[EL] ELB News and Commentary 1/25/19

[Rick Hasen]

“Roger Stone was in close contact with Trump campaign about WikiLeaks, indictment shows”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=103320>
Posted on January 25, 2019 7:54 am<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=103320> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

WaPo<https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/roger-stone-was-in-close-contact-with-trump-campaign-about-wikileaks-indictment-shows/2019/01/25/65d9ad1a-20a2-11e9-8e21-59a09ff1e2a1_story.html?utm_term=.9f2b6a87fc8c>:

A major focus of the probe has been whether Stone coordinated with WikiLeaks or its founder, Julian Assange, as the group published thousands of Democratic emails that prosecutors say were hacked by Russian operatives.

Stone was not charged with any crimes related to communicating with WikiLeaks about its activities, and he has repeatedly denied that he conspired with the group.


But his 24-page indictment <https://www.washingtonpost.com/roger-stone-indictment/7cedd188-130a-4fa3-8736-904a46747c92_note.html?utm_term=.b646b9de418e> details numerous occasions when Stone claimed to campaign officials that he had information about WikiLeaks or was in contact with Assange — and it depicts Trump aides and allies as acutely interested in learning about the group’s plans in advance.

Among those who sought information from Stone, according to the filing, was a “senior Trump Campaign official” who “was directed” by an unnamed person to contact Stone as soon as WikiLeaks began publishing Democratic emails in the summer of 2016.

Stone also communicated about WikiLeaks with “a high ranking Trump Campaign official,” whose emails in the filing match those of former campaign chairman Stephen K. Bannon. And Stone received a query about the group’s activities from a “supporter involved with the Trump campaign,” whom he then asked to communicate via a secure messaging app, according to prosecutors.
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D103320&title=%E2%80%9CRoger%20Stone%20was%20in%20close%20contact%20with%20Trump%20campaign%20about%20WikiLeaks%2C%20indictment%20shows%E2%80%9D>
Posted in chicanery<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=12>


“Dems denied access to voter database in lawsuit over NH election law”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=103318>
Posted on January 25, 2019 7:50 am<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=103318> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Union Leader<https://www.unionleader.com/news/politics/dems-denied-access-to-voter-database-in-lawsuit-over-nh/article_52de5ead-e798-5082-95e8-b46c065a8d1f.html>:

The state Supreme Court ruled on Thursday that the secretary of state does not have to provide a detailed voter database to the N.H. Democratic Party, the League of Women Voters and other plaintiffs in a lawsuit challenging Senate Bill 3<http://gencourt.state.nh.us/bill_status/Results.aspx?q=1&txtbillnumber=sb3&txtsessionyear=2017>, the new law on voter verification.

A lower court had ordered release of the database to the plaintiffs, who claimed they needed certain information from it to make their case.

“We conclude that the database is exempt from disclosure by statute, and we therefore vacate the trial court’s order,” the unanimous order of the five justices said.
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D103318&title=%E2%80%9CDems%20denied%20access%20to%20voter%20database%20in%20lawsuit%20over%20NH%20election%20law%E2%80%9D>
Posted in election administration<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>


“Illinois leaving ‘Crosscheck’ voter fraud system due to security, reliability concerns”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=103316>
Posted on January 25, 2019 7:45 am<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=103316> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

WGEM reports<https://wgem.com/2019/01/24/illinois-leaving-crosscheck-voter-fraud-system-due-to-security-reliability-concerns/>.
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D103316&title=%E2%80%9CIllinois%20leaving%20%E2%80%98Crosscheck%E2%80%99%20voter%20fraud%20system%20due%20to%20security%2C%20reliability%20concerns%E2%80%9D>
Posted in election administration<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>


“New NC elections board won’t start for a week. But it’s already deep in controversy.”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=103314>
Posted on January 25, 2019 7:40 am<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=103314> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Charlotte Observer<https://www.charlotteobserver.com/news/politics-government/election/article225004930.html>:

North Carolina’s new bipartisan elections board won’t be named for a week, but it’s already sparked more partisan sniping in the midst of what could be the state’s biggest election scandal in years.

The attacks began after former board Chairman Josh Malcolm, a Democrat who sparked the investigation into election fraud in the 9th Congressional District, told the Observer that he will not serve on a new board.

