[EL] ELB News and Commentary 7/20/20

[Rick Hasen]

President Trump, in Fox News Interview, Suggests without Evidence that Mail-In Balloting with “Rig” the Election, Refuses to Say He Would Accept the Results of the 2020 Election<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=113268>
Posted on July 19, 2020 8:53 pm<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=113268> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Transcript<https://www.foxnews.com/politics/transcript-fox-news-sunday-interview-with-president-trump> of interview with Chris Wallace:

WALLACE: Two–

TRUMP: That’s going to happen here–

WALLACE: Two final questions—

TRUMP: If he wins–

WALLACE: In general, not talking about November, are you a good loser?

TRUMP: I’m not a good loser. I don’t like to lose. I don’t lose too often. I don’t like to lose.

WALLACE: But are you gracious?

TRUMP: You don’t know until you see. It depends. I think mail-in voting is going to rig the election. I really do.

WALLACE: Are you suggesting that you might not accept the results of the election?

TRUMP: No. I have to see. Look, Hillary Clinton asked me the same thing.

WALLACE: No, I asked you the same thing at the debate.

TAPE: Presidential Debate, October 19, 2016

WALLACE: There is a tradition in this country — in fact, one of the prides of this country — is the peaceful transition of power and that no matter how hard-fought a campaign is, that at the end of the campaign that the loser concedes to the winner. Not saying that you’re necessarily going to be the loser or the winner, but that the loser concedes to the winner and that the country comes together in part for the good of the country. Are you saying you’re not prepared now to commit to that principle?

TRUMP: What I’m saying is that I will tell you at the time. I’ll keep you in suspense. OK?

TRUMP: And you know what? She’s the one that never accepted it.

WALLACE: I agree.

TRUMP: She never accepted her loss and she looks like a fool.

WALLACE: But can you give a, can you give a direct answer you will accept the election?

TRUMP: I have to see. Look, you – I have to see. No, I’m not going to just say yes. I’m not going to say no, and I didn’t last time either.

WaPo<https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trump-declines-to-say-whether-he-will-accept-november-election-results/2020/07/19/40009804-c9c7-11ea-91f1-28aca4d833a0_story.html>:

Biden’s campaign responded to Trump’s remarks in a statement Sunday morning.

“The American people will decide this election,” Biden spokesman Andrew Bates said. “And the United States government is perfectly capable of escorting trespassers out of the White House.”
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D113268&title=President%20Trump%2C%20in%20Fox%20News%20Interview%2C%20Suggests%20without%20Evidence%20that%20Mail-In%20Balloting%20with%20%E2%80%9CRig%E2%80%9D%20the%20Election%2C%20Refuses%20to%20Say%20He%20Would%20Accept%20the%20Results%20of%20the%202020%20Election>
Posted in campaigns<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59>, chicanery<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=12>, fraudulent fraud squad<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=8>


“How Congress can stop gerrymandering: Deny seats to states that do it.”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=113266>
Posted on July 19, 2020 8:21 pm<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=113266> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Lee Hamilton, William Cohen and Alton Frye WaPo oped.<https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/gerrymandering-redistricting-census-congress/2020/07/17/d1002146-c6f5-11ea-8ffe-372be8d82298_story.html?wpmk=MK0000200>
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D113266&title=%E2%80%9CHow%20Congress%20can%20stop%20gerrymandering%3A%20Deny%20seats%20to%20states%20that%20do%20it.%E2%80%9D>
Posted in redistricting<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=6>


“Settlement reached in Florida vote-by-mail battle”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=113264>
Posted on July 19, 2020 8:11 pm<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=113264> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

News Service<https://www.news-journalonline.com/news/20200719/settlement-reached-in-florida-vote-by-mail-battle> of Florida:

On the eve of a trial slated to begin Monday, lawyers representing the state and plaintiffs in a legal battle over Florida’s vote-by-mail procedures have reached a settlement.

