Michigan city looking at IRV
The Daily Tribune reports that Ferndale, Michigan, is looking at making its new voting machines be able to handle Instant Runoff Voting.
« June 2003 | Main | August 2003 »
July 31, 2003
Corporate Facilitation of Contributions
Forbes.com has an article, Federal Election Commission Eyes Corporate Donors, dealing with "corporate facilitation." That's the use of corporate facilities to gather contributions to a political campaign.
Specifically, Aube made a pitch at a bank employee dinner for $50 donations to a political action committee operated by the Oregon Bankers Association during the 2000 election. Aube then made a follow-up solicitation to dinner attendees via e-mail. A total of $1,570 was raised for the PAC. That's exactly the type of stuff prohibited under FEC rules. The bank agreed to pay a civil penalty of $16,500--more than ten times the amount it helped raise for the PAC in the first place.But much less-blatant behavior can get you in trouble too, particularly when it comes to those rules limiting use of corporate resources. "It's much easier to violate [rule] 114.2(f)," says Brett Kappel, a partner with Powell, Goldstein, Frazer & Murphy in Washington, D.C. "All the executive has to do is send out an e-mail asking employees to send their checks to his secretary."
My post on Kappel's advisory to his clients on the same subject is here.
NYC may be going non-partisan
The New York Times reports, "Panel Endorses Mayor's Plan to Alter City's Voting System."
The panel, the Charter Revision Commission, largely adhered to the wishes of Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg, who appointed them this year to consider his proposal to eliminate party primaries and switch to nonpartisan elections. Mr. Bloomberg, a billionaire who personally financed his 2001 campaign as a Democrat-turned-Republican, has suggested that the change would dilute the power of political bosses.Responding to concerns about the plan, Mr. Bloomberg has said that the first elections under the new system should take place in 2009 — after he has served a presumptive second term. He has also said candidates should be able to list their party affiliations on the ballot.
UPDATE: the Charter Commission's staff report on non-partisan elections is here.
Fail-safe disabled on NY voting machines
The New York Times reports:
The votes of as many as 60,000 people in New York City may not have been counted in the 2000 presidential election because of an adjustment made to city voting machines back in 1964, according to a lawsuit filed yesterday by advocacy groups.The lawsuit, filed on behalf of the Working Families Party and a group of community advocates and minority voters, accuses the city and state boards of elections of disenfranchising these voters, who represented about 2.7 percent of the overall city turnout. The advocates say voters in poor and immigrant communities were more likely to have been among those whose votes had not been counted.
July 30, 2003
Texas, round 3 goes on
Burnt Orange at Political State Report gives a round-up (no pun intended) of the Texas situtation. Short answer: Dems still gone.
Miss. Judicial Indictment
The Biloxi Sun Herald reports that Dickie Scruggs was on of the unnamed intermediaries named in last week's federal indictments.
July 29, 2003
Fed Ct strikes down part of California recall procedure
Findlaw has the opinion in FRANK PARTNOY, et al. v. KEVIN SHELLEY, et al. in which the federal court in San Diego struck down the requirement that a voter vote on the recall question in order to have a vote counted on the question of who wins the election.
Texas, Round 3
Charles Kuffner in Political State Report reports on today's events in Texas. Summary: the Dems are still gone; the GOP is still mad. See his earlier report here.
July 28, 2003
Texas Dems seek asylum in New Mexico
Political State Report has two posts from Texas about the most recent flight of the Democrats. The Governor has called a 2nd special session, but it now appears that enough Democrats in both houses have absented themselves that neither house had a quorum (2/3) this afternoon. Only the Senators have flown to New Mexico. See posts by Burnt Orange and Charles Kuffner.
Indiana Sup. Ct. interprets political advertising statute
The Indiana Law Blog has a post on the decision last week of the Indiana Supreme Court answering question:
Is the term “persons” in Ind. Code §§ 3-9-3-2.5(b)(1), (d) limited to candidates, authorized political committees or subcommittees of candidates, and the agents of such committees or subcommittees, or does it have a broader scope, and, if so, how much broader?
