Views of Some Conservatives and Libertarians of the Election Law Listserv

I have run the Election Law Listserv with Dan Lowenstein of UCLA since 1995. It began on the servers at Chicago-Kent, moved with me to Loyola Law School, and is now housed with me at the University of California, Irvine.  It currently has over 1,000 members, including most of the people who teach election law, historians, political scientists, journalists, students, and lawyers of all political stripes interested in these issues.  It is one of the rare fora in which people from widely divergent backgrounds exchange ideas on election law issues.  Its archives are public, although  “Members of the press …. may describe in general terms the substance of discussion on the list, but should not quote posted comments or attribute ideas to specific individuals without the consent of the individuals.  Our rules also provide that “Discussions on the listserv are often contentious, but they are conducted in a civil manner. The proprietors reserve the right to expel or otherwise discipline subscribers whose postings are in their judgment uncivil or otherwise objectionable.” While I occasionally chime in to promote civility, we have only removed one person in the history of the listserv for incivility (someone whose politics was very far to the left, by the way).

In this post yesterday, I linked to a piece in which Election Law listserv non-participant J. Christian Adams said the list was made of of “would be totalitarians” and where conservatives “are often deliberately given a cold shoulder and ignored, per plan…” This was not my understanding of how conservatives and libertarians viewed the list, and many conservative list members took to the list, Twitter, or in a private email to disagree with Adams. I asked anyone who self-identifies as a conservative or libertarian and participates on the listserv if I could post some of their comments on the blog.  Readers will recognize some of these names as people with whom I have great substantive disagreements but with whom I and the 1000+ listserv members enjoy a fruitful dialogue.  Here are a few of their comments, along with some tweeted comments:

Rob Kelner, Chair, Covington & Burling LLP’s Election and Political Law Practice Group (via Twitter): “Rick Hasen’s listserv is an institution. A valuable one. Attacks on Rick are unfounded. Civility is the glue that holds democracy together.”

Joe La Rue, attorney (my oral argument opponent in the San Diego Campaign finance case, formerly from Jim Bopp’s law firm): I write as a political conservative and an opponent of excessive regulation of political speech to commend both the Election Law Listserve and also Rick Hasen as its moderator.  Rick clearly favors more regulation than I.  But he moderates the Listerve in a fair and evenhanded way.  I have never been reprimanded by Rick or otherwise discouraged from posting because my view differs from his.  Rather, I have been allowed to engage in spirited debate with those who advocate for different policy results than I.  For the most part, these discussions have always remained friendly, even though the participants passionately disagree.  I am grateful both for the discussions that take place and also for Rick’s approach to moderating them.”

Jeffrey Milyo, Professor, Dept of Economics, University of Missouri: “I am writing to personally thank you for the tremendous public service that you provide via the election law list serve and election law blog. The list serve in particular provides an open and accessible forum for informative discussion and debate among legal scholars and professionals from a variety of backgrounds and view points; it is a true marketplace of ideas. I greatly appreciate all the time and effort that you devote to maintaining the list serve, as well as your judicious and tolerant appproach to moderating comments. You consistently achieve a balance between the goals of civility and open participation (a task none of us envy!).” (Read Professor Milyo’s full letter.)

Mark Scarberry, Professor of Law, Pepperdine: “I couldn’t disagree more with Adams. I consider myself to be mostly conservative on election law issues, if that’s a meaningful category, and to be on the ‘less regulation more 1st Amendment-protective’ side; and I think the list is a great ‘place’ for discussion. Sometimes my posts get substantial responses; sometimes not. But Rick and UCI do a real service in providing this viewpoint-neutral limited forum (if that’s the right description).

Michael Toner, Former FEC Chairman (Republican nominee) and Partner, Wiley, Rein (via Twitter): “The following diatribe directed at Larry Noble, Rick Hasen & Bob Bauer among others is a disservice http://pjmedia.com/jchristianadams/2014/04/17/a-new-more-sinister-irs-scandal/ … via @PJMedia_com”; “I’ve differed w/ Noble, Hasen & Bauer some in past but they have integrity & always been fair to me…”

Abigail Thernstrom, Adjunct Scholar, American Enterprise Institute, Vice-chair, U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, 2001 – 2013: “Conservatives are generally lonely in the academy, but Rick makes sure that voices across the political spectrum are heard.  I’m fully of admiration and gratitude.  I am also indebted.  I know one corner of election law: the VRA, about which I have written two books, the first published by Harvard University Press in 1987 and the recipient of multiple prizes including one from the ABA (a small miracle given my conservative politics).  But I have been woefully ignorant about most other election law topics, and the listserv has provided some much-needed education.”

 

Share this: