OSU Navigation Bar

Election Law @ Moritz Home Page

Election Law @ Moritz

Election Law @ Moritz


HAVA @ 10 - Presenters

Register | Presenters | Conference Schedule | Publications/Documents

Jon Husted
Ohio Secretary of State

Jon Husted will deliver the keynote address at the conference. He is Ohio's 53rd secretary of state. He was elected to the Ohio Legislature in 2000 and served as Speaker of the Ohio House of Representatives from 2005 to 2008. In 2008, Husted was elected to the Ohio Senate, where he was an advocate for election, campaign finance, and redistricting reform. He was elected secretary of state in 2010. Husted attended the University of Dayton, where he received his bachelor's and master's degrees. Husted worked for the Montgomery County Commissioners and was vice president of business and economic development for the Dayton Area Chamber of Commerce.

Doug Chapin
Director of Program for Excellence in Election Administration, University of Minnesota Humphrey School of Public Affairs

Doug Chapin will discuss how HAVA changed the profession of election administration by introducing new requirements and what skills are (and will be) necessary to carry out those requirements now that the much of the infrastructure built by HAVA is essentially gone. He is the director of the Program for Excellence in Election Administration at the University of Minnesota’s Humphrey School of Public Affairs Center for the Study of Politics and Governance. Previously, Chapin served as director of Election Initiatives for the Pew Center on the States at The Pew Charitable Trusts. As an attorney in private practice, Chapin specialized in election and ethics law. He served as elections counsel to the Democrats on the U.S. Senate Rules Committee from 1997 to 2000. He holds a law degree from Georgetown University, a master of public administration degree from Harvard University’s John F. Kennedy School of Government, and an A.B. in politics from Princeton University.

Matthew Damschroder
Ohio Deputy Assistant Secretary of State, Director of Elections

Matthew Damschroder will discuss unexpected consequences (the funding boom, machine certification, second-class accessibility systems and barriers to entry), unfinished business (National Voter Registration Act, HAVA, and the provisional ballot problem), and the future of election administration. He is the deputy assistant secretary of state/Director of Elections Ohio Secretary of State. From 2003 to 2011, he served as director/deputy director of the Franklin County Board of Elections. He received a Bachelor of Science in business administration from The Ohio State University Fisher College of Business.

Donetta Davidson
Former Chair, Commissioner of the U.S. Election Assistance Commission

Donetta Davidson will discuss the U.S. Election Assistance Commission website, products the EAC provides to local and state governments, and how local governments are using these tools. She served as chair of the EAC in 2007, 2010 and 2011 and also served as vice-chair in 2008. Before joining the EAC, Davidson served as a local election official in Colorado and was the secretary of state of Colorado from 1999 until 2005. She was first appointed to the office in 1999 by Gov. Bill Owens, was subsequently elected to the office in 2000, and was re-elected to a full four-year term in 2002. In 2005, Davidson was elected president of the National Association of Secretaries of State. She also served on the EAC’S technical guidelines committee and on the Federal Election Commission's advisory panel.

Terri L. Enns
Clinical Professor of Law, The Ohio State University Moritz College of Law;
Senior Fellow, Election Law @ Moritz

Terri L. Enns , will serve as a moderator during the conference. Enns is a clinical professor of law and a senior fellow at Election Law @ Moritz at The Ohio State University Moritz College of Law. She teaches in the Legislation Clinic and Legal Analysis and Writing. Enns is the editor of the Election Law @ Moritz website and has presented many times on election law issues. Prior to coming to Moritz in 2000, she spent three years as the legal counsel for the Ohio Senate Minority Caucus. While at the statehouse, she staffed the judiciary and education committees and worked extensively on school-funding and accountability issues, juvenile criminal law, and the tobacco settlement.

Edward B. Foley
Isadore and Ida Topper Professor of Law at The Ohio State University Moritz College of Law;
Director of Election Law @ Moritz

Edward B. Foley will participate in a roundtable at the conference. He is the Isadore and Ida Topper Professor of Law and the director of Election Law @ Moritz at The Ohio State University Moritz College of Law. A national expert on election law, he teaches and writes in all areas of this field. He co-authored, with his Election Law @ Moritz colleagues, From Registration to Recounts: The Election Ecosystems of Five Midwestern States. His current research focuses on improving the processes for resolving disputed elections, and he is the reporter for the American Law Institute project on election law. He is co-authoring a book on the history of disputed elections in the U.S. and has authored many articles on disputed elections. He designed a simulated dispute of the 2008 presidential election and in an essay, explains how this experiment can aid in resolving future disputed elections. He clerked for Chief Judge Patricia M. Wald of the U.S. Court of Appeals and Justice Harry Blackmun of the Supreme Court of the United States, and has served as state solicitor in the Ohio Attorney General’s Office.

