[EL] ELB News and Commentary 5/24/21

[Rick Hasen]

“Business leaders take their election law fights behind the scenes after attacks from Republicans”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=122280>
Posted on May 24, 2021 7:03 am<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=122280> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

CNBC<https://www.cnbc.com/2021/05/21/business-leaders-take-election-law-fight-behind-the-scenes-after-gop-attacks.html>:

Corporate leaders are now fighting behind the scenes against Republican-supported voting laws they consider too restrictive, following repeated attacks from GOP leaders and their well-funded allies.

Since the outcry earlier this year over the passage of Georgia’s new voting law, which critics say unfairly targets minorities, many executives and companies are now airing out their concerns in private, according to multiple people briefed on the matter. Some executives have said they are concerned that the laws could hurt their employees.
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D122280&title=%E2%80%9CBusiness%20leaders%20take%20their%20election%20law%20fights%20behind%20the%20scenes%20after%20attacks%20from%20Republicans%E2%80%9D>
Posted in The Voting Wars<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60>



Must-Read: “They tried to overturn the 2020 election. Now they want to run the next one.”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=122276>
Posted on May 24, 2021 6:57 am<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=122276> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Zach Montellaro<https://www.politico.com/news/2021/05/24/2020-election-republican-official-races-490458> for Politico:

Republicans who sought to undercut or overturn President Joe Biden’s election win are launching campaigns to become their states’ top election officials next year, alarming local officeholders and opponents who are warning about pro-Trump, “ends justify the means” candidates taking big roles in running the vote.

The candidates include Rep. Jody Hice of Georgia, a leader of the congressional Republicans who voted against certifying the 2020 Electoral College results; Arizona state Rep. Mark Finchem, one of the top proponents of the conspiracy-tinged vote audit in Arizona’s largest county; Nevada’s Jim Marchant, who sued to have his 5-point congressional loss last year overturned<https://thenevadaindependent.com/article/judge-rejects-marchant-request-for-new-election-in-congressional-race-over-voter-fraud-allegations>; and Michigan’s Kristina Karamo, who made dozens of appearances<https://www.mlive.com/public-interest/2021/05/republican-who-challenged-michigan-election-results-now-running-for-secretary-of-state.html> in conservative media to claim fraud in the election.

Now, they are running for secretary of state in key battlegrounds that could decide control of Congress in 2022 — and who wins the White House in 2024. Their candidacies come with former President Donald Trump still fixated on spreading falsehoods about the 2020 election, insisting he won and lying about widespread and systemic fraud. Each of their states has swung between the two parties over the last decade, though it is too early to tell how competitive their elections will be.

The campaigns set up the possibility that politicians who have taken steps to undermine faith in the American democratic system could soon be the ones running it.

As I wrote in my recent NY Times oped<https://www.nytimes.com/2021/04/23/opinion/republicans-voting-us-elections.html>: “If someone running for secretary of state endorses the false claim that the 2020 election was stolen, they should be uniformly condemned. Support should go to those who promote election integrity, regardless of party, and who put in place fair and transparent procedures. Ultimately, we need to move toward a more nonpartisan administration of elections and create incentives for loyalty to the integrity of the democratic process, not to a political party.”
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D122276&title=Must-Read%3A%20%E2%80%9CThey%20tried%20to%20overturn%20the%202020%20election.%20Now%20they%20want%20to%20run%20the%20next%20one.%E2%80%9D>
Posted in chicanery<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=12>, fraudulent fraud squad<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=8>


“Pro-Trump Conspiracy Theorists Are Taking Over State Republican Parties”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=122274>
Posted on May 24, 2021 6:55 am<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=122274> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Cameron Joseph reports for Vice News.<https://www.vice.com/en/article/v7ed9y/trump-election-conspiracy-theories-taking-over-republican-party?utm_source=Iterable&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=campaign_2375661>
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D122274&title=%E2%80%9CPro-Trump%20Conspiracy%20Theorists%20Are%20Taking%20Over%20State%20Republican%20Parties%E2%80%9D>
Posted in fraudulent fraud squad<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=8>


