[EL] Ned Foley's piece

Wed Oct 19 12:11:12 PDT 2016

The utility of any exchange is also frustrated by cryptic and substantive-less statements about how the utility of any exchange is lacking.

Lawyers should be able to respond to arguments instead of just calling something ideology and false equivalency and then declaring the matter beyond discussion. Because, God knows, that approach has worked to achieve common ground on important topics in other arenas.

And, of course, there are differences between the two criticisms. But they both take problems and conflate them into a condemnation of the entire system unjustified by the evidence.

Bill

From: John Farrell [mailto:jfarrell at mccandlishlawyers.com]
Sent: Wednesday, October 19, 2016 12:01 PM
To: Bill Maurer
Cc: Rick Hasen; Election Law Listserv
Subject: Re: [EL] Ned Foley's piece

Yet another instance of false equivalency.

Lawyers ought to be able to understand the differences in the two criticisms but it advances an ideology to pretend that all criticisms of our system of government are the same and equally invalid.

And there ends the utility of any exchange.

John W. Farrell
Attorney at Law

[cid:image001.gif at 01D22A01.E0285840]<http://mccandlishlawyers.com/>

11350 Random Hills Road | Suite 500
Fairfax, Virginia 22030-7421
tel (703) 934-1182 cell (703) 507-1182

website<http://mccandlishlawyers.com/> | bio<http://mccandlishlawyers.com/attorney/john-w-farrell/> | vCard<http://www.dynasend.com/signatures/vcard/jfarrell-at-mccandlishlawyers.com.vcf> | map<http://maps.google.com/maps?q=11350+Random+Hills+Road,+Fairfax,+VA+22030&hl=en&ll=38.857288,-77.338471&spn=0.028874,0.038409&sll=37.0625,-95.677068&sspn=59.206892,78.662109&vpsrc=6&hnear=11350+Random+Hills+Rd,+Fairfax,+Virginia+22030&t=m&z=15> | email<mailto:jfarrell at mccandlishlawyers.com>

[cid:image002.gif at 01D22A01.E0285840][cid:image003.gif at 01D22A01.E0285840]<http://www.facebook.com/McCandlishLillard>[cid:image004.gif at 01D22A01.E0285840]<http://www.linkedin.com/company/mccandlish-&-lillard-p.c.>[cid:image005.gif at 01D22A01.E0285840]<http://www.youtube.com/user/McCandlishLillard>

This email is not intended, nor shall it be deemed, unless otherwise expressly provided in writing, to (1) constitute or provide legal advice or counsel, unless the recipient already has an attorney-client relationship with the firm or me; (2) create an attorney-client relationship; or (3) contain my electronic, or other implied, signature.

On Oct 19, 2016, at 2:43 PM, Bill Maurer <wmaurer at ij.org<mailto:wmaurer at ij.org>> wrote:

I encourage everyone to read Ned Foley’s excellent piece below. I was doing some research the other day and noted that Bernie Sanders has been talking about a “rigged political system” that benefits the wealthy and connected for much longer than Donald Trump has been talking about a “rigged election” that will benefit the wealthy and connected. Trump’s unique contribution seems to be that he has identified the specific election he believes will be rigged, while Sanders and some (but clearly not all) of those who favor campaign finance regulations make more amorphous and broader suggestions of campaigns being “bought,” thus suggesting that all or at least a large number of election results are fraudulent.

Ned is correct that neither is correct and that that this kind of rhetoric from both sides encourage cynicism, distrust, and alienation. CNN is no more rigging the election than the Koch Brothers and having both voices in the political debate strengthens our political system. People voting multiple times is as much a fantasy as Sheldon Adelson or Charles Koch picking the next president practically on their own. Trump supporters cannot name one election determined by fraud and the more extreme pro-regulation supporters cannot name one election that was “bought,” but both believe, without noticing the inherent contradiction, that in order to have a fair election, voices with which they disagree must be silenced or reduced and the “wrong” people discouraged to participate. They both believe that when the government threatens people with fines and criminal sanctions for engaging in peaceful political activity, this somehow is “democracy.” Ned is totally correct that these types of Manichean delusion deserve to be publicly rejected and refuted by those who can do so.

I encourage Ned to expand this piece and publish it for a mass audience.

Bill

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] On Behalf Of Rick Hasen
Sent: Wednesday, October 19, 2016 8:02 AM
To: Election Law Listserv
Subject: [EL] ELB News and Commentary 10/19/16

“The Claim that the Media is Rigging the Election–and Citizens United”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=87695>
Posted on October 18, 2016 5:16 pm<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=87695> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Ned Foley<http://prawfsblawg.blogs.com/prawfsblawg/2016/10/the-claim-that-the-media-is-rigging-the-election-and-citizens-united.html>:
Now for the relevance of Citizens United: insofar as the attack on that decision rests on the premise that corporate-funded speech will distort the electoral process by persuading voters of its message, it seems the same sort of argument that Trump and Pence are making with respect to the media’s capacity to influence what voters think.  To be sure, there might be different types of arguments for attacking Citizens United–that corporate money, for some reason, should be off-limits in the process of persuading voters what to think.  But if one rejects the idea that CNN and the New York Times are capable of rigging the election because the messages they send to voters about the competing candidates, then presumably to be consistent one should equally reject the idea that Citizens United and other corporations are capable of improperly distorting the electoral process because of the messages these other corporations send to voters.
Conversely, defenders of Citizens United should be taking the lead in condemning the Trump-Pence claim that the media is currently rigging the election because of its messages about the candidates.  The First Amendment reasoning that underlies Citizens United rules out the Trump-Pence position on this issue.
<image001.png><https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D87695&title=%E2%80%9CThe%20Claim%20that%20the%20Media%20is%20Rigging%20the%20Election%E2%80%93and%20Citizens%20United%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted in campaign finance<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>, campaigns<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59>

_______________________________________________
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

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20161019/5bcb6358/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.gif
Type: image/gif
Size: 3295 bytes
Desc: image001.gif
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20161019/5bcb6358/attachment.gif>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image002.gif
Type: image/gif
Size: 1159 bytes
Desc: image002.gif
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20161019/5bcb6358/attachment-0001.gif>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image003.gif
Type: image/gif
Size: 1135 bytes
Desc: image003.gif
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20161019/5bcb6358/attachment-0002.gif>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image004.gif
Type: image/gif
Size: 1068 bytes
Desc: image004.gif
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20161019/5bcb6358/attachment-0003.gif>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image005.gif
Type: image/gif
Size: 1131 bytes
Desc: image005.gif
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20161019/5bcb6358/attachment-0004.gif>