The answer is "broader."
Will there be a backlash against redistricting?
The Atlanta Journal Constitution reports in "GOP pushes redistricting as next issue,"
Many Georgia voters are confused or irritated by the Democratically drawn districts for their state senators and representatives."The Democrats are missing the point. I really don't think they understand," Lee said. "It's discussed every day by people who contact me."
Lee is one of four Democrats who switched parties right after the general election in November to give the GOP control of the Senate for the first time. He and other Republicans, including Gov. Sonny Perdue, see such voter reaction to political districts as one of the ingredients that won the Republicans control of the governor's office last year.
As a result, they plan to make the supposedly once-a-decade practice of redistricting one of the top campaign themes for Republican candidates in next year's elections.
"The Democrats don't think this is an issue," said Merle Black, an Emory University political scientist. "I think they missed the boat on that."
You can view the Georgia maps here.
Vote dilution in South Dakota
The Aberdeen News reports that the State of South Dakota and the ACLU have both filed summary judgment motions in a suit challenging two legislative districts. The ACLU suit alleges "that the Legislature diluted the voting strength of American Indians when it redrew legislative district boundaries two years ago."
Here is a map of the districts.
July 26, 2003
Albany Co. NY redistricting suit
The Albany Times Union /a> and Capitol News 9 report on the county legislature's adoption of a plan designed to meet the requirements of the Voting Rights Act, but the minority plaintiffs are not pleased.
Arbor Hill activist Aaron Mair said, "What the County has presented is what we call the Oreo cookie plan. It looks like it has four majority/minority districts but in actuality the district that they are creating is actually designed to elect a white legislator."
Udall raising money for Colorado re-redistricting suit
According to the Aurora Sentinel,
U.S. Rep. Mark Udall has contracted with a telemarketing company to solicit funds from Colorado voters to help pay legal fees in a lawsuit challenging a Republican-backed congressional redistricting plan.
Udall is raising the money in accordance with the Federal Election Campaign Act.
Citizens can redistrict in Texas
Exam question 1: Find the mistakes in the following passage from this
Austin American Statesman article:
But where to begin? Most people work from whatever map is currently being considered by the Legislature, Dyer says, calling up the map on the screen. Whatever your final product, a redistricting map must conform to the federal Voting Rights Act, meant to ensure one person, one vote in the fairest possible way. No matter how you move the boundaries, all districts must have the same voting-age population, she says.
Dean Defense Forces
Howard Kurtz in the Washington Post has an interesting article about the changing nature of letters to the editor in an Internet campaign. Dean Defense Forces: Lobbing E-mail at the Enemy:
The letters were indeed generated by Dean Defense Forces, a volunteer outfit affiliated with the doctor's campaign. Day after day, the DDF Web log, which is linked to Dean's official site, hammers reporters deemed critical of Dean and urges its followers to flood the in-boxes of offending journalists."When negative press gets written, we'll ensure that letters to the editor get printed in response. . . . The last couple of months have proven the effectiveness of our efforts at media response," the DDF says.
Dean Defense Forces, of course, has noticed the article and talked about it:
Now, first of all, I think it is somewhat humorous that the fact that Dean's supporters are now using email as a tool is a big story. We've probably all heard of the GOP TeamLeader program (a pure astroturf operation), but, no, the big story is a volunteer-based, shoestring operation that puts out, in Kurtz's words, "rough stuff."Now, in case no one had noticed, Dean Defense Forces didn't start the notion of Dean supporters writing Letters-to-the-Editor, we simply are trying to channel (justified) unhappiness with the news media.
Maybe if I mention Howard Kurtz, he will give me a plug in his next column.
Ex-felon voting suit revived
The 9th Circuit has reversed a federal district court's dismissal of a Voting Rights Act suit against Washington State's disfranchisement of felons. The case is Farrakhan v. State of Washington.
We disagree with the district court’s analysis, because it conflicts with our well-established understanding of Section 2. As recognized by both the Supreme Court and our circuit, a Section 2 “totality of the circumstances” inquiry requires courts to consider how a challenged voting practice interacts with external factors such as “social and historical conditions” to result in denial of the right to vote on account of race or color. Thornburg v. Gingles, 478 U.S. 30, 47 (1986); see also Smith v. Salt River Project Agric. Improvement & Power Dist., 109 F.3d 586, 595-96 (9th Cir. 1997). Because a Section 2 analysis clearly requires that we consider factors external to the challenged voting mechanism itself, we hold that evidence of discrimination within the criminal justice system can be relevant to a Section 2 analysis. In light of the district court’s having improperly disregarded this evidence, combined with its assessment that Plaintiffs’ evidence of discrimination in Washington’s criminal justice system was “compelling,” we reverse and remand for further proceedings.
I have followed this case since its inception. I thought the plaintiffs were setting a needless burden for themselves by alleging that the criminal justice system was intentionally discriminatory as opposed to just disparate in effect. However, it seems that the plaintiffs' strategy has paid off:
To substantiate their vote denial claim, however, Plaintiffs presented statistical evidence of the disparities in arrest, bail and pre-trial release rates, charging decisions, and sentencing outcomes in certain aspects of Washington’s criminal justice system. They also submitted expert declarations and relied on the same reports and studies that the State had submitted to show the extent to which these disparities could be attributed to racial bias and discrimination.
Congratulations to Lawrence A. Weiser, D.C. Cronin and Jason T. Vail, all of
Spokane, Washington, the plaintiffs' lawyers.
Miss. S.Ct. justice indicted
The Jackson Clarion-Ledger reports:
State Supreme Court Justice Oliver Diaz Jr. became the first justice in Mississippi history to be indicted on felony charges.A federal grand jury returned a 16-count indictment Friday against Diaz, his ex-wife, Jennifer Diaz, trial lawyer Paul Minor of Ocean Springs, and former judges Wes Teel and John Whitfield charging them with fraud and bribery. Minor is also charged with racketeering.
The Clarion-Ledger has 5 other stories:
Merits, motive of case debated
Indictment alleges loans and paybacks
The Biloxi Sun-Herald has 5 stories:
Three Coast judges indicted; Minor charged with racketeering
July 25, 2003
Texas: round 2, ding!
Round 2 is over and the Democrats seem to have fought the GOP machine to a draw.
A White House-backed power play to grab more Republican congressional seats from Texas has been derailed by Democratic opposition, at least temporarily.
Republican Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst declared Friday that this round, on the most partisan of issues, is over."We didn't have the votes to bring it up," Dewhurst said. "And so, in essence, redistricting in this session is dead."
Austin American Statesman.
The Dallas Morning News has an article about the possible 2nd special session -- what will the Democrats do, should the Gov call another special session, and will the GOP overreach?
Draft AO to Bob Smith
On Thursday's agenda for the FEC was this draft Advisory Opinion to former Sen. Bob Smith that instructs him to give unrefundable contributions to the US Treasury rather than his foundation. Give it up, Bob.
Draft AO to James Treffinger
On Thursday's agenda of the FEC was this draft Advisory Opinion (and amendment) allowing James Treffinger to use some of his campaign funds to defend himself from criminal charges.
Leadership PACs
At Thursday's meeting, the FEC adopted its proposed regulations on "leadership PACs," according to the AP (see the last 2 paragraphs of the story). This article from The Hill explains the changes in more detail. This item was not listed on the agenda for the Thursday meeting.
New FEC Commissioner nominated
Thomas Edsall reports in the Washington Post:
Democratic congressional leaders yesterday announced the selection of labor lawyer Robert D. Lenhard to replace Federal Election Commission member Scott Thomas. Thomas has been a leading supporter of the McCain-Feingold campaign finance law, while Lenhard was part of a union legal team that challenged the law's constitutionality.
McCarty admin case to continue
The Sun-Sentinel reports:
A federal judge on Thursday refused to stop the Florida Elections Commission next month from levying what could be a record fine against Palm Beach County Commissioner Mary McCarty for alleged election law violations.U.S. District Judge William Stafford relied on a 1971 U.S. Supreme Court ruling that instructs federal judges to refrain from interfering in certain state cases -- especially if the case involves an issue of important state interest and involves a state proceeding that is judicial in nature.
"There are ongoing state proceedings that ... clearly under Florida law are quasi-judicial, if not judicial," Stafford said of the pending case. "And these proceedings implicate important state interests in regulating the state elections process."
McCarty, a Republican, faces a possible $450,000 in state sanctions because of her leadership of a group that raised money to oust Florida Supreme Court justices who sided with Democrat Al Gore's demand for a hand recount of votes during the 2000 presidential election.
Texas: "I'm ready to walk"
Pessimism is growing among the Republicans that they will be able to pass the re-redistricting plan in this sepcial session, according to the San Antonio Express. The Democrats are talking about a boycott of a 2nd special session, according to the Dallas Morning News:
Democratic senators said Thursday that they are poised to boycott further proceedings on congressional redistricting and that they have the numbers to paralyze the Senate if Gov. Rick Perry calls a second special session next week."I'm ready to walk," said Sen. John Whitmire, D-Houston, the Senate's longest-serving member.
"For me, there is no benefit to staying for another special session," said Sen. Mario Gallegos, D-Houston. "I can tell you as far as breaking a quorum, 11 will break it."
Florida Will Allow Many Ex-Felons to Vote
AP reports:
Florida agreed to help restore voting rights to nearly 125,000 convicted felons who didn't get enough advice on how to regain their rights when they walked free, officials said Thursday. The agreement by the Department of Corrections will settle a case brought by civil rights groups. Leon County Circuit Court Judge P. Kevin Davey is expected to sign it by Friday.About 94,000 of the felons will have to apply for a clemency hearing before the governor and Cabinet, but the rest can skip the hearing and will likely be able to vote within a year, said Randy Berg, lawyer for the Florida Justice Institute (search), one of the groups bringing the suit.
Here is the press release issued by ACLU when the suit was filed.
Update: Here is the Miami Herald story just out.
July 24, 2003
Texas, oh, Texas
Charles Kuffner has a long post at Political State Report: straight from the trenches on the strategy of both parties in Texas. Well worth a read.
Soft money still OK for conventions
AP reports:
Federal election regulators decided Thursday to allow corporations and unions to continue making large contributions to finance the two political parties' presidential nominating conventions despite a new law outlawing such donations in elections.The Federal Election Commission unanimously ruled that the law passed by Congress last year did not apply to fund raising by the local committees in the host cities that help the parties stage the nominating conventions.
Colorado Re-redistricting
The Daily Sentinel has this report on the brief filed by the Colorado Secretary of State:
"When the secretary of state was sued in the (congressional redistricting) case, the role of the attorney general was to analyze and advise his client as to the different legal strategies available ... Instead, he turned around and brought his own suit against her," attorney Richard Coffman wrote Wednesday, which was the final brief filed before oral arguments in the state Supreme Court case.
Pryor restraint (2)
Nina Totenberg's report on the Pryor Hearing includes (beginning about 4:15 minutes into the audio) some discussion of Pryor's response on the fund raising for RAGA. The Fulton County Daily Report also mentions that subject, although the supposed "newspapers of record," the NY Times and the Washington Post, do not.
July 23, 2003
Florida Senate Race Already Drawing Complaints
AP reports:
U.S. Rep. Peter Deutsch filed a complaint Wednesday with the Federal Election Commission alleging that Democratic rival Alex Penelas illegally coerced donations from a South Florida health care company in their U.S. Senate race.The complaint by Deutsch, D-Pembroke Pines, accuses the Miami-Dade County mayor of receiving at least $49,000 in illegal contributions from 41 employees and their spouses of CarePlus Medical Centers Inc. Both are competing for the seat of Sen. Bob Graham, who is running for president.
The Miami Herald has more details:
Miami-Dade Mayor Alex Penelas, whose campaign pledged to reject contributions for his U.S. Senate campaign resulting from a controversial e-mail appeal sent to employees of a South Florida healthcare firm, took tens of thousands of dollars from people associated with the company.A Herald analysis of campaign finance records shows that employees, relatives and business associates of Michael Fernandez, owner and chief executive officer of CarePlus Medical Centers Inc., donated at least $68,000 to Penelas' campaign -- all connected to the same day in May that Fernandez hosted a fundraiser at his home.
