Subject: Electionlawblog news and commentary 3/3/06
From: Rick Hasen
Date: 3/3/2006, 7:52 AM
To: election-law


Slow News Day?

With all the major election law news this week out of the Supreme Court, it is somewhat of a relief that today's New York Times features this AP story out of Virginia, which begins: "WISE, Va., March 2 (AP) -- An investigation that began with accusations that cigarettes, alcohol and pork rinds were offered for votes in a small coal-mining town led to the indictment Thursday of the mayor and 13 other people on charges of election fraud and corruption." Thanks to Grant Hayden for the pointer. (The newspaper also offers this editorial on the suit against NY for HAVA violations.)


"General plan battle shifts to the courts; Initiative backers say supervisors broke law by refusing to put measure on ballot"

The Monterey Herald offers this report.


"Governor signs redistricting measure redistricting measure"

I assume that the headline of this AP story from Georgia was a typo, and not simply a way of expressing the fact that yes, indeed, this is a re-redistricting done mid-decade.


"Court Reporter; At the Supreme Court Wednesday, it was all about Texas and the future"

Michael King has these reflections on the Texas oral argument in the Austin Chronicle.


"Battle lines are redrawn; High Court must block party hacks"

Errol Louis offers this column in the NY Daily News.


"Unhappy Texas Dems; The Dems play the race card, ineffectively it would seem."

Stephen Spruiell has written this column for National Review Online.


The Status of Campaign Finance Laws Concerning the Internet

See Adam Bonin's very informative post on DailyKos.


"Lawyer: Courts can't make Nader pay '04 election costs"

The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette offers this report.


"Making Every Vote Count"

New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson has this article on Tompaine.com. A snippet: "On March 2, 2006, I will sign a bill that will transition New Mexico to an all paper-ballot system using optical scanners to count the vote. Paper ballots are the least expensive, most secure form of voting available. Having marked their votes with pen and paper, voters will walk out of the booth and know their voices have been heard. Optical scanners will quickly and accurately provide results, while in the event of a recount, the ballots themselves will be a permanent, verifiable record of the people’s directions to their government."

-- 
Rick Hasen
William H. Hannon Distinguished Professor of Law
Loyola Law School
919 Albany Street
Los Angeles, CA  90015-1211
(213)736-1466
(213)380-3769 - fax
rick.hasen@lls.edu
http://www.lls.edu/academics/faculty/hasen.html
http://electionlawblog.org