New magazine on comparative election administration

I've just received a copy of a very interesting quarterly magazine put out by IFES, Democracy at Large, described as " quarterly magazine designed for democracy-building professionals and people interested in democracy development worldwide."

More Articles of Interest

Michael Pitts has written "Georgia v. Ashcroft: It's the End of Section 5 As We Know It (and I Feel Fine)," 32 Pepperdine Law Review 265 (2005).

American Politics Research has published this special symposium issue, "Direct Democracy and the California Recall."

Preliminary Injunction Denied in Emily's List Case

Late Friday evening, Judge Kollar-Kotelly issued this opinion denying Emily's List a preliminary injunction barring the FEC from enforcing new post-BCRA rules on allocation of federal and non-federal money for non-party committees. This is a significant ruling, upholding some limitations on the fundraising activities of non-party committees that were not in place in the last election cycle. The important First Amendment discussion appears on pages 20-21 of the opinion. This issue will likely be resolved ultimately (though not necessarily at the preliminary injunction stage) at the D.C. Circuit or the U.S. Supreme Court.

Money Spent on Campaign Finance Reform Lobbying

Political Money Online has issued a report (available to paid subscribers only here (I think, as I'm not a subscriber)). On the free portion of the website, it explains in pertitent part:

....PoliticalMoneyLine has gathered information on the national lobbying efforts to change the federal campaign finance laws. During the last ten years the Campaign Finance Reform Lobby spent close to $140 million - very little of which was reported under the Federal lobby Regulation Act. Practically all of this was done through non-profit 501c organizations.

The campaign finance reform effort involved donations of almost $140 million to nearly one hundred organizations that educated people to the problem, mobilized support, and sought legislative and legal remedies. This also involved paying lawyers, academics, business leaders, media groups, and even getting involved with federal election campaigns.

This ten-year lobby effort is small in comparison to the other major lobbying campaigns. And it is only being disclosed now because of disclosures by the major foundations involved and some of the campaign finance reform organizations. In general, most 501c organizations do not voluntarily make their donors public.

"A Vote of Confidence"

This St. Petersburg Times article examines potential election administration reform in Florida.

"Campaign Cleanser"

This editorial appears in today's Houston Chronicle, with the subhead: "A bipartisan bill aims to pull the plug on sham issue ads and drain tainted corporate and union cash out of the Texas electoral process."

"Revamping Congressional Redistricting"

This opinion piece appears in today's Harvard Cimson.

"McCain-Feingold II: It's Deja Vu All Over Again"

Robert Kelner offers this Roll Call oped (paid subscription required) on the new 527 bill. A snippet:

What is remarkable about “McCain-Feingold II” is that, like McCain-Feingold I, it includes a gaping soft-money loophole. In an example of regulatory planned obsolescence, McCain-Feingold I left outside special interests free from the restrictions on political parties, making outside groups soft-money magnets. It also carved out an exception to its “soft-money ban” that allows Members of Congress to raise soft money for 501(c)s. So long as a Member is careful to label his or her fundraising a “general” solicitation of soft money, the Member may raise an unlimited amount, which can be used by 501(c)s on electoral advocacy.

"Georgia Map All But Redone"

Roll Call offers this report (paid subscription required), which begins: "Republicans in the Georgia Legislature have reached consensus on new Congressional boundaries, moving a proposed map forward that would shore up Rep. Phil Gingrey’s (R) swing district and potentially complicate the re-election efforts of Democratic Reps. John Barrow and Jim Marshall."

"Defendants' Ties to DeLay Draw Nation's Eyes to Texas Trial"

The New York Times offers this report.

L.A. Times Endorses Redistricting By Commission for California

See here.

New Article on California Recall Remedies

James M. Fischer has written: "Preliminarily" Enjoining Elections: A Tale of Two Ninth Circuit Panels, 41 San Diego Law Review 1647 (2004) (part of a remedies sympoisum). This looks very interesting!

"Uniformity at Polls May Be Elusive; Parties Sharply At Odds Over Election Reform"

The Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel offers this report, which discusses some ways I have suggested to overcome a partisan impasse on election reform.

Hitchens on Vote Totals and Fraud in Ohio

See this Vanity Fair column.

"Assembly Supports Voter ID Bill"

The Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel offers this report. In a draft article sent out to law reviews yesterday ("Beyond the Margin of Litigation: Reforming U.S. Election Administration to Avoid Electoral Meltdown"), I advocate a package deal on registration reform that should appeal to many Democrats and Republicans: universal, national voter registration (conducted by the federal government) coupled with a voter id program---voters would not need to bring the ids to the polls, but could instead present biometric information such as a thumb print. Such a program stands to maximize voter turnout and minimize the potential for voter fraud. (I also advocate a change to nonpartisan election administration and a change in the timing of court review of election challenges.) I'll talk more about these proposals on the blog and elsewhere in coming weeks.

"Probe of Felon Voters Not Yet Started"

The Seattle Times offers this report.

Do Democrats Need a Reform Commission?

E.J. Dionne weighs in here.

Texas Campaign Finance Lawsuit to Begin

See here.

North Carolina Still Trying to Fix November Election Problems

See this A.P. report.

California Redistricting News

A new Field poll shows pretty lukewarm support for Gov. Schwarzengger's proposal to change California's redistricting plan to redistricting by commission, especially at this early point. (See here.) Usually ballot measures need to poll higher early in order to survive later attacks, but it might be different with Schwarzenegger backing. Dan Weintraub weighs in on the poll here and here (where he defends the notion that competitive districts lead to the election of moderates). John Marelius reports on party squabbling over the proposal, and Dan Walters defends the proposal, with a column entitled "Only the unreasonable can oppose a revamp of redistricting."

San Diego Mayoral Dispute Going to Appeal

See here. Update: See also this report.

Gold Analyzes 527 Reform Act

Laurence Gold has written this analysis of the proposed 527 legislation, available at OMB Watch.

Ammori on Sinclair Broadcasting Controversy

Marvin Ammori has posted "Shadow Government: Private Regulation, Free Speech, and Lessons from the Sinclair Blogstorm" on SSRN. Here is the abstract:

This paper analyzes the apparently emerging phenomenon of private regulation through ad hoc online coalitions. It evaluates the online cost structures that permit and shape the collective action underlying this form of regulation. It also evaluates the motivations and capacity necessary in particular circumstances to inspire such regulation. The paper concludes that a necessary motivation is the perception of both a market and a government failure. The paper's primary evidence comes from an internet-enabled campaign to change the behavior of a broadcast company weeks before the 2004 election. As this private regulation targeted speech, many of the paper's conclusions are particularly relevant for future instances of private speech regulation.

The paper also addresses some normative implications of these campaigns, especially when aimed at private speech. It concludes that internet-enabled private speech regulation can often undermine First Amendment values. Private speech regulation, however, is pervasive and often necessary. It always undermines some First Amendment values at the expense of other values. The question for policy-makers and judges is therefore which forms of private speech regulation are more or less desirable, or have more or less constitutional protection.

The paper's primary case study centers on the online coalition that coalesced and dissolved around the acts of Sinclair Broadcasting Group less than a month before the 2004 presidential election. The campaign attempted to punish a private party; other campaigns in the following weeks attempted to aid private parties. All such campaigns will become more common. This paper attempts an analysis of their mechanisms and possible effects."

Bauer on Tobin

Responding to Don Tobin's recent post on the constitutionality of 527 litigation (linked here), Bob Bauer offers these thoughts.

"GOP Mum on Felon Voter Names"

The Seattle Times offers this report.

"Georgia House Committee Postpones Vote on Redistricting"

Roll Call offers this breaking news report (paid subscription required).

Congressional Blogging?

See here.

News Reports on EAC Hearing

See here, here, and here.

CALPirg Amicus Brief in FPPC Schwarzenegger case

You can find it here. CALPirg has moved to intervene in the suit, and that intervention is being opposed by the plaintiffs and the governor (as intervenor), even though the FPPC stipulated to the governor's intervention in the suit a few days ago.

