“Americans Abroad to Get Bigger Say in 2012 Election”

NYT reports.

Share
Posted in election administration | Comments Off

“Why Could Romney’s Father Run For President If He Was Born In Mexico?”

NPR explains.

Share
Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off

“Overseas Vote Foundation Announces New Domestic Initiative”

Press release: “Overseas Vote Foundation (OVF) today proudly launched its new domestic voter engagement initiative known as U.S. Vote Foundation (US Vote). ‘It’s time to provide U.S.-based voters with the same breadth and quality of online voter services that we have been providing to overseas and military voters for more than five years,’ said OVF President and CEO Susan Dzieduszycka-Suinat.”

Share
Posted in election administration | Comments Off

“DEAD WRONG? Claims of widespread ‘zombie voters’ in South Carolina start to unravel”

Facing South has this post.

Share
Posted in election administration, fraudulent fraud squad, The Voting Wars, voter id | Comments Off

“Civil rights law on Supreme Court’s mind”

Reuters: “A recent decision by the U.S. Supreme Court that dealt with a narrow issue in a redistricting case from Texas suggests that the nation’s top court is ready to reconsider a key part of the Voting Rights Act, a major piece of civil rights legislation.”

Yup.

Share
Posted in Voting Rights Act | Comments Off

“Support thin for voter ID bill; Secretary of state’s plan called unnecessary at best, misguided at worst”

The Des Moines Register reports.

Share
Posted in election administration, fraudulent fraud squad, voter id | Comments Off

Breaking News: CA Supreme Court Says 2012 Commission Maps Will Be Used Even if Referendum on Senate Districts Qualifies for the Ballot

You can find the opinion here.  Justin told us it would be so.  What is perhaps most worthy of interest in this case is the concurring opinion of Justice Goodwin Liu, counseling restraint in the area of redistricting. (This is especially noteworthy because Liu was filibustered for a 9th Circuit seat on grounds that he would be a judicial activist.)  Here is how his concurring opinion begins:

More than a half century ago, Justice Felix Frankfurter observed that “[t]he one stark fact that emerges from a study of the history of [legislative] apportionment is its embroilment in politics, in the sense of party contests and party interests.” (Colegrove v. Green (1946) 328 U.S. 549, 554 (plur. opn. of Frankfurter, J.).) Faced with entreaties by litigants seeking judicial intervention in the redistricting process, Justice Frankfurter famously warned that “[c]ourts ought not to enter this political thicket.” (Id. at p. 556.) Although the law has not adopted the uncompromising version of this principle urged by Justice Frankfurter (see, e.g., Reynolds v. Sims (1964) 377 U.S. 533; Baker v. Carr (1962) 369 U.S. 186), his admonition continues to resonate each decade when courts are asked to decide what are fundamentally political disputes. Judicial restraint is especially important in the context of legislative redistricting because, as the high court recently observed, “experience has shown the difficulty of defining neutral legal principles in this area.” (Perry v. Perez (2012) 565 U.S. __ [2012 WL 162610, 2012 U.S. Lexis 908].)

And here is how it ends:

In a future case, the court may be divided with regard to which map should serve as an interim map and, closely related, whether and when to issue a decision on that important issue. Those questions will inevitably play out against a backdrop of partisan interests. I hope the court is correct that prudence will be sufficient to guide us out of the thicket. But I believe the language of our Constitution already provides the guidance we need.

Share
Posted in citizen commissions, redistricting | Comments Off

“Messin’ with Texas; The Legal Wrangle over Redistricting”

Must-read Sam Issacharoff piece in the Boston Review:

Texas shows that asking the wrong question yields no good answer. So long as the question is how many seats Republican insiders should give to Democratic and Hispanic outsiders, the answer will produce an ugly legal mess. The solution lies in taking the process of redistricting away from the insiders—as does every democracy in the world that has to draw district lines. When the question is posed in states with ballot initiatives, the wisdom of moving to independent redistricting bodies is obvious. Voters in California and Arizona did not waste their opportunities to take redistricting out of the hands of politicians.

Share
Posted in redistricting, Supreme Court, Voting Rights Act | Comments Off

“Virginia Legislative Committee Passes Bill to Allow Write-in Votes in Primaries”

Winger: “It is ironic that at the same time Virginia is adding write-in space on some ballots, the California legislature is about to pass AB 1413, which eliminates write-in space on general election ballots for Congress and state office.”

I for one would like to see California amend its top two law to specifically allow write-in votes in the second round of the primary.  This is especially important for situations where something happens with or to one of the top two candidates between the first and second round of voting.

Share
Posted in ballot access | Comments Off

NCSL Legislative Action Bulletin Now Available

Here.

Share
Posted in election administration | Comments Off

The Big Campaign Finance Question Tuesday: 501c4 Contributions

January 31 is an important day for campaign finance reporting, including when a number of new super PACs will be reporting for the first time.

The issue I will be watching: how many of these groups will be reporting contributions from (affiliated) 501(c)(4) organizations, which don’t have to report their donors publicly.  The great fear that I and many others have is that individuals, corporations, and other entities will try to hide their identities by funneling money through (c)(4)s.

Share
Posted in campaign finance | Comments Off

“New Pew Report Details Progress on Military, Overseas Voting”

Doug Chapin:

Today at the 2012 Overseas Vote Summit in Washington, DC the Pew Center on the States will release Democracy from Afar: States Show Progress on Military and Overseas Voting, a new report updating progress on the issue of military and overseas voting first highlighted by Pew’s 2009 report No Time To Vote.

Democracy from Afar finds that “47 states and the District of Columbia enacted laws to protect the voting rights of military and overseas citizens”. More specifically, Pew found that “many states have implemented changes to their laws or administrative codes,” including -

+ Enough time to vote: 38 states and the District have laws or rules meeting or exceeding federal requirements to send ballots to military and overseas voters at least 45 days before an election AND 8 additional states changed their primary dates to accommodate the requirement;

+ Electronic transmission of unvoted ballots: All states and the District allow military and overseas voters to receive blank ballots electronically;

+ Eliminating requirements for notarization or witnesses: 46 states and the District do not call for either for military and overseas voters; and

+ Expanded use of Federal Write-in Absentee Ballots (FWABs): 34 states and the District mandate FWABs be used as a backup ballot for all elections, including state and local.

All of these changes are summarized state-by-state in a typically handy-dandy Pew chart on page 5 of the report.

It really is remarkable how far this issue has come in about three years; Pew’s election team and its huge coalition of partners including OVF, the Pentagon’s Federal Voting Assistance Program and the Uniform Law Commission (whose Uniform Military and Overseas Voting Act is one ongoing vehicle for state and local reform) should be deeply gratified at everything they have accomplished.

Kudos to Director David Becker and the rest of the team at Pew’s Election Initiatives, especially my former colleagues Matthew Morse and Stacie Temple, who skillfully and doggedly rode the rollercoaster of the Congressional and state legislative process to see so many of these changes through.

On behalf of Americans around the world who now have an opportunity to cast a timely and valid ballot – I salute you.

 

Share
Posted in election administration | Comments Off

“Why redistricting commissions aren’t immune from politics”

Stateline reports.

Share
Posted in citizen commissions, redistricting | Comments Off

Council of Europe Calls for More Transparency in U.S. Election Financing

See here.

Share
Posted in campaign finance | Comments Off

NYT Editorializes on the Shelby County Voting Rights Case

The Times:

When Congress nearly unanimously reauthorized the Voting Rights Act in 2006, it relied on abundant evidence that there is still pervasive, persistent, even Jim Crow-style voting discrimination in the South and elsewhere — including in Shelby County and other parts of Alabama. Without Section 5’s preclearance requirement, Congress found, “racial and language minority citizens will be deprived of the opportunity to exercise their right to vote, or will have their votes diluted, undermining the significant gains made by minorities in the last 40 years.”

The provision remains an effective and essential check against widespread voting violations. Many jurisdictions still actively sabotage the interests of minority voters, as shown in new efforts to keep these voters from the polls. Discrimination would be even more widespread without the continuing and critical deterrence of the preclearance requirement.

Share
Posted in Voting Rights Act | Comments Off

“4 lawmakers fight effort to depose them over election-law changes”

The Orlando Sentinel reports.

Share
Posted in election administration | Comments Off

“State ignores voters on constitutional convention; Majority voted in favor of con-con in 2010, yet it hasn’t been convened”

J.H. Snider has written this oped for the Baltimore Sun.

Share
Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off

“Republicans May Block Nominees After Obama Recess Appointments”

Bloomberg reports.