“Experts or ‘grifters’? Little-known firm runs Arizona audit”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=122272>
Posted on May 24, 2021 6:54 am<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=122272> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Nicholas Riccardi <https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory/experts-grifters-firm-runs-arizona-audit-77858708> for AP.
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D122272&title=%E2%80%9CExperts%20or%20%E2%80%98grifters%E2%80%99%3F%20Little-known%20firm%20runs%20Arizona%20audit%E2%80%9D>
Posted in fraudulent fraud squad<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=8>


Illinois’s Draft Plan<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=122269>
Posted on May 24, 2021 5:51 am<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=122269> by Nicholas Stephanopoulos<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=12>

Illinois released<https://www.chicagotribune.com/politics/ct-illinois-democrats-legislature-new-map-plan-20210522-tzmkjn34mvhobasb2vpffzlome-story.html> draft state legislative district plans on Friday evening. Here’s PlanScore’s analysis<https://planscore.org/plan.html?20210524T031102.511166780Z> of the state house map (hat tip to Brian Amos for converting<https://twitter.com/BrianAmos/status/1396633324785897472> the map into a usable digital format). It’s predicted to have a pro-Democratic efficiency gap of 2%. That’s somewhat more pro-Democratic than the existing<https://planscore.org/illinois/#!2018-plan-statehouse-eg> state house plan, which had an average efficiency gap of 3% in a Republican direction from 2012 to 2018. But it’s still a low figure not indicative of a significant bias in either party’s favor.

Notably, Illinois’s draft state house map pairs this small efficiency gap with numerous noncompact districts, especially in and around Chicago. It’s likely that if the map’s districts were less oddly shaped, the map would be considerably more tilted toward Republicans. The map thus squarely presents the vexing issue of redistricting baselines. Is partisan symmetry the right benchmark? In that case, the map is exemplary since it should accurately translate the partisan preferences of Illinois voters into legislative seats. Or is the baseline what a redistricting process would produce if it ignored election results and prioritized nonpartisan criteria like compactness and respect for political subdivisions? If so, the map is probably skewed substantially in a Democratic direction (though further analysis would be necessary to prove that point).
[cid:image002.png at 01D7506B.580E3D90]
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D122269&title=Illinois%E2%80%99s%20Draft%20Plan>
Posted in Uncategorized<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>


“‘Axios on HBO’: Liz Cheney won’t fight GOP push to restrict voting”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=122266>
Posted on May 23, 2021 5:03 pm<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=122266> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Axios:<https://www.axios.com/liz-cheney-trump-voting-laws-20cf8bea-ced3-4cf6-9f57-76e6309166bb.html>

Rep. Liz Cheney (R-Wyo.) told “Axios on HBO” that she won’t support Democrats in their fight against the GOP’s push for more restrictive voting laws — a sign that she’ll be no hero to the resistance.

Why it matters: Ten days after losing her House Republican post, Cheney is trying to put former President Trump’s Big Lie about the election in a silo. She doesn’t accept the larger context: Republicans spent years fertilizing the soil for voters to believe that voter fraud is rampant.

The Hill:<https://thehill.com/homenews/house/554999-cheney-dodges-on-link-between-trump-election-claims-and-gop-voting-laws>

Rep. Liz Cheney<https://thehill.com/people/elizabeth-liz-cheney> (R-Wyo.) dodged questions from Axios’s Jonathan Swan about the connection between former President Trump<https://thehill.com/people/donald-trump>‘s claims of voter fraud in the 2020 election and the widespread Republican state-level efforts to tighten voter requirements.

In an interview airing Sunday on “Axios on HBO,”<https://www.axios.com/liz-cheney-trump-voting-laws-20cf8bea-ced3-4cf6-9f57-76e6309166bb.html> the congresswoman who lost her position as GOP House conference chair over her continued insistence that Trump lost the election and bears responsibility for the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol responded to questions about the link between the former president’s words and her own party’s efforts to change state voting laws by pointing to individual bills.

Asked by Swan about what existing problems the legislation was meant to address if not the former president’s claims about voter fraud, Cheney demurred that each of the more than 300 bills<https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/state-voting-bills-tracker-2021> should be looked at separately.