Schrag on Redistricting Reform in California

See here.

"Republicans allege 1,108 felons voted illegally in election"

The Seattle Times offers this report.

"Democrats Trail Republicans in Fund-Raising, Trials Show"

The New York Times offers this report.

"Panel Goes Easy on Shelley"

The Los Angeles Times offers this report, with the subhead: "Democrats decline to question the secretary of state on alleged misuse of federal funds because he is resigning. His office is reported on the mend."

"Public Financing Could End Pay to Play"

Steve Lopez writes this LA Times column.

"Another Session Brings More Messing with Elections"

See Mark Lane's column in the Daytona Beach News Journal.

Berman on Gerrymandering

Mitchell Berman has posted Managing Gerrymandering on SSRN, forthcoming in the Texas Law Review. The abstract:

Last spring, in Vieth v. Jubelirer, the Supreme Court addressed a claim of unconstitutional partisan gerrymandering for the first time since having held such claims justiciable, 18 years earlier, in Davis v. Bandemer. Vieth was a fractured decision. All nine Justices agreed that partisan gerrymandering is of constitutional moment, a substantial majority declaring that excessive partisanship is unconstitutional. The Justices also united in rejecting the particular gerrymandering test advanced in Bandemer. There agreement ended. Four Justices proposed three tests to replace the unmeetable Bandemer standard. A four-member plurality would have overruled Bandemer more completely by holding that partisan gerrymandering claims present a political question. Standing alone, Justice Kennedy found no proposed test satisfactory but refrained from ruling such claims nonjusticiable. Acknowledging the difficulty in crafting judicially manageable standards and warning, therefore, that the plurality might in time be vindicated, Kennedy refused to admit defeat prematurely.

Disagreeing with the Vieth plurality, this Article argues that courts can manage gerrymandering if they recognize that court-crafted constitutional doctrine need not precisely track court-interpreted constitutional meaning; instead, doctrine is designed to administer that meaning in pragmatic fashion. Although this claim should not prove very controversial, many Justices often seem not to appreciate its truth and importance. To be sure, richer appreciation of the relationship between meaning and doctrine is no panacea. For it to bear fruit here, courts must also better understand the concept of excessive partisanship. And to do that, they must grasp what partisanship means in scalar terms. That is, we cannot know how much partisanship is too much without having a clearer handle on what much partisanship means. Unfortunately, the substantial gerrymandering literature has mostly overlooked this question, focusing predominantly on the logically subsequent task of designing manageable tests.

This Article identifies four conceptually distinct ways to think about partisanship in districting as a phenomenon that possesses a dimension of magnitude or degree. These four distinct conceptualizations are the product of cross-cutting two-part distinctions: whether the baseline for measurement is supplied positively or normatively, and whether the grounds of measurement are ends-based (turning on the electoral outcome that redistricters sought to achieve) or cost-based (turning on the extent to which redistricters sacrificed other districting considerations). In brief, the Article argues that one of these conceptions (the cost-based, positive-baseline conception) is superior to the others, and that much of the confusion and pessimism that have attended academic and judicial discussions of partisan gerrymandering are attributable to implicit adoption of one or another of the alternative - and less satisfactory - conceptions of what it means for partisanship to exist in degrees.

The Article concludes with exploratory thoughts regarding how courts, armed both with a clearer and better conception of amounts of partisanship and a more mature appreciation of the relationship between constitutional meaning and constitutional doctrine, can design manageable judicial doctrine to administer the constitutional ban on excessive partisanship in redistricting. One such doctrine concerns mid-decade gerrymandering, and therefore offers a promising judicial response to the mid-decade Texas gerrymander presently before the courts.

Important Disclosure Case in California

A federal district court has upheld a California law requiring disclosure of spending in ballot measure campaigns. On remand from California Pro-Life Council, Inc. v. Getman, 323 F.3d 1088 (9th Cir. 2003), a federal district court has issued this opinion. From the introduction:

[California Pro Life Council] asserts that certain reporting and disclosure provisions in California’s Political Reform Act (“PRA”), Cal. Gov’t Code §§ 81000, et seq., violate the First and Fourteenth Amendment rights of CPLC and similar
groups who, among other activities, expressly advocate for and against the passage of ballot measure initiatives. Defendants assert that California has a compelling interest in requiring such disclosures, and that the challenged PRA provisions are narrowly tailored to advance the state’s compelling interest. For the reasons set forth below, CPLC’s motion is denied and defendants’ motion is granted.

Electionline.org Litigation Update

Electionline.org has just updated its list of election law cases pending (or recently completed) in the courts. It goes on for 48 pages of very small print. This is extremely useful for those of us following the ongoing litigation over election administration and other issues. Find it here.

"New 527 Bill Plugs Some Major Holes, but is it Constitutional?"

Donald Tobin offers this commentary. This commentary is notable because Tobin (and Ned Foley) had initially defended some regulation of independent expenditure committees as consistent with the First Amendment in a BNA article. But now Tobin writes of the new 527 bill: "Although the new McCain-Feingold legislation attempts to close some loopholes exploited by some advocacy group, there is a serious question whether the legislation as written is constitutional. Advocates need to provide strong evidence that contributions to 527 political organizations that engage in only a minimal level of federal advocacy pose significant corruption concerns to warrant the infringement on their First Amendment rights."

Single Subject Challenge to California's Stem Cell Initiative

See this A.P. report. I don't know any details on the basis for the single subject challenge yet.

"FEC Warns Right to Life"

The Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel offers this report.

Carney on Public Financing

Eliza Newman Carney writes Public Financing: Should It Stay or Should It Go? at National Journal.

Two interesting Sacramento Bee opeds

See Commission Would Ease Politicking by Mike Alvarez and Thad Hall (advocating a state electoral commission in California) and Rebuild Trust in Electoral Process by state Sen. Debra Bowen.

Campaign Legal Center Brief in Schwarzengger Fundraising Case

See here for an amicus brief arguing for the court to uphold the FPPC's newly enacted regulations imposing contribution limits on candidate-controlled ballot measure committees in California.

Guy Charles on The Supreme Court and Election Law

Guy Charles has posted Judging the Law of Politics on SSRN, forthcoming in the Michigan Law Review's annual book issue. Here is the abstract:

In this Review Essay I explore the rights-structure debate that has captivated the attention of election law scholars. The Essay juxtaposes the recent work of a leading individualist Professor Richard Hasen's new book, The Supreme Court and Election Law, against the recent work of a leading structuralist, Professor Richard Pildes' recent foreword to the Harvard Law Review.

I argue that even though the rights-structure debate produces much heat, it does not significantly advance the goal of understanding and evaluating the role of the Court in democratic politics. I aim to return election law to a dualistic understanding of the relationship between rights and structure; an understanding that prevailed in the early articulation of structuralism's relevance to judicial review of democratic politics. I shall argue that election law cases cannot be divided into neat categories along the individual rights and structuralism divide. Election law cases raise both issues of individual and structural rights. Therefore, the label attached to election law claims is immaterial. The fundamental questions are what are the values that judicial review ought to vindicate and how best to vindicate those values. These are questions that transcend the rights-structure divide

EAC Hearing tomorrow at OSU

Looks like a fascinating line-up. See here.

"When It Comes to Redistricting, Up Is Down for Tom DeLay"

Stuart Rothenberg offers this fascinating Roll Call column (paid subscription required) on a recent comment by Tom DeLay on CNN's Inside Politics. Here is the beginning of the column:

“If you have a small group of people in a back room drawing lines, what you’ll end up with is an incumbent protection system instead of a system that truly represents the will of the people,” House Majority Leader Tom DeLay (R-Texas) told Judy Woodruff on CNN’s “Inside Politics” on Thursday.

DeLay was responding to Woodruff’s question about California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger’s (R) redistricting reform plan, which would take responsibility for the drawing of Congressional district lines away from the Legislature and transfer authority to three retired judges who would draw, presumably, more competitive districts. The Majority Leader doesn’t much like the idea.

