Digital Commons Network^™

Voter Ignorance And Deliberative Democracy, Chad Flanders

All Faculty Scholarship

American voters are shockingly ignorant about politics. Not only do they not know basic facts about the structure of American government (what the three branches are, etc.) or the views of the major political parties, they do not really know in many cases even what they believe about politics, because what they believe can be manipulated depending on how pollsters ask the questions. People may oppose welfare, for instance, but favor increasing money transfers to the poor-which is pretty much what welfare is.2 Even worse, when voters are motivated to seek out more information, and do seek out that information, …

Financing Elections And 'Appearance Of Corruption': Citizen Attitudes And Behavior In 2012, Molly J. Walker Wilson

All Faculty Scholarship

As political spending reaches new highs in the 2012 election cycle, and as the controversy surrounding wealthy donors and interest groups grows, polls demonstrate a surge of cynicism among Americans who profess a belief that the American political system is corrupt. The Supreme Court’s 2010 decision in Citizens United made possible the most recent expansion of political spending. In this case, the question was whether allowing corporations and unions to spend unlimited amounts of money on political advertising would result in corruption or the appearance of corruption. The majority on the Court determined that it would not. Many observers have …

What Is The Value Of Participation?, Chad Flanders

All Faculty Scholarship

In the days after the 2012 presidential election, the pictures became drearily familiar: long lines at polling places from Election Day; people waiting four, five, even six hours in order to vote.¹ The causes? Not enough polling booths. Not enough election workers. Voting machines that did not work, or were too old. Early voting days that were off, then on, then off again. The results? Confusion. Frustration. What might have been an inspiring picture, had it been the first election in some recently democratized country, instead turned into an embarrassment. Even Russia-a famously dysfunctional polity-got into the act. In …

More On Veils: Reply To Levitt And Mueller, Chad Flanders

All Faculty Scholarship

I thank Justin Levitt and Derek Mueller for their thoughtful replies to my article, which have helped me (at least) to understand my own position better. I also thank the Florida Law Review for giving me the opportunity to briefly respond to them. I can't (and probably couldn't) give detailed or persuasive answers to their questions; instead, I want to flag some issues that they bring up, and which deserve fuller consideration than I was able to give in my article.

Election Law Behind A Veil Of Ignorance, Chad W. Flanders

All Faculty Scholarship

Election law struggles with the question of neutrality, not only with its possibility — can election rules truly be neutral between parties?—but also with its definition. What does it mean for election laws to be ― neutral? This Article examines one form of election law neutrality, found in what it terms ― veil of ignorance rules Such rules are formed in circumstances where neither party knows which rule will benefit its candidates in future elections.

This Article considers the existence of veil of ignorance rules in two recent election law controversies: the rule that write-in ballots must be spelled correctly …

What Do We Want In A Presidential Primary? An Election Law Perspective, Chad Flanders

All Faculty Scholarship

Although the 2008 presidential primaries were in many ways a resounding success in terms of turnout, attention, and sheer excitement, many noted the pressing need for reform. States were rushing to hold their primaries sooner than ever, giving rise to “Super-Duper Tuesday,” where twenty-four states had their primaries on the same day. The Democratic nominee at one point looked like it might be decided by the votes of so-called “Superdelegates” - party regulars beholden to no one. As the Democratic nomination contest wore on, Rush Limbaugh, in “Operation Chaos,” encouraged his “dittoheads” to raid the party primaries of the Democrats, …

Spelling Murkowski: The Next Act - A Reply To Fishkin And Levitt, Chad Flanders

All Faculty Scholarship

Both Joey Fishkin’s and Justin Levitt’s responses to my article, “How Do You Spell MURKOWSKI?” deal thoughtfully with the deeper questions raised by the Murkowski litigation. They both wonder, in various ways, what the right way to think about voter assistance should be. But they approach the issue from very different angles. Fishkin focuses on the state’s obligation to assist voters: to what extent, and in what ways, is the state obligated to help voters vote? Levitt approaches the question of voter assistance from nearly the opposite angle: what responsibilities do voters have in making sure that their vote counts, …

