[EL] Stacey Abrams fact check

Wed Oct 30 12:28:11 PDT 2019

That’s exactly what I’m looking for.  Thanks! -cs

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Charles Stewart III
Kenan Sahin Distinguished Professor of Political Science
The Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Cambridge, Massachusetts   02139
617-253-3127
cstewart at mit.edu

From: Tierney Sneed [mailto:tmsneed27 at gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, October 30, 2019 3:18 PM
To: Charles H Stewart <cstewart at mit.edu>
Cc: Margaret Groarke <margaret.groarke at manhattan.edu>; Election Law Listserv <law-election at uci.edu>
Subject: Re: [EL] Stacey Abrams fact check

This may not directly answer your question, but I know in Ohio — which does not have AVR but does have a non-contact trigger — LaRose implemented a policy in the latest purge to treat address changes/confirmations at the DMV (known as the BMV there) as a form of contact that got voters off the purge list.  Activists were pushing for LaRose to consult the records of other state agencies to trim the purge list as well, but his office told me that wasn't possible.

On Wed, Oct 30, 2019 at 2:53 PM Charles H Stewart <cstewart at mit.edu<mailto:cstewart at mit.edu>> wrote:
Margaret’s post brought to mind a question I’ve had, related to AVR and the NVRA trigger of non-contact (not really not voting) across two federal elections.

In Georgia, or other states with AVR, if you change your address through your interaction with the DMV, and that address change follows through to the voter rolls, does this count as contact/interaction with the election jurisdiction?

I’ve love to hear from anyone who knows the answer to this question, either in Georgia or other AVR states.

Thanks,

Charles

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Charles Stewart III
Kenan Sahin Distinguished Professor of Political Science
The Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Cambridge, Massachusetts   02139
617-253-3127
cstewart at mit.edu<mailto:cstewart at mit.edu>

From: Law-election [mailto:law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu<mailto:law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu>] On Behalf Of Margaret Groarke
Sent: Wednesday, October 30, 2019 1:34 PM
Cc: Election Law Listserv <law-election at uci.edu<mailto:law-election at uci.edu>>
Subject: Re: [EL] Stacey Abrams fact check

Bullock says, " Georgia purges lots of voters because of death, moving or not voting in recent elections, but it also makes it very easy to register because of automatic voter registration (AVR) when people obtain driver’s licenses" but it is not legal, under the NVRA, to remove people for not voting in recent elections. Georgia does mail people with whom it has not had contact in 3 years, and puts nonresponders on an inactive list, preparatory to removing them if they don't vote in the next two federal elections. While the aspiration is that this is a proxy for identifying people who have moved or died, it has all too frequently led to the removal of people who are in fact breathing, and in many cases, voting.

On Wed, Oct 30, 2019 at 12:00 PM John Tanner <john.k.tanner at gmail.com<mailto:john.k.tanner at gmail.com>> wrote:
One inference would be that the Democratic nominee for lt governor had alienated some minority voters, perhaps in the course of defeating her black primary opponent.   It happens. Someone from Georgia may have some insight.
Kessler often overlooks alternative explanations.

Sent from my iPhone

On Oct 30, 2019, at 11:43 AM, Pildes, Rick <rick.pildes at nyu.edu<mailto:rick.pildes at nyu.edu>> wrote:
Can someone explain the last point noted in Kessler’s story, which I don’t understand.  The point is that there was a 4.2% undervote in the lieutenant governor’s race, compared (I assume) to the vote in the Governor’s race.  And that this undervote was more prevalent in minority precincts.

But what is that supposed to tell us about potential issues concerning the Governor’s race?  I don’t see it having any bearing on that race.

The odd fact here is that the undervote was much larger for the Lt. Gov’s race (4.2%) compared to less significant races, such as Secretary of State (1.4%) or School Superintendent (1.9%).  So that does raise questions about what happened re voting in the Lt. Gov’s race.

But again, what inference about the vote numbers in the Governor’s race is even being suggested by this point?