Priorities USA, Dream Defenders and other plaintiffs have been seeking to expand the state’s vote-by-mail process, arguing that the COVID-19 pandemic will result in a record number of Floridians casting ballots from home to reduce chances of being infected with the highly contagious coronavirus.

Among other things, the plaintiffs asked to extend a deadline for mail-in ballots to be returned. They also wanted free postage for the ballots and challenged a provision in Florida law restricting paid workers from collecting mail-in ballots.

U.S. District Judge Robert Hinkle had set aside two weeks for a trial scheduled to start Monday.

But on Sunday, plaintiffs and Gov. Ron DeSantis’ administration notified the court that they had reached a settlement.

The agreement would require Secretary of State Laurel Lee to “educate” and “encourage” county supervisors of elections about a variety of vote-by-mail procedures that were at the heart of the lawsuit.
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D113264&title=%E2%80%9CSettlement%20reached%20in%20Florida%20vote-by-mail%20battle%E2%80%9D>
Posted in absentee ballots<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=53>


“Kobach downplays charges against Watkins despite similarity to voter cases he pursued”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=113262>
Posted on July 19, 2020 8:05 pm<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=113262> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

KC Star<https://www.kansascity.com/news/politics-government/article244307297.html>:

Kris Kobach charged 15 people with election crimes during his tenure as Kansas’ top election official. Many of the cases involved allegations similar to those now facing Kansas Republican Rep. Steve Watkins, who Kobach campaigned with 2018.

But Kobach, now a Republican candidate for U.S. Senate, questioned Friday the decision to prosecute Watkins.

The former Kansas secretary of state, who has repeatedly warned about voter fraud through his political career, suggested that the matter should have been handled instead by the State Objections Board, a panel that includes the secretary of state, attorney general and lieutenant governor.

“It’s a little bit surprising that the objections process wasn’t used and instead the prosecution process was used,” Kobach told the Kansas City Star and Wichita Eagle after a campaign event in Junction City. It was his first comment on the Watkins case.

“Normally, we would handle this through the objections process. That’s not saying that the charges are false. I’m not saying anything about the merits,” Kobach said.

But the Objections Board has little to do with Watkins’ case. It settles disputes, for example, over whether candidates qualify for the ballot by meeting residency requirements.<https://www.kansas.com/news/politics-government/article1145308.html>It does not have jurisdiction in cases of alleged voter fraud, nor does it level penalties or sanctions.
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D113262&title=%E2%80%9CKobach%20downplays%20charges%20against%20Watkins%20despite%20similarity%20to%20voter%20cases%20he%20pursued%E2%80%9D>
Posted in fraudulent fraud squad<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=8>


“Do Not Call John Lewis a ‘Hero’ if You Stood in His Way Republicans like Mitch McConnell and Brian Kemp are the reason the civil rights icon had to keep fighting until his dying breath.”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=113260>
Posted on July 19, 2020 8:00 pm<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=113260> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Joel Anderson for Slate.<https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2020/07/john-lewis-mitch-mcconnell-brian-kemp-gop-voting-rights.html>
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D113260&title=%E2%80%9CDo%20Not%20Call%20John%20Lewis%20a%20%E2%80%98Hero%E2%80%99%20if%20You%20Stood%20in%20His%20Way%20Republicans%20like%20Mitch%20McConnell%20and%20Brian%20Kemp%20are%20the%20reason%20the%20civil%20rights%20icon%20had%20to%20keep%20fighting%20until%20his%20dying%20breath.%E2%80%9D>
Posted in Voting Rights Act<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=15>


The Rise of Outside Money and Congressional Dysfunction<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=113242>
Posted on July 19, 2020 10:06 am<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=113242> by Richard Pildes<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=7>

As Rick Hasen noted<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=113229>, I have a forthcoming article<https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3655691> in The Election Law Journal, with Mike Norton, which empirically shows that the rise of outside money in elections has made governing more difficult.  When outside groups become bigger players, relative to the political parties and candidates, this foments greater tensions and conflicts within the legislative caucuses of both parties.  I wanted to say a bit more about that article, to make its technical findings more broadly accessible and to put them in context.