Are Indian Tribes Covered by State Campaign Laws
The AP reports this evening:
The [California] Supreme Court on Wednesday ordered an appeals court to consider whether Indian tribes must abide by state campaign finance laws....
The [Fair Political Practices Commission] alleged the [Agua Caliente] tribe was late in disclosing more than $8 million in donations to candidates and causes between 1998 and 2002. The tribe posts campaign finance reports on its Web site and contends it discloses its political activity just not according to the state's rules.
It argued its status as a sovereign nation means it was not bound by the state's campaign rules and the commission can't sue to enforce them.
Lack of Security in Electronic Voting
Four computer science professors at Johns Hopkins University and Rice University have published a paper concerning the Diebold software used in many Direct Recording Electronic voting systems. This is from the abstract of the paper:
Our analysis shows that this voting system is far below even the most minimal security standards applicable in other contexts. We highlight several issues including unauthorized privilege escalation, incorrect use of cryptography, vulnerabilities to network threats, and poor software development processes. For example, common voters, without any insider privileges, can cast unlimited votes without being detected by any mechanisms within the voting terminal. Furthermore, we show that even the most serious of our outsider attacks could have been discovered without the source code. In the face of such attacks, the usual worries about insider threats are not the only concerns; outsiders can do the damage. That said, we demonstrate that the insider threat is also quite considerable. We conclude that, as a society, we must carefully consider the risks inherent in electronic voting, as it places our very democracy at risk.
You can see the whole paper here. Thanks to David Jefferson for the link.
Texas re-redistricting approved by Senate committee
The Senate Jurisprudence Committee has approved (on a party-line vote) a Republican redistricting plan proposed by the GOP, according to the Dallas Morning News:
A Senate panel approved an aggressive Republican redistricting plan Wednesday that would oust at least five and as many as seven incumbent Democratic congressmen.While considered dead for this special session, the proposal is likely to be the road map GOP senators follow – at least in broad outline – in a second redistricting session, expected to be called next week.
Democrats' expert believes the Republican plans will not pass muster with the US Justice Department, while a Republican expert does, according to the San Antonio Express:
A pair of redistricting experts gave conflicting accounts Tuesday about how minorities would be impacted by two maps slated for a Senate committee vote today."When you 'plus-up' or stuff more African American or Hispanic voters into a district that is already a minority opportunity district, you are all but inviting a presumption of an unconstitutional" action, said Gerald Hebert.
Hebert is a Georgetown University law professor and former acting chief of the Justice Department's Voting Rights section.
Hebert, a consultant for the national Democratic Party, told members of the Senate Jurisprudence Committee that maps drawn by Sen. Todd Staples, R-Palestine, cram minorities in at least six congressional districts.
"There's no way either one of those maps will pass Justice (Department) review," he said outside the hearing.
But Ronald Keith Gaddie, a University of Oklahoma political science professor and consultant to Republican Attorney General Greg Abbott, said either maps is legally defensible to a court challenge.
Gaddie has written six books on politics and testified as an expert witness in six state redistricting lawsuits.
"My job here is to analyze the various data to determine if there is a retrogression of minority voting districts, and to talk about the legal threat (if there is one)," he told committee members.
The Washington Post reports on the genesis of the scheme to re-redistrict Texas:
In early 2001, Rep. Tom DeLay (R-Tex.) was driving around Austin with his top political aide, Jim Ellis, brainstorming about how to create more Republican-leaning U.S. House districts in Texas. State legislators were redrawing congressional borders to reflect the latest Census figures, and the Democrats who controlled the state House were preventing GOP senators and the governor from approving a plan that would give Republicans maximum advantage.The two men devised a bold idea: create a political action committee whose sole purpose was to give Republicans control of the state House in the 2002 elections. Then, they surmised, the legislature could draw the districts again in 2003, this time ensuring more GOP seats in Congress.