Republican Sen. Dan Bishop of Charlotte and GOP Rep. David Lewis of Harnett County, who chair election committees, called Malcolm’s decision, coupled with the December resignation of then-Chairman Andy Penry, “the inevitable result of (Gov. Roy) Cooper’s crusade to make the Board an arm of his political machine.”

Meanwhile, the N.C. Democratic Party nominated four people for three seats on the new five-member board, which Cooper is expected to name on Jan. 31. It also claimed that three of the four Republicans recommended by state GOP are ineligible. Republicans will have two seats on the new board.
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D103314&title=%E2%80%9CNew%20NC%20elections%20board%20won%E2%80%99t%20start%20for%20a%20week.%20But%20it%E2%80%99s%20already%20deep%20in%20controversy.%E2%80%9D>
Posted in election administration<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>, The Voting Wars<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60>


North Carolina: “Do state investigators really have evidence to call 9th District margin into question?”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=103311>
Posted on January 25, 2019 7:35 am<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=103311> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

WRAL<https://www.wral.com/do-state-investigators-really-have-evidence-to-call-9th-district-margin-into-question/18146218/>:

GOP officials have repeatedly said there are simply not enough votes in question to change the outcome of the race, so Harris should be declared the winner.

But during a court hearing Tuesday on Harris’ motion, Special Deputy Attorney General Amar Majmundar said that argument might not hold water.

“It’s my understanding that there’s sufficient evidence to call that margin into question, Majmundar said.

The statement provides the first glimpse into what state investigators may have uncovered – a hearing into the matter had to be canceled after the board was dissolved, and no date for a hearing can be scheduled until the new board is seated.

But where would all of those votes to erase Harris’ lead come from? One possible source is absentee ballots that were sent out but never returned.
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D103311&title=North%20Carolina%3A%20%E2%80%9CDo%20state%20investigators%20really%20have%20evidence%20to%20call%209th%20District%20margin%20into%20question%3F%E2%80%9D>
Posted in Uncategorized<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>


“It’s time for Maryland and Virginia to embrace ranked-choice voting”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=103309>
Posted on January 25, 2019 7:32 am<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=103309> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

WaPo editorial.<https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/its-time-for-maryland-and-virginia-to-embrace-ranked-choice-voting/2019/01/24/df485890-2020-11e9-9145-3f74070bbdb9_story.html?utm_term=.43e0619ec355>
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D103309&title=%E2%80%9CIt%E2%80%99s%20time%20for%20Maryland%20and%20Virginia%20to%20embrace%20ranked-choice%20voting%E2%80%9D>
Posted in alternative voting systems<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=63>


“CLC Releases Collection of Racial Appeals Used in Political Communications from 2017-18”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=103307>
Posted on January 24, 2019 2:11 pm<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=103307> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Release:<https://campaignlegal.org/update/clc-releases-collection-racial-appeals-used-political-communications-2017-18>

Campaign Legal Center’s (CLC) new Race in Politics Catalog is a collection of political communications, campaign materials and comments that make racial appeals to voters. Compiled over the 2017-2018 election cycle, the Catalog gathers – in one place for the first time – many different types of race-based appeals from political campaigns across the country.
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D103307&title=%E2%80%9CCLC%20Releases%20Collection%20of%20Racial%20Appeals%20Used%20in%20Political%20Communications%20from%202017-18%E2%80%9D>
Posted in Voting Rights Act<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=15>


Wisconsin Voters, Regardless of Party, Overwhelmingly Favor Nonpartisan Redistricting Commission<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=103305>
Posted on January 24, 2019 11:58 am<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=103305> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Marquette Poll<https://law.marquette.edu/poll/category/poll-release/> of Wisconsin voters:

Seventy-two percent of voters say they prefer redistricting of legislative and congressional districts to be done by a nonpartisan commission, while 18 percent prefer redistricting be done by the legislature and governor. Majorities in each partisan group favor a nonpartisan commission for redistricting, with 63 percent of Republicans including leaners, 83 percent of Democrats including leaners, and 76 percent of independents favoring a nonpartisan commission. Less than 30 percent of each group preferred redistricting be done by the legislature and governor, with support for the current system coming from 27 percent of Republicans including leaners, 10 percent of Democrats including leaners, and 10 percent of independents.
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D103305&title=Wisconsin%20Voters%2C%20Regardless%20of%20Party%2C%20Overwhelmingly%20Favor%20Nonpartisan%20Redistricting%20Commission>
Posted in redistricting<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=6>


