Election Law Society

Weekly Wrap Up

Election Law Society · December 30, 2009 ·

Every week, State of Elections brings you the latest news in state election law.

– The U.S. Census bureau has released its population estimates, and if their estimates are correct, 8 states stand to gain Congressional seats in 2010, and 10 states will lose seats.

– An editorial in the St. Petersburg Times accuses Florida’s “No Match, No Vote” law of disenfranchising thousands of minority voters during the 2008 presidential election. The law denies voter registration to any applicant whose name on the registration form does not match the Social Security or Florida driver’s license databases.

– The Supreme Court has held its last session of 2009, and still has not released its decision in Citizen United v. Federal Election Commission. The Court was expected to overrule existing precedents that allowed the government to limit the amount corporations could spend on campaigns. However, the long delay has fueled speculation that the Court’s decision may not be as clear cut as expected. For a review of the issues involved in Citizen United, see this transcript of oral arguments and this analysis of the possible implications of the case.

apply online essay writing companies

Weekly Wrap Up

Election Law Society · December 18, 2009 ·

Every Friday, State of Elections brings you the latest news in state election law.

– The recount in Virginia’s 21st district is over, and Ron Villanueva has been declared the winner by only 16 votes.

– Wisconsin held a voter education summit on Tuesday. Topics discussed include felon voting rights, photo id requirements at the polls, and Wisconsin’s same day registration law.

– Also in Wisconsin, two convicted felons are facing felony election fraud charges for voting in the November 2008 election. If convicted, they could be given up to three years and six months in prison.

– California is also debating the merits of a photo id requirement. State Senator George Runner has proposed an initiative that would require voters to show a driver’s license or other government issued ID before being given a ballot. The initiative has already come under fire from some Latino organizations, who fear the initiative could be used to discriminate against minority voters.

Appendicitis, as the disease came to be known towards write my paper for me with http://writemyessay4me.org/ the end of the nineteenth century, was very much an american appellation?

Op Ed: Take Jim Crow Out of the Virginia Constitution: Restore Voting Rights for All

Election Law Society · December 16, 2009 ·

After the 15th Amendment was passed, giving blacks the constitutional right to vote, Southern states enacted Jim Crow laws, designed to keep blacks from actually voting. These laws included disingenuous literacy tests and poll taxes, which served as illegal but thankfully temporary impediments for black voters. One of the few ways that states found they could legally keep at least some blacks from voting, however, was to enact felon disenfranchisement laws. These laws say that after a felon has served his time in prison, he still cannot vote. Although African-Americans represent only about 12.5% of America’s population, they make up about 48.5% of its prison population. So, felon disenfranchisement laws, which are at best arguably constitutional, have proved an effective method of suppressing the black vote.

Virginia is one of only two states in the U.S. that permanently bars ex-felons from voting, even after they have paid their debt to society (the other is Kentucky). In Virginia alone, there are more than 377,000 disenfranchised felons. Of these, more than 208,000 are African-American.This is an abomination. Virginia’s laws must be changed. [Read more…] about Op Ed: Take Jim Crow Out of the Virginia Constitution: Restore Voting Rights for All

Weekly Wrap Up

Election Law Society · December 11, 2009 ·

Every Friday, State of Elections brings you the latest news in state election law.

– Two citizen initiatives in Florida, designed to limit gerrymandering, have faced opposition from the Florida legislature. Opponents of the initiatives claim that they reduce election opportunities for minorities.

– In Illinois, a lawsuit has been filed over an Illinois law that requires the county to use vote-counting machines that make an audible beep if a voter attempts to cast a vote that is blank for some offices.

– The Governor’s Commission on Strengthening Utah’s Democracy has issued a new report recommending “automatic and portable” voter registration in that state.

– Enjoyed last week’s post on felon disenfranchisement? Want to know some of the historical roots and reasoning behind the policy? Then check out Professor Pippa Holloway’s article “‘A Chicken-Stealer Shall Lose His Vote’ – Disfranchisement for Larceny in the South, 1874-1890”

affordable essay writing for http://www.proessaywriting.org

Redistricting Reform Part 3

Election Law Society · December 9, 2009 ·

When the inmates control the asylum

So what happens when we allow partisan redistricting? The short answer is “bad things.” Here’s the longer answer:

[Warning: This post is rife with sarcasm. Most of the time, no offense is meant… most of the time.]

Here’s our scenario – your state legislature has gerrymandered the heck out of your home district. So you, a decently moderate Republican are stuck in a district of lots of Democrats… Say, 65% or so of your neighbors vote for Democrats. Republican performance in your precinct is high, the area of Republicans in your town has been broken up between three different districts, ensuring that any republican votes are effectively diluted. Your Republican friend across the street? He’s in a different district. Your conservative father in law down on Main street? He’s in yet another district. And to top it off, your state legislator, who used to live down the street, has been redistricted right out of his own district! In fact, there are so many Democrats who have been put into this district of yours that there’s almost no reason a republican should run – he’ll lose and lose badly, often even if the Democrat isn’t the greatest candidate.

So what happens in this situation? Well, first thing first, Democrats win. Second, Republicans lose. And third, the primary election becomes more important than the general election. In the situation where the opposition party has no chance of winning the general election, and one party will always win the General Election, the real competition comes in the primary election, when the parties choose their nominees. Imagine, for a moment, that America was a 70-30 Democratic country. What would be a more important election? The General or the Democratic primary? Yeah, it’s an easy answer.