Pryor restraint
Despite calls by Democrats to continue an investigation into Bill Pryor's fundraising for the Republican Attorneys General Association, the Senate Judiciary Committee approved Pryor on a party line vote. See the
article in the Washington Post.
California redistricting case
A California Superior Court judge has dismissed three petitions to invalidate the legislative and congressional redistricting on state constitutional grounds -- contiguity, respect for subdivision boundaries, and reasonable equality of population. The case is Andal v. Davis. Thanks to Lance Olson, one of the counsel for the Senate and Congressional delegation for the PDF.
July 21, 2003
Bush gets the big bucks
Reform Voter Project has released a study:
A state-by-state analysis of President George W. Bush’s campaign contributions as filed with the Federal Elections Commission (FEC) finds that in 48 out of the 50 states, plus the District of Columbia, the majority of funds collected came from donors of $2,000, and that in two-thirds (32) of the states, $2,000 contributions comprised more than 70 percent of the itemized contributions the president collected. In the top ten contributing states, the proportion of contributions from $2,000 donors was 77% or higher.
July 19, 2003
The Money-Vote Connection
I know you will be shocked by this AP Wire story:
You don't need a scorecard to figure out how lawmakers vote on major issues. You just need to tabulate their campaign donations.
Texas Lt. Gov. might break precedent
Meanwhile, back in Texas, Lt. Gov. Dewhurst is telling the dissidents in the Senate they had better deal now or get rolled later. Dave McNeely
explains how it can be done.
Another Republican map surfaced late in the week. See the stories in the San Antonio Express, Houston Chronicle, the Austin American Statesman, and the Dallas Morning News.
July 18, 2003
The Pryor-Condon connection
the wyeth wire has a posting about the connection between RAGA and South Carolina AG Charles Condon's decision to drop an antitrust suit against Microsoft shortly after the SC Republican Party received a contribution from Microsoft.
What was Pryor hiding?
Stories on the controversy about Bill Pyror's nomination to the 11th Circuit appear in the Washington Post, the New York Times, and the Birmingham News.
The Democrats are saying that Pryor lied to them when he said he did not remember soliciting contributions for the Republican Attorneys General Association (RAGA) from Alabama companies. The Republicans say (to quote John Cornyn), ''elected officials can and do raise money . . . It's perfectly legal.''
In his confirmation hearing, Pryor answered most questions with admirable candor -- except when it came to RAGA. As I have discussed before, RAGA was soliciting contributions from companies for the use in various state Attorney General campaigns. On this subject, Pryor's answers were something like, "I don't remember," "I don't have the records," "you'll have to ask the Republican committee for the records." Why the reticence?
I want to suggest an answer that fits the facts. The documents the Democrats have show that Pryor made calls for RAGA in September 1999 to some Alabama-based companies. Alabama law (Ala. Code 17-22A-7(b)(2)) prohibits legislative and state-wide elected officials are prohibited from raising funds for their own campaigns more than a year before the primary or general election. In September 1999, Pryor's next election was the primary in May 2002. To see this section, go the Alabama Code online and drill down to the proper section.
Of course, Pryor was not fundraising for his own campaign at the time. But the Attorney General of Alabama (Bill Pryor) issued an opinion (2001-176)to a legislator about whether he could solicit for a PAC during the prohibited period. The answer was as follows:
A member of the Legislature who participates in the establishment and operation of a political action committee is not prohibited by the FCPA from soliciting contributions on behalf of the committee. The legislator may receive contributions from this committee if the legislator does not have the sole authority to make contributions or expenditures on behalf of the committee to his own campaign and does not participate in the decision to make these contributions.
Applying that rule to Pryor's conduct, if he participated in the decisions of RAGA about its contributions, he was prohibited from this fundraising. And Pryor was on the the executive committee of RAGA. If the executive committee does not make those decisions, who does?
My hypothesis is that Bill Pryor was close-mouthed about his fundraising for RAGA because it violated state law and his own office's interpretation of that law. Documents I have not seen and skillful cross-examination of Pryor and others may prove the hypothesis.