How Do You Spell M-U-R-K-O-W-S-K-I? Part I: The Question Of Assistance To The Voter, Chad Flanders

All Faculty Scholarship

The 2010 race for the Alaska Senate now seems to be over. After losing in the Republican Party Primary to Tea Party-backed candidate Joe Miller, Senator Lisa Murkowski staged a write-in candidacy and, bucking both U.S. and Alaska history, won the general election. Although much attention has been paid to Miller’s post-election challenges to Murkowski write-in ballots, a major election law question was at issue prior to the election: to what extent can poll workers assist voters who need help in voting for a write-in candidate?

After Murkowski declared her write-in candidacy, the Alaska Division of Elections distributed a list …

Too Much Of A Good Thing: Campaign Speech After Citizens United, Molly J. Walker Wilson

All Faculty Scholarship

In January 2010, the Supreme Court in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission overturned Austin v. Michigan Chamber of Commerce and the portion of McConnell v. Federal Election Commission that restricted independent corporate expenditures, as codified in section 203 of the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act. Specifically, Citizens United invalidated laws forbidding corporations and unions from using general treasury funds for “electioneering communication,” political advocacy transmitted by broadcast, cable, or satellite communication in the period leading up to a federal election. The effect of Citizens United was to protect the right of corporations, no less than individual American citizens, to fund …

Behavioral Decision Theory And Implications For The Supreme Court’S Campaign Finance Jurisprudence, Molly J. Walker Wilson

All Faculty Scholarship

America stands at a moment in history when advances in the understanding of human decision-making are increasing the strategic efficacy of political strategy. As campaign spending for the presidential race reaches hundreds of millions of dollars, the potential for harnessing the power of psychological tactics becomes considerable. Meanwhile, the Supreme Court has characterized campaign money as “speech” and has required evidence of corruption or the appearance of corruption in order to uphold restrictions on campaign expenditures. Ultimately, the Court has rejected virtually all restrictions on campaign spending on the ground that expenditures, unlike contributions, do not contribute to corruption or …

How To Think About Voter Fraud (And Why), Chad Flanders

All Faculty Scholarship

In recent months, debates over voter fraud have consumed state legislatures and blogs, courts and election commissions. The prevailing way of framing that debate has been in terms of numbers and statistics: how much voter fraud is there, and does the amount of voter fraud justify new measures to prevent it? In my essay, I argue for a shift away from statistical analysis and towards normative discourse. Only if we understand why (and whether) voter fraud is bad will we be able to decisively settle debates about what should be done about it, if anything.

The first part of my …

Bush V. Gore And The Uses Of 'Limiting', Chad Flanders

All Faculty Scholarship

My comment looks at the debate in the 6th Circuit case Stewart v. Blackwell in light of the history of the use of "limiting language" by the Supreme Court. I catalog the Court's past uses of limiting language, and distinguish between the Court's several uses of limiting language. Against those who defend the limiting language of Bush v. Gore as simply an example of innocuous minimalism, I report my findings that "limiting" is always used by the Court to nullify a principle that decided a previous case. Additionally, the Court has never, prior to Bush, used limiting language to limit …

Deliberative Dilemmas: A Critique Of Deliberation Day From The Perspective Of Election Law, Chad Flanders

All Faculty Scholarship

My paper deals with two subject areas - deliberative democracy theory and election law - that have had surprisingly little contact with another. My paper tries to remedy this lacuna by looking at how the two fields intersect and can contribute to the understanding of one another. In particular, I look in detail at a particularly prominent proposal by two political theorists, Bruce Ackerman and James Fishkin's Deliberation Day, and how the aims of that proposal might be frustrated by the present structure of American election law. I argue that because they fail to take into account certain structural features …