Share
Posted in legislation and legislatures | Comments Off

Criticism of PA Justice Baer

Following up on this post, the Pa. GOP has blasted Justice Baer for talking to the press about an ongoing case and for taking at trip to Puerto Rico while the redistricting opinion is pending.

Share
Posted in redistricting | Comments Off

Thought of the Night

Despite all the talk of the influence of money in a post-Citizens United world (and I do believe it is a problem for the legislative process), it is heartening that public opinion on the presidential election seems driven to a great extent by the debates rather than by ads.  If, as some predict, Gingrich tanks again after tonight, it won’t be because of disparities in super-PAC spending.

Share
Posted in campaign finance | Comments Off

“So Who’s a Lobbyist”

This NY Times editorial endorses reforms from the  the lobbying task force of the American Bar Association [Disclosure: I am a member of the task force].

Share
Posted in legislation and legislatures, lobbying | Comments Off

“Testimony in Texas Redistricting Trial Ends”

The latest from D.C.

Share
Posted in Department of Justice, redistricting, Voting Rights Act | Comments Off

Does the “Stand by Your Ad” Provision Have Any Meaning?

Andrew Kaczynski tweets about Mitt Romney statements during debate: “Romney just said I doubt an ad is mine. Well it is. Earlier he said he doesn’t watch ads he approves.”

 

Share
Posted in campaign finance | Comments Off

“Pro-Mitt Romney super PAC seems to parallel his campaign”

USA Today reports.

Share
Posted in campaign finance | Comments Off

“Romney tax returns detail funds not identified in ethics forms”

The LA Times reports (via TPM).

Share
Posted in campaign finance | Comments Off

Tom Susman Talks with NPR About Gingrich, Lobbying, and His Advice

Here.

Share
Posted in legislation and legislatures, lobbying | Comments Off

“Special filing: Redistricting opinion coming tomorrow”

Horvitz & Levy’s “At the Lectern” blog reports on the CA Supreme Court redistricting decision coming tomorrow.

 

Share
Posted in redistricting | Comments Off

“Breaking down the Florida GOP’s redistricting map”

The Fix reports.

Share
Posted in redistricting | Comments Off

Pa. Supreme Court Justice Gives Interview About Ongoing Redistricting Case

This [corrected link] is behind a subscription wall, but it is very unusual for a judge to comment about an ongoing case like this.  A few quotes from Justice Baer: ““It takes a week or so to write a majority opinion on any big case, and it will take a week or so here.” “I did not expect this maelstrom,” he said. “I don’t think any of us did. But in 40 years since the constitution established this procedure, this is the first the court has voted to not rubberstamp the commission’s work. And, you know, the constitution was not set up to rubberstamp things.”

Share
Posted in redistricting | Comments Off

“UF professor to testify on Fla. election law, voting rights before U.S. Senate subcommittee”

See this press release.  Complete witness list at Dan Smith’s blog.

Share
Posted in election administration, The Voting Wars, voting | Comments Off

“Working group examines future of California elections”

That’s teh lead story in this week’s Electionline Weekly.

Share
Posted in election administration | Comments Off

“Lobbying Dips Sharply in 2011″

WaPo reports: “Lobbying activity plunged in 2011 for the first time in a decade, most likely driven lower by the struggling economy and legislative gridlock on Capitol Hill, according to new estimates released Thursday.”

Share
Posted in legislation and legislatures, lobbying | Comments Off

“Lawsuit challenges Kentucky’s redistricting plan”

Where isn’t there a redistricting lawsuit?

Share
Posted in redistricting | Comments Off

“Super PACs’ money could tip balance of power in Congress”

CNN offers this extensive report.

Share
Posted in campaign finance | Comments Off

“Citizens United’s Impact on Judicial Elections”

The UCI Law chapter of ACS has put together this event for Monday Feb. 6 at 12 pm (Pacific time), and it will be webcast.  Here is a description: “Controversial for many reasons, the Supreme Court’s 2010 Citizens United decision has raised particular concern over the role of campaign contributions and unlimited spending in judicial elections. Join UCI’s Dean Erwin Chemerinsky and Prof. Rick Hasen, and Prof. James Sample of Hofstra, for a lively discussion of the impact of Citizens United on judicial elections.”

Share
Posted in campaign finance, judicial elections | Comments Off

“State’s witness concedes point in hearing on Texas districts”

Star-Telegram: “A key witness before a federal three-judge panel considering the Texas redistricting challenge appeared to make a major concession Wednesday to the case made last week by state Sen. Wendy Davis, D-Fort Worth.”  More from Texas Redistricting on the retrogression concession.