Best,
Rick

Richard H. Pildes
Sudler Family Professor of Constitutional Law
NYU School of Law
40 Washington Sq. So.
NYC, NY 10012
212 998-6377

From: Law-election [mailto:law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu] On Behalf Of Smith, Brad
Sent: Wednesday, October 30, 2019 11:20 AM
To: 'Rick Hasen' <rhasen at law.uci.edu<mailto:rhasen at law.uci.edu>>; Election Law Listserv <law-election at uci.edu<mailto:law-election at uci.edu>>
Subject: [EL] Stacey Abrams fact check

But it turns out this is a difficult situation to fact-check

Also from the full “fact check:”
Even if every provisional ballot not counted and every rejected absentee ballot had been awarded to Abrams, it would not have necessitated a runoff, much less overcome Abrams’s vote deficit.
The 2018 turnout was far greater than any previous midterm, according to FiveThirtyEight, and more African Americans voted in 2018 than in 2016.
Georgia purges lots of voters because of death, moving or not voting in recent elections, but it also makes it very easy to register because of automatic voter registration (AVR) when people obtain driver’s licenses. Registration has grown 94 percent in Georgia because of automatic voter registration, according to the Brennan Center.
“Abrams was very effective in mobilizing her supporters, but in the end — perhaps due to a narrowing of the enthusiasm gap following the [Brett] Kavanaugh hearings — lots of Republicans also turned out,” said Charles S. Bullock III, political science professor at the University of Georgia. “The claim is not based on fact but will continue to be articulated by Abrams since it helps mobilize her supporters.” …

Hasen said. “I have seen no good social science evidence that efforts to make it harder to register and vote were responsible for Kemp’s victory over Abrams in the Georgia gubernatorial race. …

Buttigieg suggested his statement was a factual claim, not in dispute, though it’s really more of an opinion.

Glenn Kessler is probably the best of the “fact checkers” out there, but is this “fact check” really that hard? Perhaps it depends—is Buttigieg making a statement of fact, a statement of opinion, or an supported interpretation of facts?

This illustrates nicely the problems with recent demands that the government, or perhaps Facebook, police ads for accuracy. I think Rick is exactly right—there’s really no good evidence for the Abrams/Buttigieg claim. Thus, most people would conclude that it is false. (I also agree with Rick when he adds, “That seems to me to be beside the point: The question is whether Georgia had a good reason to put these …  measures in place,…” at least if we’re discussing whether such laws are good or bad, as opposed to discussing whether Ms. Abrams was cheated out of the governorship). But can we really insist that Buttigieg’s statement is false? I would normally respond to good ole’ Mayor Pete by saying or his statement “that’s not true,” but I’m sure he would insist that it is. And listeners would have to decide.

Which leads us to ask: would Buttigieg have FB refuse an ad in a future race involving Abrams that criticizes her by saying, “Stacey Abrams continues to insist that she lost because of vote suppression-a delusional claim not supported by good social science evidence.” Conversely, what would Buttigieg, or those on the left fighting off feinting fits because Facebook isn’t fighting false advertising, think if Facebook refused to accept a Buttigieg ad saying, “Racially motivated patterns of voter suppression are responsible for Stacey Abrams not being governor of Georgia right now,” citing a lack of evidence for the claim?

Bradley A. Smith
Josiah H. Blackmore II/Shirley M. Nault
  Professor of Law
Capital University Law School
303 E. Broad Street
Columbus, OH 43214
(617) 236-6317

From: Law-election <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 30, 2019 10:55 AM
To: Election Law Listserv <law-election at uci.edu<mailto:law-election at uci.edu>>
Subject: [EL] ELB News and Commentary 10/30/19
<image001.png><https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.addtoany.com_share-23url-3Dhttps-253A-252F-252Felectionlawblog.org-252F-253Fp-253D107842-26title-3D-25E2-2580-259CFBI-2520Documents-253A-2520Kobach-2520Hired-2520A-2520Criminal-2520Investigator-2520With-2520No-2520Law-2520Enforcement-2520Experience-25E2-2580-259D&d=DwMFAg&c=slrrB7dE8n7gBJbeO0g-IQ&r=v3oz9bpMizgP1T8KwLv3YT-_iypxaOkdtbkRAclgHRk&m=XSgtawx7EN0-PpbpY-_ujDdn40Al7ekifLrx25xIF0o&s=lqarix9xMUB9lObH52ezD7aS5MZXIOmMRDlk4ZKd2oI&e=>
Posted in fraudulent fraud squad<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__linkprotect.cudasvc.com_url-3Fa-3Dhttps-253a-252f-252felectionlawblog.org-252f-253fcat-253d8-26c-3DE-2C1-2CitzVrzvaItok9nfyTb-5F0Xli3bVqZ-2DEwkFFcLxyzwkTzUwTQ-5FmLSGpNEoep9UUXqkuyJIcgs-2DSqsJv9a48Mhl3E6IKddDaCG226B8y0P9E-5FfL-26typo-3D1&d=DwMFAg&c=slrrB7dE8n7gBJbeO0g-IQ&r=v3oz9bpMizgP1T8KwLv3YT-_iypxaOkdtbkRAclgHRk&m=XSgtawx7EN0-PpbpY-_ujDdn40Al7ekifLrx25xIF0o&s=zJB7bojCxljGj_Ic17M9g5u3MioVKQRiapthjrc4URI&e=>