UPDATE: An earlier AG opionion, issued when (now-US Senator) Jeff Sessions was AG and Pryor was Deputy AG, is even clearer that RAGA's and Pryor's activities (as I understand them) would be a violation of state law. The opinion is number 97-54 and states:
A member of the Legislature who maintains a principal campaign committee may participate in the establishment and operation of a separate and distinct political committee for the purpose of receiving contributions and making expenditures to other members of the Legislature and nonmembers who are candidates for election to the Legislature, if the political committee's organizational document prohibits contributions to or expenditures on behalf of the member of the Legislature participating in such establishment and operation.
Don't be confused by the reference to a "member of the Legislature." The opinion was requested by a legislator and the question was phrased that way, but the law applies to all elected officials and candidates.
Pryor cannot be prosecuted under Alabama law because the two-year statute of limitations has expired, Ala Code 17-22A-22, but it would still look bad for a person nominated for judge to have violated the state law, wouldn't it?
July 17, 2003
Pryor nomination
Bill Pryor's fundraising for the Republican Attorneys General Association has become the issue on which the Democrats on the Judiciary Committee are centering their attention, according to the AP. I had missed the earlier story in the Mobile Register to which the AP refers. The Washington Post and the New York Times have stories. Finally, here is yesterday's story by Nina Totenberg on All Things Considered.
July 16, 2003
NC re-re-redistricting
The Fayetteville Observer editorializes that redistricting in North Carolina cannot be consistent with the state constitution's command, "No county shall be divided," and the Voting Rights Act. The conclusion:
Two little parts of our state constitution must be revised - an even dozen words per chamber. Until that anachronism is disposed of, no one's remap is safe because no plan that complies with the state's no-splits provision can comply with the Voting Rights Act. Anyone can challenge any remap, with a reasonable expectation of seeing it overturned - and, perhaps, of seeing yet another map drawn by a judge despite the state constitution's unambiguous declaration that redistricting is the responsibility of House and Senate.
Colorado re-redistricting
The Bennan Center has filed an amicus brief in Salazar v. Davidson, the action in the Colorado Supreme Court on the validity of the recent re-redistricting of congressional districts. The brief's introduction begins:
The extent to which partisan advantage can permissibly serve as one of several goals in post-census redistricting is among the most difficult questions in election law, one that the Supreme Court will wrestle with once again this coming Term. See Vieth v. Jubelirer, 71 U.S.L.W. 3709, 3793, 3798 (U.S. June 27, 2003) (No. 02-1580) (noting probable jurisdiction).This case does not present that question. Instead, it raises the far simpler question of whether a legislature can alter election rules midstream for the sole purpose of partisan advantage and justify the discrimination against disfavored voters by labeling it “redistricting.”
Attorney General Ken Salazar urged the Colorado Supreme Court to act quickly on the case, set for oral argument on 8 September. Salazar said speed would aid next year's candidates. See the AP story here.
Democratic lawmakers filed a brief on Tuesday arguing that the process of adoption was ''closed, starkly brief, uninformed and unconstitutional,'' and noting that the new plan "decreases Hispanic voters in the 7th Congressional District by 5 percent and carves up heavily Democratic Pueblo into two districts," according to the AP.
DeLay 'splains; Gonzales sues
AP reports "DeLay denies misuse of FAA in redistricting dispute." However, according to the Houston Chronicle,
"I think we mishandled it," Transportation Department Inspector General Kenneth Mead said Tuesday. But he said he didn't think DeLay's request was inappropriate. "I'm not going to make a judgment about Mr. DeLay. The issue is, how should the FAA respond to these requests."
Meanwhile, back in Washington, The Hill reports,
Rep. Charlie Gonzalez has turned to the courts in his effort to force the Department of Justice to detail its possible role in tracking Democratic Texas state legislators who fled the state in May.Gonzalez (D-Texas), a former state judge, and Diana Salgado, an official with the state Democratic Party, filed the suit July 8 under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA).
The Glitches will get you if you don't watch out
AP reports
A Republican state senator whose congressional redistricting proposal h