“Well, I think you have to look at the specifics of each one of those efforts,” she said.

Swan countered that he doesn’t “think anyone doubts” that there is a link between Trump’s claims that the 2020 election was stolen and the new legislation, to which Cheney responded that “everybody” should want a voting system where fraud is prevented.
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D122266&title=%E2%80%9C%E2%80%98Axios%20on%20HBO%E2%80%99%3A%20Liz%20Cheney%20won%E2%80%99t%20fight%20GOP%20push%20to%20restrict%20voting%E2%80%9D>
Posted in Uncategorized<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>


“Many Americans don’t trust elections. What can be done?”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=122264>
Posted on May 23, 2021 4:56 pm<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=122264> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

CSM:<https://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Politics/2021/0521/Many-Americans-don-t-trust-elections.-What-can-be-done>

America’s democratic process has been severely tested in the aftermath of the 2020 presidential election. Former President Donald Trump’s personal push to overturn results in key states revealed vulnerabilities in the nation’s electoral system – including how many important aspects of voting are defended not by laws, but by norms of official behavior.

Nor has the testing ended, despite the Trump campaign’s dozens of losses in election-related lawsuits, the Jan. 6 insurrection at the U.S. Capitol, and Congress’ ultimate certification of President Joe Biden’s Electoral College win. Despite no evidence that Mr. Trump’s loss in Arizona was fraudulent, 16 Republicans in the state Senate voted to subpoena ballots from Maricopa County, for an examination that has been widely criticized as a partisan ploy.

Trump supporters are now seeking Arizona-style “audits” in Georgia and other swing states.

Leading up to the 2020 vote, Americans had mixed feelings about election integrity, with about 6 in 10 saying they did not trust the outcome to be fair. Rebuilding trust now looks like a high civic priority. Next in our series, “Democracy Under Strain<https://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Topics/Democracy-Under-Strain>.”

Can elections be armored against disgruntled efforts to subvert them? Perhaps more important, can changes to the electoral system regain trust that has been lost on both sides?

Complete trust in election outcomes is likely an impossible goal in today’s polarized political environment. But it is possible to have trustworthy elections, ones that impartial observers can agree are free and fair, experts say.

lection audits could be akin to financial audits – activities that occur regularly, follow established professional procedures, and are largely the same in all 50 states, says Charles Stewart III, a professor of political science at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

“If we weren’t in the middle of partisan wrangling over the whole 2020 election, with crazy things happening in Arizona, we could have a reasonable discussion about making things better,” Professor Stewart says.
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D122264&title=%E2%80%9CMany%20Americans%20don%E2%80%99t%20trust%20elections.%20What%20can%20be%20done%3F%E2%80%9D>
Posted in The Voting Wars<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60>


Pennsylvania: “Execution Of Search Warrant Requested On Fayette County Bureau Of Elections Over Ballot Issues”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=122262>
Posted on May 23, 2021 4:51 pm<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=122262> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Pittsburgh<https://pittsburgh.cbslocal.com/2021/05/20/search-warrant-fayette-county-bureau-of-elections-ballot-issues/>:

The Fayette County District Attorney’s office is requesting the execution of a search warrant on the county bureau of elections to investigate ballot issues during Tuesday’s primary.

There are multiple investigations underway after ballot issues in Fayette County. Commissioners said some ballots were being rejected at all 77 precincts in the county, which prompted them to launch an internal investigation.