For several years now, I have been arguing<https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2546042> that political fragmentation within both parties is a major element in why governance in America has become more difficult.  By fragmentation, I mean both that power has flowed away from the political parties to other groups, and also that political leaders have less ability to bring their members along to make difficult deals.  While the overwhelming focus of commentary has been political polarization, this fragmentation – on top of polarization – is an underappreciated but highly significant aspect of why Congress has become so dysfunctional.

I have also suggested, along with others, that the rise of outside money – starting with the McCain-Feingold law, followed by Citizens United – is one of the forces driving this fragmentation within the parties.  But our article is the first, as far as I know, to document this fact empirically.

We also interviewed a number of former high-ranking Democrats and Republicans to get their perspective on this issue.  I wanted to share here some of what they said —

Former NRCC chair Tom Reynolds (2016):

“Citizens United and other changes—McCain-Feingold—those  guys  that  campaigned  and wanted very badly to create McCain-Feingold have actually created a party that has less money, less resources, and have enabled outside groups to have enormous presence in campaigns.”

Former Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC) Chair Martin Frost (2016):

“McCain-Feingold’s worthless. Took money away from political parties and forced it to the fringes. I talked to campaign finance advocates at the time. I said, ‘Don’t you understand you’re going to be harming political parties.’ And some of them said, ‘Well, we don’t like political parties anyways.’ And then I said, ‘Well, don’t you understand if you take the soft money away from political parties, where it has to be disclosed’—we had to disclose every single dollar that I raised to the DCCC from corporations and unions and large contributors— ‘’you’re going to force it out to the wings, out to the extremes, some of whom don’t have to report.’”

Former DCCC and Democratic House Caucus Chair Vic Fazio (2016):

‘‘[Then president of the Heritage Foundation] Jim DeMint has got more power at Heritage Action [their PAC affiliate] than he did as a second-line Senator from South Carolina. Members run in fear of not having any ability to control the environment in which they are running.’’

Former DCCC Chair Martin Frost (2016):

‘‘Members live in fear of a well-financed, well-organized minority in their own party taking them out. The way you avoid that is not to work with the other side.’

Republican Rep. Lynn Westmoreland (R-GA-03) (2016)

“If you’re a candidate and you have a group that is supporting your candidacy, whether they’re supporting you or opposing your opponent, they can come out with any message they want to and you don’t have anything to say about it. You can deny. You can say you don’t agree with it, but after seeing it on TV for seven weeks—typically people don’t listen to a policy and so it makes it extremely hard.”

Rep. Tom Coleman (R-MO-06) (2016):

Coleman characterized the interest groups as too shortsighted and focused on votes that were irrelevant because a majority had already been reached. ‘‘Then you have to go out and defend that vote because of how it’s been characterized. A lot of them are one-issue people, which you can’t please all the people all the time. You can’t please your best friend or your spouse with your votes. It’s impossible.’’

Former NRCC and House Oversight chair Tom Davis (2016):

Current or former moderate Republican members noted it has become harder to govern when the more ideological members in the party refuse to cooperate with leadership because they are bolstered by outside influences. Tom Davis saw it as an expectations problem. ‘‘When you get one-party government, there’s always that tendency to go overboard. When you don’t, you see what happens. Republicans control the Congress. They don’t control the president, and their base is so upset they turn to Trump, because these guys are doing nothing. You produce Ted Cruz and the Tea Party.  All of a sudden, you cannot fit the rising expectations.”

Former NRCC staffer Bob Holste (2016):

‘‘If you’re a pissed off whatever—you know, a hedge fund guy and a member of Congress pisses you off, you can now shove a million dollars up their ass and never have it show up in a report anywhere, but people know exactly who pissed you off.’’
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D113242&title=The%20Rise%20of%20Outside%20Money%20and%20Congressional%20Dysfunction>
Posted in Uncategorized<https://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
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/>


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20200720/dd6271a1/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/20200720/dd6271a1/attachment.png>