Woodruff very properly followed up her initial question by asking the Texas Republican whether there wasn’t already “a massive incumbent protection system” in place, given the microscopic level of turnover in the House in 2002 and 2004.

DeLay’s response was stunning.

“Yes, it’s called judges,” he said. “When the Democrats in Texas saw that they no longer were the majority party, they used judges to protect them. And they went 20 years being a minority party with a majority of the Congressional delegation. And they used judges to do it. That makes my point for me.”

"Schwarzenegger and Common Cause: Strange Bedfellows?"

A.P. offers this report.

"Census miscounts prisoners, dilutes urban voting power"

Prisonersofthecensus.org has posted this analysis.

Law School Gossip

It is an unusual week when two election law scholars (including me) get mentioned in everyone's favorite law school gossip column, The Leiter Report. See here and here.

Bauer Recap on Miami Conference

See here.

P.R. for California?

Steven Hill writes Schwarzenegger v. Gerrymander, an oped for the New York Times. A snippet: "It may well be that California's electoral system, like the rest of America's, has reached its endgame. Our current politics are as good as they are going to be as long as we continue to use an antiquated method that is so ill suited for the new California and its wide range of attitudes, demographics and geographic regions. We can't change where people choose to live, but we can begin using some type of proportional representation system. For example, California could use a system like that in Peoria, Ill., for municipal elections. Instead of electing 40 state senators from 40 districts, voters in 10 districts could elect four senators each. Any candidate who won at least a quarter of the vote would earn a seat. These districts would be far more likely to be bipartisan, even electing some urban Republicans and rural Democrats."

"527s Prepare Their Defense"

Roll Call offers this report (paid subscription required), which begins: "Defenders of 527 groups are gearing up to battle Congressional efforts to more strictly regulate their political efforts, which are estimated to have resulted in more than $400 million in spending during the 2004 election cycle."

"Democrats Eye Remap Payback"

Roll Call offers this report (paid subscription required), which begins: "House Minority Whip Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) has spoken with several Democratic governors in recent weeks about the possibility of revisiting their states’ Congressional lines in response to the ongoing Republican-led redistricting in Georgia, according to informed party sources. Faced with the prospect of Republicans redrawing Congressional lines in a third state since the initial 2001 round of redistricting ended, a faction of national Democrats is urging an aggressive strategy aimed at striking back at Republican House Members in states like New Mexico and Illinois."

"Tackling Election Reform"

The New York Times offers this editorial.

"Elections in State are Headed for Change"

The Seattle Times offers this report. Earlier this weekend, the newspaper offered Judge Sides with G.O.P. Over Election Lawsuit.

Text of Election Administration Bills Now Available

Doug Chapin writes to note that the Kerry/Clinton bill is here and the McConnell/Bond bill is here.

Jacoby on the Gerrymander

See Jeff Jacoby's column in the Boston Globe praising Gov. Schwarzenegger's plans to move to a nonpartisan redistricting commission. Thanks to Richard Winger for the link.

"Senator Seeks to Ease Elections Bill 'Uproar'"

The Washington Post offers this very interesting report on election administation controversies in Maryland.

"Governor Fails to Curb Big Money"

The Los Angeles Times offers this report, with the subhead: "While criticizing the system, Schwarzenegger continues to raise millions to help his political agenda and seeks to lift restrictions."

Greene Book Due Out in Paperback

Abner Greene's Understanding the 2000 Election is coming out in paperback next month, and can be pre-ordered from the NYU website. This is a very readable introduction to the Florida 2000 controversy. I turn to it often as a reference work, as I just did last week in preparing my election administration article.

"Bill Would Alter Election Procedures"

The Los Angeles Times offers this report, with the subhead: "Democrats' measure would make sweeping changes in the national voting process to ease task of balloting. A GOP version focuses on fraud." Senator Clinton issued this press release. I have not seen the bill itself yet, but here is how the press release describes it:

The Count Every Vote Act of 2005 will provide a voter verified paper ballot for every vote cast in electronic voting machines and ensures access to voter verification for all citizens, including language minority voters, illiterate voters and voters with disabilities. The bill mandates that this ballot be the official ballot for purposes of a recount. The bill sets a uniform standard for provisional ballots so that every qualified voter will know their votes are treated equally, and requires the Federal Election Assistance Commission to issue standards that ensure uniform access to voting machines and trained election personnel in every community. The bill also improves security measures for electronic voting machines.

To encourage more citizens to exercise their right to vote, the Count Every Vote Act designates Election Day a federal holiday and requires early voting in each state. The bill also enacts "no-excuse" absentee balloting, enacts fair and uniform voter registration and identification, and requires states to allow citizens to register to vote on Election Day. It also requires the Election Assistance Commission to work with states to reduce wait times for voters at polling places. In addition, the legislation restores voting rights for felons who have repaid their debt to society.

The Count Every Vote Act also includes measures to protect voters from deceptive practices and conflicts of interest that harm voter trust in the integrity of the system. In particular, the bill restricts the ability of chief state election officials as well as owners and senior managers of voting machine manufacturers to engage in certain kinds of political activity. The bill also makes it a federal crime to commit deceptive practices, such as sending flyers into minority neighborhoods telling voters the wrong voting date, and makes these practices a felony punishable by up to a year of imprisonment.

Small Fix for Presidential Funding

Stephen Medvic reports that Reps. Ney and Hoyer have introduced a bill "to establish a single date for presidential candidates to receive public funds for the general election. The date would be the Friday of Labor Day weekend." I agree with Medvic that this is a no-brainer, but it is also quite obvious that more comprehensive changes are necessary. One proposal out there is the Thomas-Toner proposal (linked here) that I hope to examine in the next few weeks.

"G.O.P. Says Corzine's Cash Makes Him the New Boss"

The New York Times offers this report.

Some Reformers Against Schwarzenegger Redistricting Commision Plan

The day after news broke that Common Cause likely will be supporting the governor's plan, Demos and the Center for Governmental Studies issued this report critical of the proposal. Here is an excerpt from the press release:

A new report, Drawing Lines: A Public Interest Guide to Real Redistricting Reform, released today by Demos and the Center for Governmental Studies, shows that current legislation and proposed initiatives on redistricting all fail to sufficiently address the needs of the public, and suggests clear guidelines for much fairer redistricting. The report responds to the California State Legislature and Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, who are considering sweeping changes to the way California draws electoral district boundaries with its consideration of several new proposals that would give redistricting authority to an "Independent Redistricting Commission," and take it away from partisan legislative control.

Drawing Lines recommends criteria for selection of Independent Redistricting Commission members, key components to be included in any redistricting plan, and analyzes the major features of each current proposal against the recommendations. The report finds that each one falls short of assuring fair representation of California's population.

"In California's 2004 legislative and congressional elections, none of the 153 seats changed party hands, even in districts where no incumbent was running," noted Bob Stern, CGS President. "This lack of competition is due significantly to the legislature's decision to redraw electoral districts to protect party boundaries."

Drawing Lines shows that, while redistricting should be conducted by an Independent Commission, none of the various proposals under current consideration does enough to encourage the creation of more competitive districts or better representation of communities of color, the areas where California is most in need of improvement.

"A number of states are considering Independent Redistricting Commissions. This is an opportunity for California to draft model legislation that other states can use to end decades of limited minority representation and partisan cronyism," said Steven Carbó, Director of Demos'Democracy Program.

Public Interest Goals
The report finds that the public interest will be served better by amending current and any future proposals to achieve the following goals:

* Independence: Create an Independent Redistricting Commission and insulate the redistricting process from legislative control.
* Minority Representation: Protect minority influence in a judicious manner.
* Competition: Increase the number of close contests.
* Partisan Fairness: Ensure that no party can capture and unfairly exert influence on the redistricting process.

Recommended Features of an Independent Redistricting Commission
Drawing Lines also outlines five key areas for Commission composition and execution that would ensure a fair process for drawing district lines in California.