Fayette County Commissioner Scott Dunn said Wednesday why ballots were rejected was still unclear, but what commissioners do know is that some ballots are missing barcodes. The ones that didn’t work had to be placed in an emergency slot. Most were hand-counted Tuesday night and again Wednesday after an emergency petition was filed in the courts.
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D122262&title=Pennsylvania%3A%20%E2%80%9CExecution%20Of%20Search%20Warrant%20Requested%20On%20Fayette%20County%20Bureau%20Of%20Elections%20Over%20Ballot%20Issues%E2%80%9D>
Posted in election administration<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>


Must-Read, Absolutely Bonkers Report from Jeremy Stahl of Slate on the Odd and Worrying Procedures Being Used in the Fake Arizona “Audit”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=122260>
Posted on May 23, 2021 4:40 pm<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=122260> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Read it and weep.<https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2021/05/arizona-audit-recount-claiming-trump-won.html>
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D122260&title=Must-Read%2C%20Absolutely%20Bonkers%20Report%20from%20Jeremy%20Stahl%20of%20Slate%20on%20the%20Odd%20and%20Worrying%20Procedures%20Being%20Used%20in%20the%20Fake%20Arizona%20%E2%80%9CAudit%E2%80%9D>
Posted in chicanery<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=12>, fraudulent fraud squad<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=8>


ACLU Challenges Florida Law Limiting Contributions to Ballot Petition Drives to $3,000 Per Person<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=122258>
Posted on May 23, 2021 4:32 pm<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=122258> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

The NY Times article<https://www.nytimes.com/2021/05/22/us/politics/republican-ballot-initiatives-democrats.html> in the post below this one on Republican measures to curtail direct democracy noted among other changes was a $3,000 individual limit on contributions to ballot petition drives in Florida. This seems clearly unconstitutional under existing Supreme Court precedent (Bellotti and CARC v. City of Berkeley).

So when I did a bit of searching I see via Ballotpedia that the ACLU already filed suit <https://news.ballotpedia.org/2021/05/11/florida-governor-signs-bill-limiting-contributions-to-ballot-initiative-petition-drive-campaigns-to-3000/> against this measure, citing those cases.
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D122258&title=ACLU%20Challenges%20Florida%20Law%20Limiting%20Contributions%20to%20Ballot%20Petition%20Drives%20to%20%243%2C000%20Per%20Person>
Posted in Uncategorized<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>


“Republicans Move to Limit a Grass-Roots Tradition of Direct Democracy”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=122256>
Posted on May 23, 2021 4:26 pm<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=122256> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

NYT:<https://www.nytimes.com/2021/05/22/us/politics/republican-ballot-initiatives-democrats.html>

n 2008, deep-blue California banned same-sex marriage. In 2018, steadfastly conservative Arkansas and Missouri increased their minimum wage. And last year, Republican-controlled Arizona and Montana legalized recreational marijuana.

These moves were all the product of ballot initiatives, a century-old fixture of American democracy that allows voters to bypass their legislatures to enact new laws, often with results that defy the desires of the state’s elected representatives. While they have been a tool of both parties in the past, Democrats have been particularly successful in recent years at using ballot initiatives to advance their agenda in conservative states where they have few other avenues.

But this year, Republican-led legislatures in Florida, Idaho, South Dakota and other states have passed laws limiting the use of the practice, one piece of a broader G.O.P. attempt to lock in political control for years to come, along with new laws to restrict voting access<https://www.nytimes.com/2021/05/06/us/politics/florida-texas-voting-rights-bills.html> and the partisan redrawing of congressional districts<https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/31/us/politics/gerrymander-census-democrats-republicans.html> that will take place in the coming months.

So far in 2021, Republicans have introduced 144 bills to restrict the ballot initiative processes in 32 states, according to the Ballot Initiative Strategy Center, a liberal group that tracks and assists citizen-driven referendums. Of those bills, 19 have been signed into law by nine Republican governors. In three states, Republican lawmakers have asked voters to approve ballot initiatives that in fact limit their own right to bring and pass future ballot initiatives.
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D122256&title=%E2%80%9CRepublicans%20Move%20to%20Limit%20a%20Grass-Roots%20Tradition%20of%20Direct%20Democracy%E2%80%9D>
Posted in direct democracy<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=62>


“In echo of Arizona, Georgia state judge orders Fulton County to allow local voters to inspect mailed ballots cast last fall”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=122254>
Posted on May 23, 2021 4:24 pm<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=122254> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

WaPo:<https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/georgia-ballot-inspection/2021/05/21/1e8ad1cc-ba61-11eb-a6b1-81296da0339b_story.html>