“Florida Secretary of State Michael Ertel resigns after Halloween blackface photos emerge”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=103303>
Posted on January 24, 2019 11:49 am<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=103303> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Holy cow from the Tallahassee Democrat<https://www.tallahassee.com/story/news/2019/01/24/new-secretary-state-ertel-dressed-blackface-halloween-2005/2649161002/>:

Michael Ertel, the newly appointed Secretary of State of Gov. Ron DeSantis, has resigned after photos emerged of him posing as a Hurricane Katrina victim in blackface at a private Halloween party 14 years ago.

The photos obtained by the Tallahassee Democrat were shown to the Governor’s Office on Thursday morning. Hours later it issued a statement.


“The governor accepted Secretary Ertel’s resignation,” the Governor’s Office said.

The photo was taken in 2005, eight months after Ertel was appointed Seminole County supervisor of elections and two months after Hurricane Katrina devastated New Orleans.

After the Democrat texted the photos to him last week, Ertel, 49, identified himself as the white man in blackface and red lipstick, wearing earrings and a New Orleans Saints bandanna, and falsies under a purple T-shirt that had “Katrina Victim” written on it.
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D103303&title=%E2%80%9CFlorida%20Secretary%20of%20State%20Michael%20Ertel%20resigns%20after%20Halloween%20blackface%20photos%20emerge%E2%80%9D>
Posted in Uncategorized<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>


Did OSCE Election Observer Give Spy Pen as Gift to Nebraska Election Officials?<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=103301>
Posted on January 24, 2019 8:52 am<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=103301> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Crazy story<https://journalstar.com/news/state-and-regional/govt-and-politics/fbi-questioned-nebraska-election-officials-party-leaders-following-visit-by/article_e09c1462-a2d9-5082-9742-4b6a1f116257.html> via Electionline:

FBI agents questioned state and county election officials and state political party leaders about two international election observers who toured Nebraska before November’s general election.

In at least two interviews, federal law enforcement agents asked if the veteran observers from the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe — one from Russia, the other from Switzerland — offered a pen as a gift.

According to multiple people who described the schematic shown to them by FBI agents, the pen may have doubled as a covert listening device, but those who spoke to law enforcement said they were not offered any object.


[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D103301&title=Did%20OSCE%20Election%20Observer%20Give%20Spy%20Pen%20as%20Gift%20to%20Nebraska%20Election%20Officials%3F>
Posted in Uncategorized<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>


Mulroy: Proportional Representation Through The Single Transferable Vote<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=103265>
Posted on January 24, 2019 7:00 am<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=103265> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

The following is the third of three guest posts<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=103261> by University of Memphis law professor Steve Mulroy<https://www.memphis.edu/law/faculty-staff/steve-mulroy.php>, sounding some themes from his fascinating new book, Rethinking US Election Law: Unskewing the System<https://www.amazon.com/Rethinking-Us-Election-Law-Unskewing/dp/1788117506>:

This is the 3rd of a series of blog posts discussing key arguments from my new book, Rethinking US Election Law: Unskewing The System<https://www.elgaronline.com/view/9781788117500/9781788117500.xml>.  This post advocates proportional representation.

In our winner-take-all election system, 51% of the vote controls 100% of the power.  A consistent, repeated, politically cohesive minority of 40% gets 0% of the power. Over time, they tend to realize the futility of engagement, and drop out, alienated.

Far more intuitive is a system in which 40% of the vote controlled 40% of the power, and 60% of the vote controlled 60% of the power. Instead of winner-take-all, it’s “majority takes most, and minority takes its fair share.”  This is of course proportional representation (PR).

PR is by far more common globally than winner-take-all.  Outside North America, almost every industrialized democracy uses some form of PR at the national level<http://aceproject.org/ace-en/topics/es/default>.

Most PR systems have voters vote for parties rather than candidates, eschew primary elections, or foster the instability of parliamentary systems, making them unsuitable for America.   But there is a way to achieve PR without these problematic features: multimember districts using the Single Transferable Vote (STV).