“Did racially motivated voter suppression thwart Stacey Abrams?”<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__linkprotect.cudasvc.com_url-3Fa-3Dhttps-253a-252f-252felectionlawblog.org-252f-253fp-253d107840-26c-3DE-2C1-2CI3-2Dx03EWmZIN1nVvPRZshEXFSFyDbreUL3Keu-5FHcjf-2D4V4pEQqAsf7fUwtpPXqY9PyqOoYDmoprs85OoO98uMI6aC8yXAXG9jpv1VqgWtv3Pgk4b-26typo-3D1&d=DwMFAg&c=slrrB7dE8n7gBJbeO0g-IQ&r=v3oz9bpMizgP1T8KwLv3YT-_iypxaOkdtbkRAclgHRk&m=XSgtawx7EN0-PpbpY-_ujDdn40Al7ekifLrx25xIF0o&s=oRm58x7-qE82g1wStHTSR84Nw_4k9U2khQq6MS3rjRo&e=>
Posted on October 30, 2019 7:45 am<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__linkprotect.cudasvc.com_url-3Fa-3Dhttps-253a-252f-252felectionlawblog.org-252f-253fp-253d107840-26c-3DE-2C1-2CJKAaH4oTrc37pJTZXn77kF-5Fox4L3i7wZVpAgEYziS7rt-5FTM7equn24p-2D3sZdciLqQU6gP0He6Bb353y3koMT-2DjEK6NVUvrC9qhSCXtCIsNlWUlzFVkGltWrc-26typo-3D1&d=DwMFAg&c=slrrB7dE8n7gBJbeO0g-IQ&r=v3oz9bpMizgP1T8KwLv3YT-_iypxaOkdtbkRAclgHRk&m=XSgtawx7EN0-PpbpY-_ujDdn40Al7ekifLrx25xIF0o&s=xL3cVlWXIyQH28-K5s3eqb31g2iuwWzVYaUzhL2RjfU&e=> by Rick Hasen<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__linkprotect.cudasvc.com_url-3Fa-3Dhttps-253a-252f-252felectionlawblog.org-252f-253fauthor-253d3-26c-3DE-2C1-2CFAaKWkznEOXh-5FRaNAlBWY-2DzxyNDl6-5F4s4TsgMGM5M72f-5FRGOtr75BhmiIQTuTkzSjx0aTNpiJ3ZUx6tVjTbpFOiYslmn-5FmcxI486ckL3M2I-2C-26typo-3D1&d=DwMFAg&c=slrrB7dE8n7gBJbeO0g-IQ&r=v3oz9bpMizgP1T8KwLv3YT-_iypxaOkdtbkRAclgHRk&m=XSgtawx7EN0-PpbpY-_ujDdn40Al7ekifLrx25xIF0o&s=BGBHNGNOouAJd-swXDCrM2Rbpj2kLlzZibg1MJG4fwg&e=>

WaPo Fact Checker:<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.washingtonpost.com_politics_2019_10_30_did-2Dracially-2Dmotivated-2Dvoter-2Dsuppression-2Dthwart-2Dstacey-2Dabrams_&d=DwMFAg&c=slrrB7dE8n7gBJbeO0g-IQ&r=v3oz9bpMizgP1T8KwLv3YT-_iypxaOkdtbkRAclgHRk&m=XSgtawx7EN0-PpbpY-_ujDdn40Al7ekifLrx25xIF0o&s=ekA3T-muRM0phYSN5D5t9LOrv7UjGY_tVx86ErMVWAU&e=>

“Racially motivated patterns of voter suppression are responsible for Stacey Abrams not being governor of Georgia right now.”
— South Bend, Ind., Mayor Pete Buttigieg (D), in remarks in Bow, N.H., Oct. 25, 2019

It has become an article of faith among Democrats, especially those running for president, that Stacey Abrams was narrowly denied the governorship of Georgia because of voter suppression. It is equally an article of faith by Republicans that this is a false claim based on no evidence.

Buttigieg’s remark caught our attention because he specifically said that the voter suppression was racially motivated and that it tipped the balance toward Republican Brian Kemp — who was directly responsible for overseeing the voting because he retained his post of secretary of state while he sought the governorship.