In Georgia, Superior Court Judge Brian Amero ruled on Friday that the nine plaintiffs and their experts could examine copies of the ballots but never touch the originals, which will remain in the possession of Fulton election officials. Further details of how the inspection will proceed are expected next week, said one of the plaintiffs, Garland Favorito.
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D122254&title=%E2%80%9CIn%20echo%20of%20Arizona%2C%20Georgia%20state%20judge%20orders%20Fulton%20County%20to%20allow%20local%20voters%20to%20inspect%20mailed%20ballots%20cast%20last%20fall%E2%80%9D>
Posted in chicanery<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=12>


“How The Republican Push To Restrict Voting Could Affect Our Elections”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=122251>
Posted on May 23, 2021 4:22 pm<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=122251> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

538:<https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/how-the-republican-push-to-restrict-voting-could-affect-our-elections/>

Understanding how new voting restrictions will influence our elections is difficult. Political science hasn’t found that these types of laws have that big of an effect<https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/what-we-know-about-voter-id-laws/>, at least as individual measures. But, while laws that make it more taxing to vote are not new, the current onslaught of voting restrictions and changes to how elections will be administered<https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/its-not-just-georgia-more-than-a-dozen-other-states-are-trying-to-take-power-away-from-local-election-officials/> is not something we’ve grappled with on this scale. Additionally, there is their nakedly partisan origins — nearly 90 percent of the voting laws proposed or enacted in 2021<https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/republicans-have-made-it-harder-to-vote-in-11-states-so-far/> were sponsored primarily or entirely by Republican legislators — and the fact that these laws are likely to have a greater impact<https://www.dropbox.com/s/gbw7ldftbqu2jvv/Voter%20ID.pdf?dl=0> on Black and brown voters<https://www.nytimes.com/2021/03/25/us/politics/georgia-black-voters.html>, who are less likely to vote Republican.

Republican efforts to pass new voter restrictions have been so aggressive and widespread<https://www.nytimes.com/2021/02/27/us/republican-voter-suppression.html> that their effects are hard to predict. Elections, moreover, don’t run themselves; they’re run by people. And these new laws point to an even more troubling problem that threatens to undermine our democracy: the GOP’s eroding commitment<https://www.pnas.org/content/117/37/22752> to democratic values<https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/forget-norms-our-democracy-depends-on-values/>, like free and fair elections. In many ways, the most concerning change our elections face may not be any one law, but rather the GOP’s increased willingness to take such anti-democratic actions.
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D122251&title=%E2%80%9CHow%20The%20Republican%20Push%20To%20Restrict%20Voting%20Could%20Affect%20Our%20Elections%E2%80%9D>
Posted in Uncategorized<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>


“Redistricting delays add to Democrats’ worries about keeping U.S. House”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=122249>
Posted on May 23, 2021 4:11 pm<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=122249> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Jim Oliphant column.<https://www.yahoo.com/news/redistricting-delays-add-democrats-worries-100338548.html>
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D122249&title=%E2%80%9CRedistricting%20delays%20add%20to%20Democrats%E2%80%99%20worries%20about%20keeping%20U.S.%20House%E2%80%9D>
Posted in redistricting<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=6>


“Polling places for urban voters of color would be cut under Texas Senate’s version of voting bill being negotiated with House”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=122247>
Posted on May 23, 2021 4:09 pm<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=122247> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

The Texas Tribune reports.<https://www.texastribune.org/2021/05/23/texas-voting-polling-restrictions/>
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D122247&title=%E2%80%9CPolling%20places%20for%20urban%20voters%20of%20color%20would%20be%20cut%20under%20Texas%20Senate%E2%80%99s%20version%20of%20voting%20bill%20being%20negotiated%20with%20House%E2%80%9D>
Posted in Uncategorized<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>


“How Matt Gaetz’s Legal Problems Could Lead to Campaign Finance Violations”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=122244>
Posted on May 21, 2021 4:30 pm<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=122244> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Ciara Torres-Spelliscy<https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/analysis-opinion/how-matt-gaetzs-legal-problems-could-lead-campaign-finance-violations> for the Brennan Center.
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D122244&title=%E2%80%9CHow%20Matt%20Gaetz%E2%80%99s%20Legal%20Problems%20Could%20Lead%20to%20Campaign%20Finance%20Violations%E2%80%9D>
Posted in Uncategorized<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>


