and reducing barriers to participation. But when it
    comes to scheduling off-cycle elections^1
    <http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/how-democrats-suppress-the-vote/#fn-1>like
    those taking place today, the Democratic Party is the champion of
    voter suppression.

    Indeed, few people will vote today. Many elections are taking place,
    but almost all are for local offices. School boards, for example,
    areup for election
    <http://ballotpedia.org/School_board_elections,_2015>in Houston;
    Fairfax County, Virginia; Charlotte, North Carolina and in hundreds
    of other communities that oversee the education of millions of
    schoolchildren. But only a small number of highly engaged voters
    will participate in the elections for these offices.

    Scheduling elections at odd times appears to be a deliberate
    strategy aimed at keeping turnout low, which gives more influence to
    groups like teachers unions that have a direct stake in the
    election’s outcome. But before getting into the details of off-cycle
    elections, consider the parties’ basic positions on issues of voter
    participation. As election law expert Rick Hasenhas
    <https://electionlawblog.org/?p=43289>noted
    <http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2014/02/the_new_conservative_assault_on_early_voting_more_republicans_fewer_voters.html>,
    there is a philosophical divide between the parties. Supposedly, for
    Republicans, small barriers to participation can help the
    functioning of a democracy. For instance, in recent years,
    Republicanshave been pushing
    <http://www.ncsl.org/research/elections-and-campaigns/voter-id.aspx>a requirement
    that voters present identification when they show up to cast a
    ballot. They argue that voter ID laws can prevent fraud and foster
    confidence in the electoral system. But they also argue that if an
    ID requirement deters people who aren’t particularly well-informed
    or invested in the political process, this might be a net benefit
    for the electoral system.

    The Democratic philosophy is different. For Democrats, universal
    participation is a value: All voices ought to be represented in the
    electoral sphere, so the government should not put up any
    unnecessary barriers to participation.

    Debates over issues like voter ID are politically explosive because
    each side suspects the other of having a strategic motive, not a
    philosophical one, for its position. Maybe Republicans want lower
    turnout not because it yields an informed electorate, butbecause it
    favors their side
    <http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/government-elections-politics/why-voter-id-laws-arent-really-about-fraud/>.
    Maybe Democrats promote higher turnout not because of an ideological
    commitment to civic engagement, but because higher turnout helps
    elect Democrats (though there issubstantial disagreement
    <https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/monkey-cage/wp/2015/03/25/even-more-on-the-potential-impact-of-mandatory-voting/>on
    whether that is true).

    Nowhere are the strategic motivations — and the hypocritical
    rhetoric — of both parties more apparent than in the timing of
    elections.

Share 
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D77236&title=%26%238220%3BHow%20Democrats%20Suppress%20The%20Vote%3A%20Off-year%20elections%20have%20much%20lower%20turnout%2C%20and%20Democrats%20prefer%20it%20that%20way%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted invoting <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=31>


    “Anthony Kennedy’s Citizens United Disclosure Salve ‘Not Working'”
    <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=77234>

Posted onNovember 3, 2015 8:08 am 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=77234>byRick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Paul Blumenthal 
<http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/citizens-united-anthony-kennedy_5637c481e4b0631799134b92>for 
HuffPo.

Share 
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D77234&title=%26%238220%3BAnthony%20Kennedy%26%238217%3Bs%20Citizens%20United%20Disclosure%20Salve%20%26%238216%3BNot%20Working%27%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>,Supreme 
Court <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>


    “Kentucky Law Journal Symposium to Focus on Election Law”
    <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=77232>

Posted onNovember 3, 2015 8:06 am 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=77232>byRick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

A great event at Kentucky 
<http://www.uky.edu/electionlaw/analysis/kentucky-law-journal-symposium-focus-election-law>(which 
I will have to miss because of the upcoming Plutocrats United book tour):

    The Kentucky Law Journal is proud to announce that this year’s
    *Symposium*
    <http://www.kentuckylawjournal.org/index.php/symposium/> ​will cover
    Election Law. As Kentucky and our nation are in the midst of various
    elections, this symposium will be particularly interesting. The
    Kentucky Law Journal has brought together academic leaders in the
    field of Election Law, as well as local practitioners in order to
    discuss the important issues in this field. These special guest
    speakers include:

    Edward Foley, Professor of Law | The Ohio State University
    Dan Tokaji, Professor of Law | The Ohio State University
    Michael Gilbert, Professor of Law | University of Virginia
    Franita Tolson, Professor of Law | Florida State University
    Michael Pitts, Professor of Law | Indiana University-Purdue
    University Indianapolis
    Ellen Katz, Professor of Law | University of Michigan
    Jocelyn Benson, Professor of Law | Wayne State University
    Michael Solimine, Professor of Law | University of Cincinnati
    Luis Fuentes-Rohwer, Professor of Law | Indiana University
    Atiba Ellis, Professor of Law | West Virginia University
    Mark Summers, Professor of History | University of Kentucky
    Tracy Campbell, Professor of History | University of Kentucky
    Eric Lycan, Dinsmore & Shohl, LLP, Lexington, KY
    Scott White, Morgan & Pottinger Attorneys, Lexington, KY
    Jennifer Moore, Grossman & Moore, PLLC, Louisville, KY
    The Honorable Trey Grayson, Former Kentucky Secretary of State

    The Symposium will consist of four panels with four speakers in each
    panel.  The Election Law Symposium will be held January 22^nd , 2016
    at the College of Law in Lexington, Kentucky. Please stay tuned for
    updates on this exciting event over the coming months. We look
    forward to seeing you in January!

Share 
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D77232&title=%26%238220%3BKentucky%20Law%20Journal%20Symposium%20to%20Focus%20on%20Election%20Law%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted inUncategorized <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>


-- 
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/20151103/c29a26ed/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/20151103/c29a26ed/attachment.png>


View list directory