But it turns out this is a difficult situation to fact-check, and not quite as easy as the case when we gave Four Pinocchios<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.washingtonpost.com_politics_2019_03_06_hillary-2Dclintons-2Dclaims-2Dabout-2Dvoter-2Dsuppression-2Dgeorgia-2Dwisconsin_-3Ftid-3Dlk-5Finline-5Fmanual-5F8&d=DwMFAg&c=slrrB7dE8n7gBJbeO0g-IQ&r=v3oz9bpMizgP1T8KwLv3YT-_iypxaOkdtbkRAclgHRk&m=XSgtawx7EN0-PpbpY-_ujDdn40Al7ekifLrx25xIF0o&s=9yLUCFIzsMOKoLu0TBlFv7ZMg-3bdyZT9TbNHxqJb1I&e=> to Hillary Clinton for claiming she lost Wisconsin in 2016 because of voter suppression or Four Pinocchios to Sen. Cory Booker<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.washingtonpost.com_politics_2019_08_02_bookers-2Dclaim-2Dthat-2Ddemocrats-2Dlost-2Dmichigan-2Dbecause-2Drussian-2Dgop-2Dsuppression_-3Ftid-3Dlk-5Finline-5Fmanual-5F8&d=DwMFAg&c=slrrB7dE8n7gBJbeO0g-IQ&r=v3oz9bpMizgP1T8KwLv3YT-_iypxaOkdtbkRAclgHRk&m=XSgtawx7EN0-PpbpY-_ujDdn40Al7ekifLrx25xIF0o&s=fGwrZxT8QaIvc8jG4l3BYmNAVkg54JGvuikA9rBn_80&e=> (D-N.J.) for claiming Russian efforts to suppress African American votes led to Clinton’s loss of Michigan. …

Hasen, the UC Irvine expert, said the practices used under Kemp raise serious questions even if one cannot prove they affected the election outcome.

“There is no question that Georgia in general and Brian Kemp in particular took steps to make it harder for people to register and vote, and that those people tended to skew Democratic,” Hasen said. “I have seen no good social science evidence that efforts to make it harder to register and vote were responsible for Kemp’s victory over Abrams in the Georgia gubernatorial race. That seems to me to be beside the point: The question is whether Georgia had a good reason to put these suppressive measures in place, and for the most part, the state did not have good reasons.”
<image001.png><https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.addtoany.com_share-23url-3Dhttps-253A-252F-252Felectionlawblog.org-252F-253Fp-253D107840-26title-3D-25E2-2580-259CDid-2520racially-2520motivated-2520voter-2520suppression-2520thwart-2520Stacey-2520Abrams-253F-25E2-2580-259D&d=DwMFAg&c=slrrB7dE8n7gBJbeO0g-IQ&r=v3oz9bpMizgP1T8KwLv3YT-_iypxaOkdtbkRAclgHRk&m=XSgtawx7EN0-PpbpY-_ujDdn40Al7ekifLrx25xIF0o&s=W30MNOtbO6RUl6yqcs0jXjj-OdbAe_P4kPkTnByDm-U&e=>
Posted in The Voting Wars<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__linkprotect.cudasvc.com_url-3Fa-3Dhttps-253a-252f-252felectionlawblog.org-252f-253fcat-253d60-26c-3DE-2C1-2CmWAGuelP-5FO-2Dh5uub-5FHkZn2JMJ78yzid83oZCLAWaLCLWh8p2ayGgfjJpqfY6jGsgvePE7njxIwv7Eaz6sW2ZMT3STPEHHojp6rWtyptpIQ-2C-2C-26typo-3D1&d=DwMFAg&c=slrrB7dE8n7gBJbeO0g-IQ&r=v3oz9bpMizgP1T8KwLv3YT-_iypxaOkdtbkRAclgHRk&m=XSgtawx7EN0-PpbpY-_ujDdn40Al7ekifLrx25xIF0o&s=LC_M6N2Wiomkj9dvdoIQtC4QECVJB4Pe1OlFBiUMGeY&e=>

_______________________________________________
Law-election mailing list
Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu<mailto:Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu>
https://department-lists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/law-election
_______________________________________________
Law-election mailing list
Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu<mailto:Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu>
https://department-lists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/law-election

--
Margaret Groarke
Professor, Political Science
Coordinator, Community Engaged Learning
https://jaspercommunityengagement.blogspot.com/
[http://home.manhattan.edu/collegerelations/email_logo.jpg]
Riverdale, NY 10471
Phone: 718-862-7943
Fax: 718-862-8044
margaret.groarke at manhattan.edu<mailto:name.name at manhattan.edu>
www.manhattan.edu<http://www.manhattan.edu/>

_______________________________________________
Law-election mailing list
Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu<mailto:Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu>
https://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/20191030/7d2806e5/attachment.html>