“Four House Democrats urge party leaders to fight for an expansive voting rights bill.”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=122242>
Posted on May 21, 2021 4:24 pm<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=122242> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

NYT:<https://www.nytimes.com/2021/05/20/us/politics/democrats-voting-rights-bill.html>

In the latest example of divisions among congressional Democrats over voting rights, four House Democrats emailed the party caucus on Thursday pushing for their colleagues to muscle through two election bills now being considered on Capitol Hill, arguing that “democracy is on the line.”

The email, which was signed by Representatives Mondaire Jones of New York, Val Demings of Florida, Nikema Williams of Georgia and Colin Allred of Texas, represented not-so-subtle pushback to recent statements from influential Democrats like Senator Joe Manchin III of West Virginia and Representative James E. Clyburn of South Carolina, who have each expressed to the caucus a preference for a more narrow strategy.

The most ambitious legislation Democrats have put forward is the For the People Act, a sweeping bill to overhaul the nation’s elections system that would protect voting rights, reduce the role of money in politics, strengthen enforcement of existing election laws and limit gerrymandering. They have also introduced the narrower John Lewis Voting Rights Act, which would restore crucial parts of the 1965 Voting Rights Act that were struck down<https://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/26/us/supreme-court-ruling.html> by the Supreme Court in 2013, including the preclearance requirements under which some states mostly in the South had to receive federal approval before changing their election laws.

The email from the four representatives argues that passing only the John Lewis Act — which Democrats like Mr. Manchin and Mr. Clyburn have recently told other members they would prefer — would be an insufficient response to the spate of voting restrictions Republicans have enacted across the country since the 2020 presidential election. The email states that passing the narrower bill alone would leave too much up to the courts, do little about laws already enacted, do nothing to reduce partisan gerrymandering, and would still be no closer to Senate passage.
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D122242&title=%E2%80%9CFour%20House%20Democrats%20urge%20party%20leaders%20to%20fight%20for%20an%20expansive%20voting%20rights%20bill.%E2%80%9D>
Posted in Uncategorized<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>


“Weeks From Pivotal Primary, Still No Software to Count Ranked Choice Votes”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=122239>
Posted on May 21, 2021 8:58 am<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=122239> by Richard Pildes<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=7>

Apparently the state has to approve the software NYC wants to use. Let’s hope the various governmental actors do not screw this up. In four special elections for city council, the Board of Elections had to tally all the votes by hand, for lack of software available to do this. From The City<https://www.thecity.nyc/2021/5/12/22433507/ranked-choice-voting-software-new-york-city>:

For the four special elections for City Council held in February and March, the BOE tallied thousands of paper ballots manually because a software platform was not yet in place.

Staffers sifted through the ballots one by one, kept handwritten tallies of the votes cast and placed the ballots in plastic bins marked for each candidate.

Workers then took ballots in the box with the fewest cast and redistributed each to the box matching the next choice on the voters’ lists, repeating the process until two finalists remained and the one with the most votes won.
In the southeast Queens contest to replace former Council member and current Queens Borough President Donovan Richards, the first of nine rounds<https://www.thecity.nyc/2021/3/16/22335159/queens-ranked-choice-vote-count-slogs-special-election> of manual ranking took roughly seven hours. Selvena Brooks-Powers emerged as the winner after a three-day count of some 7,000 ballots.

State Board of Elections staff are still in the process of testing the software that the city board seeks to use to tabulate rankings and will make a recommendation on May 25, said John Conklin, a spokesperson for the state board.