Share
Posted in redistricting, Voting Rights Act | Comments Off

“Arizona Candidate Challenged Over English Skills”

NYT: “What began as an effort by political opponents to block Mrs. Cabrera from the ballot for a seat on the City Council has mushroomed into an uncomfortable discussion of just how fluent Arizona officeholders need to be. Like many other states, Arizona has long required politicians at all levels to speak, read and write English, but the law fails to spell out just what that means. Is grade-school knowledge enough? Must one speak flawlessly? Who is to decide?”

Share
Posted in legislation and legislatures | Comments Off

Get the Popcorn

Jack Abramoff sits down for a video interview with Eliza Newlin Carney.

Share
Posted in chicanery, legislation and legislatures, lobbying | Comments Off

“L.A. County ‘Challenge’ Could Be the Future of Voting Technology”

A Chapinblog.

Share
Posted in election administration, voting technology | Comments Off

“Obama Should Force Recess Appointment Fight”

Norm Ornstein has written this column for Roll Call.  It concludes:

If that is the case, and if I were the president, I would think about one other area to employ the same recess appointment strategy: Make five recess appointments to the Federal Election Commission to fill seats now held by commissioners (three Democrats and two Republicans) whose terms have expired.  McConnell has been delighted to keep the status quo on the FEC because the three past GOP appointees have acted regularly to ignore the law and court rulings to create a lawless environment in the campaign arena.

McConnell has made it clear that nullifying all existing campaign finance laws and regulations is a top priority of his, and he would go to DEFCON I if Obama went ahead and picked FEC commissioners he did not OK.

It is time for the president to defy McConnell — and his own party hacks as well — to pick five individuals who will uphold the law and the court when it comes to disclosure and true independence of super PACs, and not follow their own ideology. That one action would do more to improve American politics and governance this year than any possible set of reforms right now. And let’s be frank: Would McConnell do anything to spite or damage the president that he would not do now if he could get away with it?

Share
Posted in campaign finance, legislation and legislatures | Comments Off

The Cain Campaign May Be Over…

but the campaign finance investigations live on.

Share
Posted in campaign finance | Comments Off

“Battle rages over tracing voted ballots in Colorado”

The Denver Post reports. See also this editorial.

Share
Posted in election administration, The Voting Wars | Comments Off

“How Citizens United Created Newt”

Jonathan Chiat blogs.

I have explained the complex relationship between CU and the emergence of super PACs here.

Share
Posted in campaign finance | Comments Off

“John McCain Goes Off Message, Predicts ‘Major Scandal’ Related To Unlimited Political Giving”

Maverick loose on pro-Romney call.

Share
Posted in campaign finance | Comments Off

“Citizens United v. FEC decision proves justice is blind — politically”

Jeff Rosen has written this Politico oped.

Share
Posted in campaign finance | Comments Off

“Election Law Journal Highlights Political Activities of Nonprofit Organizations after Citizens United Decision”

This press release begins: “The U.S. Supreme Court decision in the Citizens United case lifted many of the legal restrictions on the political activities of nonprofit organizations funded by corporations. This has created a new environment in which corporate and union funded nonprofit groups may exert greater influence on politics, a topic explored in detail in a special issue of Election Law Journal: Rules, Politics, and Policy, a peer-reviewed publication of Mary Ann Liebert, Inc. The issue is available free online. ”

I note that as of now the entire issue is free, meaning not just this excellent symposium, but also my article on the Supreme Court’s shrinking election law docket, and book reviews by Alex Keyssar, Ned Foley, and Mike Pitts.

Share
Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off

“A Quote Not ‘Questionable’ at All”

Steve Hoersting responds to my post from yesterday on FEC Chair Hunter’s oped.  I notice how many times Steve said that my claims were “true.”

Share
Posted in campaign finance | Comments Off

“Sec. Of State Pushes For Voter ID Requirement”

News from Iowa.

Share
Posted in election administration, voter id | Comments Off

“Fox’s South Carolina ‘Dead Voters’ Story Collapses”

Media Matters reports.

Share
Posted in election administration, fraudulent fraud squad, The Voting Wars, voter id | Comments Off

City of Los Angeles Redistricting Just Got Ugly

I mean that in both senses of the term.

Share
Posted in redistricting | Comments Off