Subject: Electionlawblog news and commentary 9/28/05 |
From: Rick Hasen |
Date: 9/28/2005, 8:52 AM |
To: election-law |
The Wall Street Journal offers this report on yesterday's orders by the Supreme Court agreeing to hear two election law cases. Thanks to Steven Sholk for the pointer (See here for links to my earlier commentary on these cases).
You can also find coverage in the
New York Times; the
Washington Post; the
Los Angeles Times; Roll Call
(paid subscription required); USA
Today; AP;
and Bloomberg
News. Bob Bauer offers some commentary.
Heather Gerken offers this
commentary at The New Republic Online (free, but
registration required). It begins:
Still, even without the authority accorded to most federal agencies, the EAC can get something done. In politics, information is power, and the EAC is uniquely suited to use that power to catalyze reform. The study released yesterday, which documents election practices in different states and localities, is an important first step. But it also presents much of its information in disaggregated and difficult-to-navigate form, and it does not provide a full set of comparative rankings on every issue that matters to voters.
Now the EAC should use its data to create explicit, comprehensive rankings of states and localities, shaming those local governments that are doing a poor job of running elections and rewarding those that are excelling. It's a strategy taken directly from the playbook of some human rights and environmental organizations, which have long used rankings to prod nations into improving their practices. The strategy works for a simple reason: No one wants to be at the bottom of a list.
Spencer Overton has written this Roll
Call commentary (paid subscription required). It begins:
But the Carter-Baker proposal is more exclusionary than any state ID law — including Georgia’s.
Just under half the states require ID to vote, and most of these states accept a long list of non-photo ID such as a utility bill, bank statement, government check or paycheck. About a dozen of these ID states allow voters without ID to prove their identity by signing an affidavit or reciting information such as birth date and home address.
The Carter-Baker ID proposal would phase out the affidavit safety net and limit the forms of permissible identification to a “Real ID” card. If Georgia adopted the Carter-Baker ID proposal, voters would no longer be able to vote using a U.S. passport, military ID card, student ID card from a Georgia state university, government employee ID card or tribal ID card.
You can find it here.
Meanwhile, there were some news reports yesterday about the Rose
Institute report on Prop. 77. See the articles Google has aggregated here.
See this National Journal column. Thanks to Chuck Bell for the pointer
-- Rick Hasen William H. Hannon Distinguished Professor of Law Loyola Law School 919 Albany Street Los Angeles, CA 90015-1211 (213)736-1466 - voice (213)380-3769 - fax rick.hasen@lls.edu http://www.lls.edu/academics/faculty/hasen.html http://electionlawblog.org