The proposed software is based on the open-source RCV Universal Tabulator<https://www.rcvresources.org/rcv-universal-tabulator>, which has been usedin Utah and Michigan.
“The state board is working with its testing partners to examine the software and technical documentation submitted, and perform the necessary functional and security testing to ensure compliance with all relevant statutes and regulations,” Conklin said in a statement. “The certification process is on schedule.”
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D122239&title=%E2%80%9CWeeks%20From%20Pivotal%20Primary%2C%20Still%20No%20Software%20to%20Count%20Ranked%20Choice%20Votes%E2%80%9D>
Posted in Uncategorized<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>


“Voting Machines in Arizona Recount Should Be Replaced, Election Official Says”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=122237>
Posted on May 21, 2021 7:23 am<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=122237> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

NYT:<https://www.nytimes.com/2021/05/20/us/politics/arizona-recount-voting-machines.html?action=click&module=Top%20Stories&pgtype=Homepage>

Arizona’s top elections official on Thursday urged the state’s most populous county to replace hundreds of voting machines that have been examined as part of a Republican-backed review of the state’s November election.

The request added fuel to charges by impartial election observers and voting rights advocates that the review, ordered in December by the Republicans who control the State Senate, had become a political sham.

In a letter to officials of Maricopa County, which includes Phoenix, the elections official, Secretary of State Katie Hobbs, said it was unclear whether companies hired to conduct the review had sufficiently safeguarded the equipment from tampering during their review of votes.

Ms. Hobbs, a Democrat, recommended that the county replace its 385 voting machines and nine vote tabulators because “the lack of physical security and transparency means we cannot be certain who accessed the voting equipment and what might have been done to them.”

The advisory, in a letter to the county’s board of supervisors, did not contend that the machines had been breached. But Ms. Hobbs wrote that she had “grave concerns regarding the security and integrity of these machines, given that the chain of custody, a critical security tenet, has been compromised.”

She added that she had first consulted experts at the federal Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency, the national authority for election security issues.

A spokeswoman for the county elections department said county officials “will not use any of the returned tabulation equipment unless the county, state and vendor are confident that there is no malicious hardware or software installed on the devices.”
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D122237&title=%E2%80%9CVoting%20Machines%20in%20Arizona%20Recount%20Should%20Be%20Replaced%2C%20Election%20Official%20Says%E2%80%9D>
Posted in Uncategorized<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>


National Constitution Center “We the People” Podcast: Constitutional Issues in Voting Rights Today”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=122235>
Posted on May 21, 2021 6:59 am<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=122235> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

I participated in a great conversation with Derek Muller and host Jeffrey Rosen. Listen!<https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/constitutional-issues-in-voting-rights-today/id83213431?i=1000522586564>
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D122235&title=National%20Constitution%20Center%20%E2%80%9CWe%20the%20People%E2%80%9D%20Podcast%3A%20Constitutional%20Issues%20in%20Voting%20Rights%20Today%E2%80%9D>
Posted in Uncategorized<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>


June 4 Humphrey School Event: “The New Danger in Voting Legislation”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=122233>
Posted on May 21, 2021 6:56 am<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=122233> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Looking forward to participating in this virtual event<https://umn.zoom.us/webinar/register/WN_9mEQfVB3TiC5PmaooSiCmA> (registration required) at Minnesota’s Humphrey School’s Center for the Study of Politics and Government:

Topic: The New Danger in Voting LegislationDescriptionGeorgia, Texas and other states are pursuing legislation that will make it more difficult to vote, especially for voters of color. Less attention has been paid to a second threat: giving the legislature a greater hand in who counts votes and how they are counted. Will this reform improve or damage the integrity of elections and the confidence of voters in their results?

An impressive panel joins us:

Richard L. Hasen, Professor of law and political science, University of California, Irvine

Michael T. Morley, Professor of law, Florida State University

Tammy Patrick, Senior Advisor to the Elections Program at the Democracy Fund will moderate the conversation.Time

Jun 4, 2021 12:00 PM in Central Time (US and Canada)<javascript:;>
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D122233&title=June%204%20Humphrey%20School%20Event%3A%20%E2%80%9CThe%20New%20Danger%20in%20Voting%20Legislation%E2%80%9D>
Posted in Uncategorized<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>


“Stewards of Democracy: Pursuing diversity and representation among LEOs”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=122230>
Posted on May 20, 2021 10:49 am<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=122230> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Paul Gronke, Paul Manson, Jay Lee, and Heather Creek at Electionline<https://electionline.org/electionline-weekly/?utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=May%2020%202021&utm_content=May%2020%202021+CID_5d57cd1046ec2a1f386820f0eb648b80&utm_source=Campaign%20Monitor&utm_term=Read%20More#tab-1>:

Who are the professionals doing the day-to-day work of running American elections? As we touched on in a preceding post<https://democracyfund.org/idea/understanding-the-career-journeys-of-todays-local-election-officials-and-anticipating-tomorrows-potential-shortage/>, local election officials are not a population that mirrors the American public. The average local election official is far more likely to be white, a woman, and over age 50 than the general public, or even the voting-eligible public, which skews whiter and older.

The 2020 Democracy Fund/Reed College Survey of Local Election Officials found that almost 75 percent of these officials are over age 50, 80 percent are women, and over 90 percent are white (and non-Hispanic). Almost half had a college degree or even further education, and 44 percent identified as Republican — compared to 33 percent who identified as Democrat and 22 percent who described themselves as Independent (among the 72 percent of respondents who shared any party identification). Only 45 percent make more than $50,000 a year, and 60 percent are elected to their positions.

Before diving into this post’s exploration of gender and race/ethnicity diversity in particular, it’s helpful to understand the demographic stability among local election officials over the past 15 years, as well as a few areas where we see changes.
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D122230&title=%E2%80%9CStewards%20of%20Democracy%3A%20Pursuing%20diversity%20and%20representation%20among%20LEOs%E2%80%9D>
Posted in election administration<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>


“Shareholders fight to rein in risk by demanding transparency into public companies’ political spending”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=122228>
Posted on May 20, 2021 10:09 am<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=122228> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

MarketWatch reports.<https://www.marketwatch.com/story/shareholders-fight-to-rein-in-risk-by-demanding-transparency-into-public-companies-political-spending-11621471534>
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D122228&title=%E2%80%9CShareholders%20fight%20to%20rein%20in%20risk%20by%20demanding%20transparency%20into%20public%20companies%E2%80%99%20political%20spending%E2%80%9D>
Posted in Uncategorized<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>


“Trump, Pelosi, and other fundraising juggernauts just got put on notice by the feds that they could be breaking the law with their spammy ‘5x match’ fundraising gimmicks”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=122226>
Posted on May 20, 2021 10:07 am<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=122226> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Dave Levinthal<https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-pelosi-emails-spam-fundraising-match-donations-doj-2021-5> for Business Insider:

But this wildly popular — and demonstrably bogus — fundraising gimmick could soon be dead.

That’s because the Department of Justice on Monday indicated that fraudulent “match” solicitations were one of several misdeeds that factored into a political scam artist’s guilty plea Monday on one count of wire fraud. The man, James Kyle Bell of Las Vegas, now faces up to 20 years in federal prison and a fine.

“The solicitations promised that individual donations would be ‘5x matched’ by Bell’s PACs. … However, none of the individual donations was ever ‘5x matched’ by Bell or anyone else,” the US Attorney’s Office for the District of Columbia wrote in announcing the guilty plea<https://www.justice.gov/usao-dc/pr/nevada-man-pleads-guilty-election-fundraising-scam-and-cheating-taxpayers-out-paycheck>.

Two former leaders of the Federal Election Commission told Insider that political candidates and committees should now proceed with great caution when wooing prospective donors with “match” promotions.
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D122226&title=%E2%80%9CTrump%2C%20Pelosi%2C%20and%20other%20fundraising%20juggernauts%20just%20got%20put%20on%20notice%20by%20the%20feds%20that%20they%20could%20be%20breaking%20the%20law%20with%20their%20spammy%20%E2%80%985x%20match%E2%80%99%20fundraising%20gimmicks%E2%80%9D>
Posted in campaign finance<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>, chicanery<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=12>

--
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/20210524/d5f5dbd2/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/20210524/d5f5dbd2/attachment.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image002.png
Type: image/png
Size: 130308 bytes
Desc: image002.png
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20210524/d5f5dbd2/attachment-0001.png>