STV allows voters to rank candidates in order of preference.  It fills seats with candidates meeting more than a quota, based on the number of seats to be filled.  For example, if 5 seats are to be filled in an election, any candidate with at least 1/5  1st-place votes gets seated.  Any “surplus” votes over that minimum quota are redistributed to remaining candidates based on voters’ 2nd-choice votes in  a subsequent round.  If no candidate meets the quota in a round, the candidate with the fewest votes is eliminated, and votes for that candidate are redistributed to remaining candidates based on their 2nd-choice votes.  Each time a candidate meets the quota, a slot is filled.  The rounds of redistribution of “surplus” votes and votes from eliminated candidates continues until all seats are filled<http://aceproject.org/main/english/es/esf04.htm>.

STV has been used for over 70 years in Australia to elect the national Senate. It’s used in the U.S. at the local level in Cambridge, Mass., and Minneapolis, Minn. Wherever it is used, it leads to proportional results.

STV could easily be used at the state and local level, where it is not uncommon to see at-large elections or multimember districts.  States and localities could also convert single-member district systems to at-large or multimember systems for this purpose. This would eliminate, or at least minimize, gerrymandering by eliminating (or minimizing) districting.  It would also eliminate or minimize redistricting, preventing the current cycles of blood sport politics and litigation which begin every 10 years.

How could we adopt STV for Congress? One pending bill, the Fair Representation Act (FRA),<http://aceproject.org/ace-en/topics/es/default>illustrates.  Under FRA, states could choose to adopt STV for House elections.  States with 5 or fewer House members, the state would hold statewide at-large STV elections.  Other states could choose to carve the state up into multimember districts 3-5 seats in size, drawn by nonpartisan redistricting commissions.  The FRA is just one example of a variety of STV approaches.

As an example of Ranked Choice Voting, STV brings all sorts of advantages, including making elections more competitive, giving third parties a realistic chance to influence elections and policy, and discouraging negative campaigning.  As an example of PR, it brings the potential to make elections more truly reflect popular will, ease gridlock, and decrease polarization.  It is the most undervalued of all current proposals for election reform.
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D103265&title=Mulroy%3A%20%20Proportional%20Representation%20Through%20The%20Single%20Transferable%20Vote>
Posted in alternative voting systems<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=63>


“Federal court picks redrawn Va. House map that boosts Democrats’ chances of taking control”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=103299>
Posted on January 23, 2019 8:16 pm<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=103299> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Richmond Times-Dispatch<https://www.richmond.com/news/virginia/government-politics/federal-court-picks-redrawn-va-house-map-that-boosts-democrats/article_6b727239-4d46-592d-99c7-f2b544c5e045.html?utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter&utm_campaign=user-share>:

A federal court redrawing portions of Virginia’s House of Delegates map in a long-running racial gerrymandering case has picked a new configuration that could help Democrats retake control of the chamber this year and imperil the re-election campaigns of two top Republicans.
Judges in the Richmond-based U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia revealed their decision Tuesday night, ordering University of California-Irvine political science professor Bernard Grofman to finalize the district lines the court preferred.
Republicans currently have 51 seats and Democrats have 48 pending the outcome of a Feb. 19 special election. All 100 House seats are up for election in November. If the map survives Republican legal appeals and takes effect, it could tilt five to six GOP-held districts toward Democrats.
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D103299&title=%E2%80%9CFederal%20court%20picks%20redrawn%20Va.%20House%20map%20that%20boosts%20Democrats%E2%80%99%20chances%20of%20taking%20control%E2%80%9D>
Posted in redistricting<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=6>


--
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
rhasen at law.uci.edu<mailto:rhasen at law.uci.edu>
http://www.law.uci.edu/faculty/full-time/hasen/
http://electionlawblog.org<http://electionlawblog.org/>
[signature_1366581150]
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20190125/b5d0b3bc/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.png
Type: image/png
Size: 2021 bytes
Desc: image001.png
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20190125/b5d0b3bc/attachment.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image002.png
Type: image/png
Size: 25207 bytes
Desc: image002.png
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20190125/b5d0b3bc/attachment-0001.png>