* Membership: Commissioners should reflect California's diversity and be balanced to ensure that no single party can unduly influence the process. Commissioners should be insulated from political influences and ambitions to ensure fair, objective decision-making.
* Selection Process: The Commissioner selection process should emphasize neutrality, equality and fairness, while mitigating possible political and incumbent-protection gerrymandering.
* Criteria: Voting Rights Act, minority representation and competitiveness criteria should not be compromised in favor of other redistricting criteria. The Commission's objectives should be carefully and clearly defined to avoid allowing Commissioners to pursue partisan or incumbent-friendly goals.
* Transparency and Public Accountability: The Commission must reject the backroom deals that characterize much of the public's image of redistricting and restore public confidence through rigorous requirements for public hearings, open meetings, accessible data, and transparent decision-making.
* Implementation and Review: The Commission must be assured the capacity to enact a plan, subject only to Supreme Court review. The Commission should also be provided with legal resources sufficient to defend the plan. The traditional decennial redistricting rule should be respected to avoid what the Washington Post calls "a dangerous trend, threatening a new front in partisan warfare as district lines become subject to change whenever the political balance shifts."

Currently Proposed Measures

"Unfortunately, the current measures don't go far enough to protect the right of the public to choose their elected officials rather than having the legislators choose their constituents," stated Jacqueline Jacobberger, President, League of Women Voters of California.

The three most prominent proposals to reform the state's redistricting process – Ted Costa's ballot initiative, ACAX1 3 (McCarthy, R-Bakersfield), which is supported by Governor Schwarzenegger, and SCA 3 (Lowenthal, D-Long Beach) – are each considered in-depth in this report. These measures have provoked an important discussion and put the national spotlight on California's flawed redistricting process.

Student Note on Felon Disenfranchisement

Daniel S. Goldman has written "Note, The Modern-Day Literacy Test?: Felon Disenfranchisement and Race Discrimination," 57 Stanford Law Review 611 (2004).

Bauer v. Potter on New 527 Bill

I received the following via e-mail:

The Alliance for Justice lunchtime speaker series continues
Monday, March 7
featuring a debate on
the “527 Reform Act of 2005”
with
Bob Bauer, Perkins Coie
&
Trevor Potter, Caplin & Drysdale
The debate will include the opportunity for audience questions.
Thursday, March 7, 2005 at 12:00 pm
Equality Forum of the Human Rights Campaign
1640 Rhode Island Ave., NW
Washington, DC
Bring your brown bag lunch.
Drinks and dessert will be provided.
RSVP by February 28 to rpowers@afj.org.
For those unable to attend, this event will be recorded and audio will be available for download on our website at http://www.allianceforjustice.org.

Stuart Taylor Endorses California Redistricting by Commission

See this column in the National Journal.

Winkler on the History of Regulating Corporate Campaign Finance Activity

Adam Winkler has published "Other People's Money: Corporations, Agency Costs, and Campaign Finance Law," 92 Georgetown Law Journal 871 (2004). I read this piece in draft and it is a fascinating look at the history of the regulation of corporate campaign finance activity. A must read!

"Political Donations Pour Through Gap in NY Laws"

The New York Times offers this report.

Redistricting Reform in California

The Sacramento Bee reports that Common Cause may endorse Gov. Schwarzenegger's proposal to move to commission-based redistricting. Meanwhile, there's more talk of a marriage between redistricting reform and term limits relaxation in California.

When Even a Coin Toss Can't Resolve a Tied Election...

See here.....Laches anyone?

More election reform proposed in Florida

See here. One observer views the proposed reforms as a power grab by the Florida Secretary of State against the counties.

Is the FEC getting more interested in regulating 527s?

BNA has this very interesting report (paid subscription required), which begins: "In a surprise move, the Federal Election Commission has asked--and a federal judge has granted--permission to reconsider its dismissal of an enforcement complaint against a so-called Section 527 group that allegedly violated campaign finance laws in a New Jersey congressional race (Kean for Congress v. FEC, D. D.C., No. 04-007 (JDB), 2/15/05.) "

Huefner on Independent Election Administration

See here for an interesting weekly comment on the Ohio state election law site.

California Campaign Finance

Following up on an article I noted here, the San Francisco Chronicle offers Senator Rejects Charge, which begins: "A state senator whose campaign finances are under investigation denied Tuesday that he had done anything improper and accused a state regulatory agency of conducting a political witch hunt."

Meanwhile, the Los Angeles Times reports that morgage lender Ameriquest sent some Democratic California legislators to the Pro Bowl in Hawaii. That's the same Ameriquest that gave over $1 million to the California Recovery Team, Gov. Schwarzenegger's candidate controlled ballot measure committee. (See Table 1 on page 22 here.) The Times reports that the company also gave $1 million to the California Republican Party. The article describes the company as the nation's largest "high risk" mortgage lender and states that it is "accused by hundreds of customers of fraudulent sales tactics."

LA Times Wants Quick Confirmation of California Secretary of State

See this editorial.

"State Lawmakers Unveil New Districting Plan"

See this news from Georgia. Thanks to Michael McDonald and Jeff Wice for passing this along.

Bauer Responds to Campaign Finance Institute Report on 527s

See here.

"Political Web Ads May Be Curtailed"

CNET News offers this report.

Republican Policy Committee in the Senate Issues Report on Vote Fraud

Here is Putting an End to Voter Fraud; The Need for New Federal Reforms. From the executive summary:

Voter fraud continues to plague our nation’s federal elections, diluting and canceling out the lawful votes of the vast majority of Americans.
• Congress began to address the problem of voter fraud when it passed the Help America Vote Act (“HAVA”) in 2002, but much work is still necessary to protect the election process from those who would undermine our democracy.
• First, Congress should require that voters at the polls show photo identification.
o Without genuine, photographic identification, the avenues for manipulation and fraud by unscrupulous individuals will remain open to exploitation.
o Government at all levels should ensure fair access to government-issued photo identification — not only for voting purposes, but so citizens can better participate
in and contribute to mainstream economic and civic life.
• Second, Congress should examine the integrity of the voter registration process and the ongoing failures of states to maintain accurate voter lists.
o Current federal laws governing registration list maintenance prevent local officials from taking a zero-tolerance approach to voter fraud.
o Congress should make certain that non-citizens are not illegally registering and
voting: only Americans should decide the results of American elections.
• Third, Congress should examine the extent to which early and absentee voting increases the likelihood of fraudulent votes being cast.
o These alternative voting options should have at least as many fraud-protection
safeguards as those available on Election Day.
o Congress should examine how states conduct early and absentee voting and determine whether legislation is necessary to protect voters against vote dilution
through others’ fraud.
• No election-related legislation should proceed in this Congress unless these issues receive a thorough examination.

New in Roll Call

At Last, 527 Reform (editorial)

BCRA Works, So Let's Focus on Presidential Fundraising Now (commentary by Norm Ornstein)

Georgia Remap Stings GOPers

Paid subscription required to view the articles.

"A.P.: Donor Was Promised Ambassadorship"

See here.

"Fairer District Lines Will Serve All Georgians"

Rep. Lynn Westmoreland offers this oped in the Atlanta Journal-Constitution.

Amend for Arnold Gaining Momentum, Bipartisan Support

See this Roll Call report (paid subscription required).

"Auditors Find 'Weaknesses' at FEC"

Roll Call offers this report (paid subscription required), which begins: "An independent audit of the Federal Election Commission’s 2004 financial statements turned up 'material weaknesses' in the areas of financial reporting and information technology, according to the accounting firm that performed the review, Clifton Gunderson LLP."

Making It Harder to Investigate Campaign Corruption in California

See here.

Weintraub on Shelley's Replacement

See here.

Second Circuit Campaign Finance Case Likely Heading to Supreme Court

BNA reports (paid subscription required) that the Second Circuit has denied en banc review in Landell v. Vermont Public Interest Research Group. A three-judge panel had held that Vermont's mandatory spending limits in campaigns could be justified by a compelling interest in protecting the time of elected officials as well as to prevent corruption and its appearance, putting it in apparent direct conflict with the Supreme Court's 1976 opinion in Buckley v. Valeo. The Supreme Court recently denied cert in a case involving the Albuquerque spending limit law (Homans). In that case, the 10th Circuit held spending limits unconstitutional, and I predicted a denial there. Here, the unprecedented decision to hold such limits constitutional certainly will attract at least some of the Justices to hearing the case.

As I noted here, the main hurdle for review of Landell is procedural: the case is being remanded to the district court to see if Vermont can actually prove that its law is supported by the compelling interests it asserts. The Court could choose to wait to see what happens below, perhaps with the thought that upon further review the spending limits issue will go away. But that would still leave the existing Second Circuit opinion holding that spending limits may be justified in some cases by compelling interests.

"Schwarzenegger Redistricting Plan Hits Politicians Where It Hurts"

A.P. offers this report.

"Report: Fixes Saved 1M Votes in 2004"

A.P. offers this report. The Caltech/MIT report referred to is here.

"States fall behind on voting-system improvements"

USA Today offers this report, which begins: "Repairs to the nation's voting system, already long overdue, are likely to remain uncompleted by the 2006 congressional elections, top state election officials warn."

Election Law Symposium at the University of Miami

This Saturday, the University of Miami Law Review is having an election law symposium. Here is the schedule:

University of Miami Law Review Election Law Symposium

Registration & Breakfast 8:00 a.m. - 9:00 a.m.

Opening Remarks - 9:00 a.m. - 9:15 a.m.

I. Rationalizing Election Law
9:15 am - 10:30 am
Election law encompasses multiple topics addressed by discrete statutes and distinct Constitutional claims raised by candidates, parties, interest groups, contributors. The roles of voters, who represents these interests, and how the claims of voters relate to claims of other parties have not figured prominently in election law jurisprudence. What would election law jurisprudence relating to campaign finance and to election administration look like if voters were more central to the deliberations of Congress, the courts, and the FEC?

Scott Thomas, Chairman, Federal Election Commission

Frances R. Hill, Professor of Law, University of Miami School of Law

Daniel Hays Lowenstein, Professor of Law, University of California at Los Angeles Law School

Coffee Break -
10:30 a.m.11:00 a.m.

II. The Contested Jurisprudence of McConnell v. FEC
11:00 am - 12:45 pm

What did the Court decide and why has this opinion become so controversial? Is the Court developing an innovative concept of democracy? Or, is the controversy largely tactical? What were the consequences of this case for the 2004 election? What were the implications of the 2004 election for the continuing controversy over McConnell?

Robert F. Bauer, Perkins Coie, Washington, D.C

Benjamin L. Ginsberg. Patton Boggs, Washington, D.C.

Trevor Potter, Caplin & Drysdale and the Campaign Legal Center, Washington, D.C.

Daniel Ortiz, Professor of Law, University of Virginia Law School

LUNCH - 12:45 P.M. - 2:00 P.M.
III. One View from the FEC
2:00 pm - 2:45 pm

Bradley Smith, Commissioner and former Chair, Federal Election Commission

Is McConnell consistent with the Constitution? What has been the Federal Election Commissionís response to McConnell? On what fundamental principles should the FEC base its work going forward?

IV. Organizing Elections: Issues in Election Administration

Both panels address issues of federalism and balance of powers. Is there a general jurisprudential theory in these areas? Should there be?


A. Issues in Defining Congressional Districts
2:45 pm ñ 4:15 pm
Districting and apportionment issue have been addressed repeatedly by the courts since the Supreme Court decided Baker v. Carr. Nevertheless, new issues continue to arise. Experiences in Texas and Colorado raise issues of how frequently a state legislature may redistrict and what limits, if any, federal courts may place on the authority of states.

Paul M. Smith, Jenner & Block, Washington, D.C.

Terrence Anderson, Professor of Law, University of Miami School of Law

Miguel A. De Grandy, Miguel De Grandy, P.A., Coral Gables, Florida


B. Issues relating to Voting Procedures and Voter Protection
4:15 pm ñ 5:15 pm
New technologies and the requirements in the Help America Vote Act that older technologies be replaced have raise important issues of votersí rights to have their votes counted. How do current controversies compare with historic controversies over the integrity of voting? What are the claims in this area? What is the standard for election integrity? What role should legislatures and courts place in these controversies? What role should state and the federal government play? Are the appropriate claims civil or criminal?

Benedict R. Kuehne, Sale & Kuehne, Miami, Florida

Martha Mahone, Professor of Law, University of Miami School of Law

V. Open Question Time

Opportunity for audience to ask any questions of any panelist

"Should We Not Elect Top Election Official?"

See this editorial, originally appearing in the Orange County Register. Meanwhile, George Skelton reports that Gov. Schwarzenegger "dumped cold water on the idea" of making the California Secretary of State's office a nonpartisan elected one.

"Policing Internet Politics?"

Roll Call offers this report (paid subscription required), which begins: "The Federal Election Commission next month will begin looking at tightening restrictions on political activities in cyberspace, a controversial move that makes some FEC officials uneasy."

Election Reform Editorials

The New York Times has editorialized about election administration issues for two days in a row. On Sunday, the newspaper featured When Elections Go Bad, on voting issues in New York and North Carolina. (No credit given to the Issacharoff, Karlan, and Pildes book of the same name.) On Monday, the newspaper offered Umpires Still Taking Sides, that begins "The scandal of state election officials who are also political partisans has reached a new low."

See also Fix Voting Laws from the Charlotte Observer on the recent provisional voting dispute there.

"Long, Unmarked Road Ahead for Election Challenge"

The Seattle Post-Intelligencer offers this report on the continuing dispute over Washington's gubernatorial race.

"Opinion: Plugging the Loophole"

Sen. John McCain offers these comments at Newsweek on the 527 issue. Never one to mince words, the Senator writes:

Why are these groups allowed to break the law? Because of the Federal Election Commission's despicable failure to do its job. Led by a Democratic apparatchik on one side and a right-wing ideologue on the other, the commission is politically hidebound, and has refused to take on those who brazenly thumb their noses at the law. It's hard to argue that McCain-Feingold is responsible for that.

"Looking to Design a Fairer Map"

The Los Angeles Times offers this report, with the subhead: "The governor's plan to take redistricting from lawmakers could make more political races competitive. It's unclear which party would gain."

New Articles in "Business and Politics" E-Journal

See this link for the following articles from Vol. 6, Issue 3 (Dec. 2004):

* Campaign Contributions and Congressional Voting on Tobacco Policy, 2980-2000, John Wright
* The (Sometimes Surprising) Consequences of Societally Unrepresentative Contributors on Legislative Responsiveness, Michael Bailey
* Firms’ Choice of Regulatory Instruments to Reduce Pollution: A Transaction Cost Approach, Magali Delmas and Alfred Marcus
* China Standard Time: A Study in Strategic Industrial Policy, Greg Linden

Newer Draft Version of My Candidate-Controlled Ballot Measure Committee Piece Now Posted

I have revised my forthcoming Southern California Law Review article, "Rethinking the Unconstitutionality of Contribution and Expenditure Limits in Ballot Measure Campaigns," to include newer campaign finance informaton on Gov. Schwarzenegger's political committees. The latest draft is here, and the updated data appear in the text accompanying footnotes 68-73.

One of the issues raised in this article is the constitutionality of limits, like California's recently adopted limit, on contributions to committees "controlled" by candidates and elected officials. A committee supporting Governor Schwarzenegger's ballot measure agenda filed suit last week (see this complaint, filed in state court) raising constitutional and other issues against the California limits. The committee has requested a preliminary injunction, so we should get our first sense on how courts address this question soon. I expect that it will be the California Supreme Court (or U.S. Supreme Court) that ultimately resolves the constitutional question, given that it turns on the vitality of a 1981 U.S. Supreme Court case barring contribution limits to ballot measure committees. As I argue in the article, that case may not control the outcome here, given the evidence of candidate control of such committees now in California.

North Carolina Provisional Ballot Decision

Following up on this post, here is a link to the opinion of the Supreme Court of North Carolina in a provisional ballot "wrong precinct" case. Thanks to a reader for passing the link along.

CA Governor Appoints Bruce McPherson as Shelley Replacement

The Sacramento Bee story is here. McPherson is a centrist Republican. From the article: "McPherson said he didn't know if he would run for a full term in 2006, but noted that the governor did not make that a prerequisite for taking the job. "I'm going to leave my options open," he said." Randy Riddle notes that McPherson once sponsored a bill to make the office of Secretary of State a nonpartisan elected position. I favor making it a nonpartisan appointed position subject to a large supermajority vote of the legislature. See here.

Replacing Shelley

See this analysis.

Howland on the Wash. Gov's Mess

See this Seattle Weekly column.

"Jury Finds Montgomery Guilty in Vote Fraud Case"

St. Louis Today offers this report, which begins: "A St. Louis jury found former Operation Big Vote head Nonaresa Montgomery guilty Thursday of lying to a grand jury investigating thousands of fraudulent voter registration cards turned in before the 2001 mayoral primary."

"Dan Walters: Sunshine would be better approach to campaign finance issues"

See this Sacramento Bee column. A snippet: "Is it somehow better, from a public interest standpoint, that Schwarzenegger stage an elaborate charade of noninvolvement in the supposedly independent committee? Of course not. The ballot measures almost certainly will proceed, and huge sums of money will be collected and spent on both sides of the battle. We'd be better served if Schwarzenegger simply raised the money directly and took responsibility for spending it. We would then be able to judge whether - as some critics have alleged - corporate interests that contribute to his causes receive most-favored treatment by the administration."

"Voters Might Face Flood of Fall Ballot Initiatives"

The Los Angeles Times offers this report.

Call for Better Campaign Finance Disclosure in Kansas

See here.

"House passes bill targeting independent voter affiliation"

The Union Leader (NH) offers this report, which begins: "The New Hampshire House passed a bill yesterday that will change the procedures independent voters follow after they vote in primary elections. House Bill 154, which now heads the state Senate, would require independent voters to remain a registered Democrat or Republican, depending on which primary they voted in, for 90 days before they could re-register as an independent."

"Top FEC Officials Urge Higher Spending Limit"

The Washington Post offers this report.

More on NASS-EAC Bickering

See this BNA report (paid subscription required).

CFI Issues Interesting New Report on 527s in the 2004 Election

The report is here. The press release is here. Click on the release for a summary of the fascinating findings.

Citizens to Save California Sues to Overturn FPPC Regulations on Candidate Controlled Ballot Measure Committees

You can find the complaint here. You can find an earlier post on the constitutional questions raised here. This issue will be of immediate importance in California. Although Assembly member Richman is a plaintiff in the case just filed as a candidate who wants to partially "control" Citizens to Save California, the real issue is Gov. Schwarzenegger's degree of control, as he's out there asking $100,000 to sit with him at a fundraiser for CSC, whose board is full of Schwarzenegger cronies. Because donations to Schwazenegger's controlled California Recovery Team (which raised over $18 million in the last election cycle, many in six and seven figure donations) are now limited to $22,500, the extent to which Schwarzenegger will be successful in his expected special election depends in a large part on how this litigation goes. UPDATE: The Los Angeles Times story is here . The quote from me could be a bit misleading. My point about corruption and its appearance applies only to candidate-controlled ballot measure committees. You can find additional coverage of the lawsuit here, here, and here.

"McCain-Feingold 'Antidote' Introduced in the House"

CNSNews offers this report. The proposed legislation, which would repeal some of BCRA's electioneering communcations provisions, is sponsored by Roscoe Bartlett (R-Md) and has 40 co-sponsors.

"Official Disputes Vote Tally Assertion"

The Seattle Times offers this report, which begins: "A Metropolitan King County councilman who once served on the county canvassing board is disputing election officials' claim that there is nothing unusual in their inability to figure out who cast 1,800 ballots in the Nov. 2 gubernatorial election." The newspaper also links to this report issued by King County election officials.

Election Law Journal 4:1 Now Available

You can find the table of contents (as well as online access to articles for subscribers) here. Look for ELJ 4:2 in April featuring Brad Smith and Allison Hayward on 527 regulation by the FEC; Diane Mazur on military ballots in Florida 2000; and a forum on Dennis Thompson's Just Elections featuring Andy Sabl, Beth Garrett, Bruce Cain, and a response by Thompson.

"Former GOP Consultant Gets 5 Months in Phone-Jamming Case"

A.P. offers this report, which begins: ""CONCORD, N.H. -- A former Republican consultant was sentenced Tuesday to five months in jail for jamming Democratic telephone lines in several New Hampshire cities during the 2002 general election."

"Committee Examines 2004 Election Reforms"

A.P. offers this report.

End of NY State Senate Election Dispute

See this New York Times report. Thanks to Doug Greene for the link.

Toner-Thomas Letter to Congress on Reforming the Presidential Public Financing System

You can find it here.

Ohio Voting Equipment in Election 2004

Dan Tokaji, whose excellent "Equal Vote blog" just had its first birthday, writes How Did Ohio's Voting Equipment Fare in 2004?" A snippet:

Overall, the residual vote rate in Ohio 's November 2004 presidential election was 1.65%. That's down slightly from the November 2000 election, in which the residual vote rate was 1.89%.

The table also indicates the type of system that each county uses for in-precinct voting. In 2004, the counties that used each of the three types of equipment for in-precinct voting had the following residual vote rates:
Type of Voting Equipment Residual Vote Rate
Punch Card 1.84%
Electronic 1.25%
Optical Scan 1.01%

A $100,000 Donation to a Ballot Committee the Governor Favors Gets You a Seat---Literally---At the Governor's Table

See this Los Angeles Times report.

Redistricting, Competition and Entrenchment

Responding to reports that congressional Republicans in California don't like Gov. Schwarzenegger's proposed redistricting plan that would create more competitive districts, David Gillard reportedly is trying to persuade the governor's team to leave congressional districting out of the reform package.

This would present some very interesting questions of intent and partisan gerrymandering. How would a state defend a redistricting plan pushed by a Republican governor that makes redistricting competitive when it comes to the Democratically controlled legislature, but declines to impose competition when it could hurt Republicans in Congress?

Keene on California Election Administration Reform

Responding to my call for California to move to nonpartisan election administration at the state level, Barry Keene offers his own model to achieve the goals of neutrality and accountability. Meanwhile, Dan Walters reports: "Legislative leaders are virtually begging Schwarzenegger to appoint a caretaker who wouldn't seek election to a new term in 2006, but he's planning to name a Republican - perhaps a Latino - who would, in fact, run in 2006 and begin rebuilding the otherwise nonexistent bench of statewide GOP political figures."

"Taking the Politics Out of Elections"

The Los Angeles Times has published my oped on the Kevin Shelley mess and what California can do to fix it. A snippet:

California's Constitution should be revised so that the chief elections officer (who may or may not be the secretary of state) is appointed to the position for a fixed term of, say, 10 years. He or she should be nominated by the governor and approved by a 75% majority of the Legislature. Such a supermajority requirement would ensure that only a consensus candidate who could achieve broad support from both parties would be chosen for the office. The Constitution should also guarantee some independence for the budget of the office and provide that the chief elections officer can be removed only through a difficult impeachment procedure.

In addition, the Legislature should pass tough conflict-of- interest provisions. Shelley's predecessor, Republican Bill Jones, generally did a good job as secretary of state. But almost immediately after leaving office he went to work as a paid consultant for a manufacturer that was selling electronic voting machines to California counties.

In the short term, the governor and Legislature should appoint a competent, neutral administrator (such as an experienced county registrar of voters) to the position. Longer term, the special election that the governor is expected to call for June provides the perfect opportunity to make these changes.

Election reform Budget

Doug Chapin of Electionline.org writes:

President Bush's fiscal year 2006 (FY06) budget has both good news and bad news for election reform.

The good news is that the Election Assistance Commission (EAC) is slated for a $4 million increase from $14 million to $18 million. The increase is split evenly between $2 million for research and $2 million for travel and administrative costs of the Commission.

The bad news is that the White House is not requesting any additional funds at this time for Help America Vote Act grants to states.

Details are available in an excerpt from the President's budget located here (EAC piece begins halfway down the first column).

We will keep you abreast of further budgetary developments as they occur.

Doug Chapin
Director, electionline.org

"Group Claims Governor Breaks Fundraising Rules"

The Sacramento Bee offers this report. A snippet: "A political watchdog group accused Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger of violating California campaign finance law in a complaint filed Monday with the state's Fair Political Practices Commission. TheRestOfUs.org, a nonprofit organization that monitors campaign fund raising, said the governor is breaking the law by "controlling" the activities of a business group's finance committee that is raising money to support Schwarzenegger's agenda in a series of ballot measures." You can find a copy of the complaint here.

"GOP Fears a Redistricting Backfire"

The Los Angeles Times offers this report, with the subhead: "Schwarzenegger plan is seen as jeopardizing control of Congress."

"Lott supports changes to law governing 527 advocacy groups"

See this Knight-Ridder report.

Close Texas Senate Race Resolved

See here.

"Senate Panel Approves Photo I.D. Bill"

See this news from Indiana.

NASS Wants Congress to Eliminate the Election Assistance Commission

The resolution that NASS has passed is here. An A.P. story on the dispute is here. This just adds to the further politicization of election administration reform, now on state-federal lines. My work in progress deals with the appropriate federal role in election administration reform. It is a tough issue, but NASS's approach of picking a fight like this is the wrong way to go.

Bauer on Schwarzenegger's Redistricting Proposal

See here.

"Election Officials Work on Making Changes"

A.P. offers this report.

"Why Felons Deserve the Right to Vote"

The New York Times offers this editorial.

More on NY State Senate Race

A.P. offers N.Y. State Senate Race Hangs on Court Decisions." Thanks to Doug Greene for the pointer.

Carney on Trent Lott's Conversion to Campaign Finance Reform

See her Rules of the Game column in today's National Journal.

Roll Call Reports...

Georgia Remap Ahead? GOP Members Have Proposal

New Bill on Continuity Proposed, which begins: "Acknowledging strong philosophical opposition to his previous attempt to fix Congress’ constitutional danger if a catastrophe were to strike at the Capitol, Rep. Dana Rohrabacher (R-Calif.) plans to introduce a different proposal that would allow every district continuity in representation without employing temporary lawmakers."

Paid subscription required.

"To Replace Shelley, Bold Choice May Be Best Option"

George Skelton offers this column in the Los Angeles Times. More Shelly news here.

"States See Growing Campaign to Change Redistricting Laws"

The New York Times offers this front-page report. In my view, this movement is an entirely appropriate response to the Supreme Court's Vieth case. Because there is no social consensus over how best to control partisan manipulation of the redistricting process, the Supreme Court was right in Vieth not to impose a one-size-fits-all constitutional solution. The matter should be fought out in the political processes in the states and Congress, as is now occurring. This is a point I make in much greater detail in my recent Election Law Journal article on Vieth.

Some Federal Law Review Articles Posted

Following up on this post you can find the electoral law symposium introduction here and Bryan Mercurio's contribution here.

House to Hold Hearing on HAVA Implementation

Details here on the Feburary 9 hearing. Thanks to Doug Chapin for the link.

Provisional Ballot Dispute in North Carolina Casts Doubts on Outcomes of Some Races

See this editorial in the Charlotte Observer. See also this article on the aftermath of an other Election Day problem in that state.

"Judge Might Void Election, Won't Order New One"

The Seattle Times offers this report.

Will There Be Financial Support for An Appeal in the San Diego Mayoral Election Contest?

See this San Diego Union-Tribune article. The issue of course will have most effect in San Diego, but there would be a beneficial externality to such an appeal as well: especially if the case makes it to the California Supreme Court, it would help clarify the extent to which Bush v. Gore mandates equal treatment of classes of voters casting votes in a race.

Kevin Shelley's Replacement

You can find stories on potential replacements for Kevin Shelley here and here. I'll be writing my own thoughts on how to replace California's secretary of state soon.

Shelley Resigns

See this L.A. Times report.

"Judge refuses to dismiss lawsuit over governor's election"

The Seattle Times offers this report.

Cressman on Low Contribution Limits

On Jan. 27, Derek Cressman published "Will Chiles Revive Movement for $100 Limits?" in the Orlando Sentinel. It is reprinted here.

Electoral Law Symposium Published

You can find a link to the articles in Volume 32, Number 3 of the Federal Law Review (Australia) here. Unfortunately, the articles themselves are not on line without a subscription. Here is the table of contents:

ELECTORAL LAW SYMPOSIUM
Electoral Law Symposium: An Introduction
GRAEME ORR, BRYAN MERCURIO AND GEORGE WILLIAMS

ARTICLES
Australian Electoral Law: 'Free and Fair'?
BRYAN MERCURIO AND GEORGE WILLIAMS

Public Funding and Expenditure Regulation of Australian Political Parties: Some Reflections
JOO-CHEONG THAM AND DAVID GROVE

The Ritual and Aesthetic in Electoral Law
GRAEME ORR

'All is Changed, Changed Utterly'? — The Causes and Consequences of New Zealand's Adoption of MMP
ANDREW GEDDIS AND CAROLINE MORRIS

COMMENT
Compulsory Voting in Australia: A Basis For A 'Best Practice' Regime
LISA HILL

BOOK REVIEWS
Selective Democracy: Race, Gender and the Australian Vote
JENNIFER NORBERRY

The Supreme Court and Election Law: Judging Equality from Baker v Carr to Bush v Gore
DAVID TUCKER

Oral Argument Transcript in Clingman v. Beaver Now Available

You can find it here. Thanks to Robbin Stewart for the link.

Kevin Shelley News

The Sacraemento Bee offers Elections Official Rips Shelley and Núñez gives Shelley incentive to quit.

"Dan Walters: Is it true redistricting reform, or is it just a GOP power grab?"

See this Sacramento Bee column.

"Gov. Ties to Fund Drive Questioned"

The Los Angeles Times offers this report, with the subhead: "Schwarzenegger aides deny that he runs a committee accepting unlimited donations. If he did, state law would restrict contributions." This is hardly surprising, given the vagueness problems with the FPPC regulation that I've flagged in my forthcoming Southern California Law Review paper and my recent L.A.Times oped. The article does not mention a separate FPPC provision that would potentially kick in if "Citizens to Save California" wants to run TV ads within 45 days of the special election featuring Schwarzenegger. That provision limits contributions to $25,000 to fund such ads made at the "behest" of a candidate. The FPPC has taken the position that this would not apply to officeholders like Schwarzenegger, who are not running for reelection on the same ballot (and therefore not "candidates" for purposes of that provision), but perhaps someone will challenge that interpretation. In the meantime, I'm not aware of any constitutional challenge that has been mounted to the FPPC rules. My law review article addresses the constitutional questions in some detail.

"Pataki Concedes That Aide Paid by Republicans Delivered Meals to His Home"

The New York Times offers this report.

"Election Law Raises Limits for Donations"

The New York Times offers this report. Because of a BCRA inflation provision, the individual contribution limits to federal candidates has now risen to $2100.

"Key ruling on rerunning race for governor to come today"

The Seattle Post-Intelligencer offers this report, which begins: "The battle over Washington's gubernatorial election resumes today in Wenatchee, where a Chelan County judge is expected to decide a host of issues that could determine whether a Republican court challenge to Democrat Christine Gregoire's controversial victory has the legal legs to stand trial."

"Compromising Elections"

The Fort Wayne Journal Gazette offers this editorial, which begins: "Anyone who respects the integrity of Indiana’s state and local elections – including Republican Secretary of State Todd Rokita – ought to be concerned about Senate Bill 500. The proposed legislation eliminates bipartisan protections in state law and gives effective control of all elections to the GOP."

New Voting Systems Institute

From the Center for Governmental Studies website: "In an effort highlighted in Steven Levy’s Newsweek article, 'A Step Forward in the Voting Wars,' CGS and USC/Columbia Digital Government Research Center have announced the creation of a new institute, the Voting Systems Institute (VSI), to support a growing grassroots effort to develop objective test standards for tamperproof, verifiable, and technologically sound voting systems. Against a background of continuing controversy about the reliability, security, and accuracy of voting technology, VSI will work closely with the newly formed Voting Systems Performance Rating (VSPR) effort, which has brought together state and county election officials, computer and security experts, and voting equipment manufacturers to create assessment methods for voting systems." See also the Newsweek article; press release; Voting Systems Institute website.

The New 527 Bill Introduced in Congress

You can find the bill itself here. News coverage in The New York Times; Bloomberg News; A.P.; BNA (subscription required); Roll Call (subscription required); NPR. Bob Bauer also offers this critical analysis of the bill. (In somewhat related analysis, David Broder writes this column praising McCain-Feingold.)

Roll Call reports that the bill may be on the fast track. I certainly hope that when hearings are held on the bill, members of Congress will seriously consider and debate the constitutional question whether it is permissible to limit contributions to 527s that engage only in independent spending. As readers of this blog know, I believe there is a serious constitutional question lurking in this kind of legislation.

Those interested in the question of this bill and incumbent protection should listen to Senator McCain's statement to Peter Overby not in the NPR story linked above but in today's hourly newscast: "Some billionaire decided he or she doesn't like you in office, and they decide to form up a 527 and contribute 10, 20 million dollars and dive bomb into your district."

Interesting Opinion from Utah on a Party's Ability to Replace a Nominee in a General Election

Thanks to Richard Winger for passing along this link to Adams v. Swenson.

"Spano Loses Court Ruling in Senate Recount Battle"

The New York Times offers this report. The majority opinion and dissent are available here. Thanks to the many readers for passing this information along.

More on San Diego Mayoral Election Decision

See coverage in the San Diego Union-Tribune and the Los Angeles Times. Still no indication here regarding how the judge ruled on the equal protection issue, but the end of the Trib story suggests the judge may have based his decision in part on laches.

"Shelley Hearing Postponed"

The Sacramento Bee offers this report.

Judge Rules Against San Diego Mayoral Election Challenge

The A.P. report is here . A two and a half minute video excerpt of the ruling from the bench is here. From what I've seen, there is no indication of whether, or how, the judge ruled on what I consider to be the most important question: whether the registrar's treatment of ballots creates and equal protection problem under Bush v. Gore. I expect that this will be appealed and the legal question ultimately decided by the California Supreme Court.

"New Rules to Be Drafted for Write-In Candidates"

The San Diego Union-Tribune offers this report.

"Bill to Reform 527s Attracts Schumer, Lott"

Roll Call offers this report (paid subscription required). See also Money Flows to Senators and Associations Urge Change to PAC Rules. The newpaper also offers Cheers for Arnold, an editorial endorsing the change to nonpartisan redistricting in California.

"Schwarzenegger raises big-time money - with a big difference"

Dan Walters offers these thoughts in his Bee column.

"Shelley Has Way to Avoid Hearing"

The San Jose Mercury News offers this report, which begins: "Secretary of State Kevin Shelley's much-anticipated appearance Thursday before California lawmakers scrutinizing his conduct might be delayed by weeks, if not months, to give attorneys and investigators more time to delve into the controversy." Another snippet: "Shelley is quietly trying to work out a deal in which he would step down if he can find another job and state lawmakers agree to ease up on their investigation, according to two sources who have spoken to the secretary of state."

"Power Struggle Grips Club for Growth"

The New York Sun offers this report. Link via Political Wire.

"Maybe Anyone Can Be President"

The Los Angeles Times offers this front-page report, with the subhead: "Support is growing to amend the Constitution to let foreign-born citizens lead the nation. So, which governor comes to mind?"

"Competition Isn't Everything"

California state senator Kevin Murray offers this LA Times oped on the proposal to make California redistricting more competitive.

San Diego Trial Update

See this Los Angeles Times story and this San Diego Union-Tribune report.

"Republicans Question Validity Of Political Donation By Corzine's Mother"

WNBC.com offers this report.

"Security for Voting Machines is Pushed"

The Baltimore Sun offers this report.

"Report: Fla Ballot Performance Improves"

A.P. offers this report.

"A Job for the Judiciary? Governor sees role for bench in plan to redraw state's election districts"

The Recorder (Law.com) offers this report (paid subscription required).

More on Redistricting and Term Limits

Responding to John Gear's comments, Brett Bellmore writes:

"The state overall leans D but the US House delegation is 9-6 R-D, and both state houses are R dominated, tribute to the skill of the gerrymander artists."

Rick, while there's been some gerrymandering since Republicans took over, they had to get the majority legitimately, first. To some extent Democrats had naturally gerrymandered themselves, by so overwhelmingly dominating a few cities like Detroit and Flint, while doing so wrtetchedly through most of the state.

Anyway, I don't think repeals of our term limits law here in Michigan have much hope. The only people pushing it are the incumbent legislators, and lobbyists, and they look too self-interested in doing so. Perhaps because they are.

Might be worth reforming redistricting, in addition to term limits, though. And I hear some buzz about switching to a part-time legislature.

Journal of Legislation Symposium on the "Supreme Court and Election Law" Now Available

Although hard copies won't be mailed for a few weeks, electronic versions of the submissions to the Journal of Legislation symposium (Volume 31, 2004) on my book, The Supreme Court and Election Law: Judging Equality from Baker v. Carr to Bush v. Gore, are now available. You can now download Guy Charles's contribution, Luis Fuentes-Rohwer's contribution, John Nagle's contribution, and my reply. My reply also reacts to some recent writings of Rick Pildes, Sam Issacharoff and Heather Gerken on the structuralism-rights debate.

"Federal Judge Gives New Life to Nevada Marijuana Petition"

A.P. offers this report, which begins: "Three state initiatives -- including one that would make Nevada the first state to legalize possession of small amounts of marijuana -- were revived Friday when a judge ruled that the secretary of state was wrong to raise petition requirements while signatures were being gathered." Thanks to Richard Winger for the information.

Text of Dodd Election Reform Bill

Randy Riddle of the new California Election Law Blog has posted S.17, Senator Dodd's proposed voting reforms.

Bauer on the FEC and the "Millionaire's Amendment"

See here.

"Ohio Supreme Court Suspends Three Parts of Its Judicial Code"

This report from A.P. explains that "The Ohio Supreme Court has suspended three sections of its judicial code because of an appeals court judge's campaign to become a justice." Thanks to a reader for passing this along.

End to Public Financing for Nominating Conventions

Roll Call reports (paid subscription required): "If Rep. Roscoe Bartlett (R-Md.) has his way, there will be no publicly funded partying in late summer 2008, at least not at the nominating conventions."

"Court Race Donors' List Released"

A.P. offers this report from Ohio, which begins: "A business group ended a 4-year-old court challenge Friday by releasing a list of donors to its failed campaign to unseat a Democratic Supreme Court justice. Complying with a judge's order, the Ohio Chamber of Commerce provided the list of 383 donors who gave $4.2 million to a chamber organization that raised money to defeat Justice Alice Robie Resnick. Contributions ranged from $135,000 to $1."

"Former Congressman Luther Still Raising, Spending Campaign Cash"

A.P. offers this report, which begins: "Former Minnesota Rep. Bill Luther, out of office since 2002, accepted $12,500 in donations and generated $63,442 in bills for campaign office expenses, travel and gasoline the past two years, according to a published report."

"High Court Hears Arguments in Disputed State Senate Election"

A.P. offers this report out of New York.

"Photo ID May Be Required to Vote"

A.P. offers this report out of Wisconsin.

"New Bill Aims to Refine State Clean election Law"

The Bangor Daily News (Maine) offers this report.

"Schwarzenegger a Big Fundraiser in 2004"

The Los Angeles Times offers this report.

Reports on First Day of Trial in San Diego Election Contest

See this San Diego Union-Tribune report and this LA Times report.