Heather Gerken
J. Skelly Wright Professor of Law, Yale Law School

Heather Gerken will participate in a roundtable at the conference. She is the J. Skelly Wright Professor of Law at Yale Law School, specializing in election law, constitutional law, and civil procedure. She is a leading expert on voting rights and election law, subjects on which she has published numerous articles, provided media commentary, and testified before Congress. Her proposal that Congress establish a “Democracy Index” – a national ranking system of state election performance – has been incorporated into several bills before Congress. The proposal is the subject of her book, The Democracy Index: Why Our Election System is Failing and How to Fix It. She clerked for Judge Stephen Reinhardt of the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals and U.S. Supreme Court Justice David Souter and has worked in private practice in Washington, D.C. She received her A.B. from Princeton University and J.D. from the University of Michigan Law School.

 

Paul Gronke
Professor of Political Science, Reed College
Paul Gronke will serve as a moderator during the conference. He is a professor of political science at Reed College and served as chair from 2001 to 2009. Gronke teaches courses on political behavior, political institutions, and social science research methods. He is co-editor of the Election Law Journal. He studies American politics and empirical political theory, with specialties in the U.S. Congress, elections and electoral behavior, and public opinion. Gronke is the founder and director of the Early Voting Information Center, where he and his team conduct research on early voting and election reform, predominantly in the United States. He is author of the book The Electorate, The Campaign, and the Office: A Unified Approach to Senate and House Elections (Michigan University Press, 2000), as well as articles in The American Journal of Political Science, The Journal of Politics, Legislative Studies Quarterly, Public Opinion Quarterly, Electoral Studies, American Politics Quarterly (now American Politics Research).

Thad Hall
Associate Professor of Political Science, University of Utah

Thad Hall will discuss voter registration and what did and didn’t happen after HAVA. He is an associate professor of political science and research fellow for the Institute of Public and International Affairs at the University of Utah. His primary research is in the area of public administration and public policy, with a focus on election administration and policy development in legislatures. He has authored or coauthored several books, including Point, Click, and Vote:  The Future of Internet Voting, Election Fraud: Detecting and Deterring Electoral Manipulation, and Electronic Elections: The Perils and Promise of Digital Democracy. He is co-writing Evaluating Elections: A Handbook of Methods and Standards and co-editing Confirming Elections: Creating Confidence and Integrity Through Election Auditing. Hall has conducted many studies on election administration and reform, including studies on Internet voting, electronic voting, election auditing, public attitudes toward various aspects of the voting process, poll worker attitudes toward the election process, and observational studies of election administration in the U.S. and abroad.

Richard L. Hasen
Chancellor’s Professor of Law and Political Science, University of California, Irvine School of Law

Richard L. Hasen will participate in a roundtable at the conference. He is the Chancellor’s Professor of Law and Political Science at the University of California, Irvine School of Law. He is a nationally recognized expert in election law and campaign finance regulation and is co-author of a leading casebook on election law. From 2001 to 2010, he served as founding co-editor of the quarterly, peer-reviewed publication, Election Law Journal. He is author of many articles on election law issues and op-eds and commentaries for national media. He writes the often-quoted Election Law Blog. He is writing The Voting Wars: From Florida 2000 to the Next Election Meltdown. He clerked for the Honorable David R. Thompson of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, and then worked as a civil appellate lawyer at the Encino, Calif. firm of Horvitz & Levy, LLP. He received a B.A. from the University of California, Berkeley, and a J.D., M.A., and Ph.D. (Political Science) from University of California, Los Angeles.

 

Steven F. Huefner
Professor of Law at The Ohio State University Moritz College of Law;
Senior Fellow at Election Law @ Moritz

Steven F. Huefner will serve as a moderator during the conference. He is a professor of law and senior fellow at Election Law @ Moritz at The Ohio State University Moritz College of Law, where he also is director of Clinical Programs and director of the Legislation Clinic. He teaches Legislation, Jurisprudence, and Legal Writing. With his Election Law @ Moritz colleagues, he co-authored, From Registration to Recounts: The Election Ecosystems of Five Midwestern States, and is the author of numerous articles. His research interests are in legislative process issues and democratic theory, including election law. He is associate reporter for The American Law Institute project on election law and previously served as the reporter for the Uniform Law Commission’s drafting committee that prepared the Uniform Military and Overseas Voters Act. He clerked for the Honorable David S. Tatel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, and for Chief Justice Christine M. Durham of the Supreme Court of Utah. He was an attorney in the Office of Senate Legal Counsel for the U.S. Senate and in private practice in Washington, D.C. He has an A.B. from Harvard College and a J.D. from Columbia Law School.

David Kimball
Associate Professor of Political Science, University of Missouri - St. Louis

David Kimball will discuss how the size of local jurisdictions is related to changes in election administration, support for HAVA, the need for innovation, partisan conflict over election administration, and the reform community. He is an associate professor of political science at the University of Missouri - St. Louis. His major publications and research projects include Helping America Vote: The Limits of Election Reform – Controversies in Electoral Democracy and Representation (co-authored with conference participant Martha Kropf), Lobbying & Policy Change: Who Wins, Who Loses, and Why, Controversies in Voting Behavior, Why Americans Split Their Tickets: Campaigns, Competition, and Divided Government, and the Advocacy and Public Policymaking project. He has presented on and authored many articles and chapters on voting technology and election administration. He received a Ph.D. from The Ohio State University and a B.A. from Brown University.

Martha Kropf
Associate Professor of Political Science, The University of North Carolina at Charlotte

Martha Kropf will discuss the impact of HAVA on ballot design. She is an associate professor of political science at The University of North Carolina at Charlotte. Her recent book is Helping America Vote: The Limits of Election Reform – Controversies in Electoral Democracy and Representation (co-authored with conference participant David Kimball). She has presented on and authored many articles and chapters on voting technology and election administration. She received a B.A. from Kansas State University and a Ph.D. from American University.

Ray Martinez III
Former Commissioner, U.S. Election Assistance Commission

Ray Martinez III will discuss the future of the EAC. He served as commissioner and vice chair of the U.S. Election Assistance Commission from 2003 to 2006. He is an attorney and owner of the Martinez Policy Group, a government relations and policy development firm. He also teaches election law as an adjunct professor at the University of Houston Law Center and at the LBJ School of Public Affairs at the University of Texas at Austin.

Charles Stewart III
Kenan Sahin Distinguished Professor of Political Science, Massachusetts Institute of Technology

Charles Stewart III will discuss the topics that largely motivated the passage of HAVA (voting technology, voter registration, and accessibility), focusing on whether elections have gotten better because of HAVA. He is the Kenan Sahin Distinguished Professor of Political Science at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, where he has taught since 1985. His research and teaching areas include congressional politics, elections, and American political development. Since 2001, Stewart has been a member of the Caltech/MIT Voting Technology Project, a leading research effort that applies scientific analysis to questions about election technology, election administration, and election reform. He is the MIT director of the project. Stewart is an established leader in the analysis of the performance of election systems and the quantitative assessment of election performance. He received his B.A. in political science from Emory University, and S.M. and Ph.D. from Stanford University.

Daniel P. Tokaji
Robert M. Duncan/Jones Day Designated Professor of Law, The Ohio State University Moritz College of Law; Senior Fellow at Election Law @ Moritz

Daniel P. Tokaji will discuss litigation under HAVA. He is the Robert M. Duncan/Jones Day Designated Professor of Law and a senior fellow at Election Law @ Moritz at The Ohio State University Moritz College of Law. He is co-editor of the Election Law Journal and a national expert on HAVA and election law. He co-authored, with his Election Law @ Moritzcolleagues, From Registration to Recounts: the Election Ecosystems of Five Midwestern States. He has written many articles and provided frequent media commentary on election law issues. He served as law clerk for Judge Stephen Reinhardt of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit and was an attorney for the American Civil Liberties Union Foundation of Southern California. He has a B.A. from Harvard University and a J.D. from Yale Law School.

Commentary

David  Stebenne

Reshaping the Rules for Voting: How Two Different Eras Compare

David Stebenne

Fifty years ago, an eight – year period of innovation in voting rules began with ratification of the 24th Amendment to the Constitution. Formally adopted on January 23, 1964, it put an end to the practice (in several of the Southern and Border States) of requiring payment in order to vote in federal elections. Two years later, a U.S. Supreme Court ruling known as Harper v. Virginia Board of Elections interpreted the Constitution’s Equal Protection Clause so as to apply the ban to state elections as well. In 1965, Congress passed and President Lyndon Johnson signed into law a Civil Rights Act known less formally as the Voting Rights Act. It established federal registrars in Southern states where local registrars had long denied the right to vote to black residents. That measure was followed by Congress’s passage and the states’ ratification of the 26th Amendment to the Constitution. This amendment prohibited denying the right to vote to citizens who had reached age eighteen. Part of a trend to establish that age as the mark of adulthood, rather than the older standard of twenty-one years, the 26th Amendment was formally adopted on June 30, 1971. And, of course, during that same eight – year time period, the U.S. Supreme Court handed down landmark reapportionment rulings that required state legislative bodies to reapportion themselves (and U.S. House districts) promptly after each federal census, and to do so in accordance with the principle of one person, one vote. By the end of 1972, that reapportionment process was complete, and had produced some far reaching changes for voters at the ballot box. For example, in Maryland, where I mostly grew up, representation of the rural and conservative Eastern Shore counties greatly diminished in the Maryland General Assembly (and in Maryland’s U.S. House delegation), while that of the Baltimore metropolitan area greatly increased.

From the vantage point of more than four decades later, what all of those changes meant for the American electorate has become clear. The impact of the poll tax ban and introduction of federal registrars into the South substantially increased the number of black women voters. (The rise in felony disfranchisement among black men nationally over the past forty years meant that gains among black men voting in the South were offset by losses among black men voting elsewhere.) Voters between the ages of eighteen and twenty seldom turned out in large numbers, and so giving them the right to vote didn’t change much in terms of who voted with any regularity. Thus, the one major gain in terms of participation came among black women. At the same time, the propensity of people in the middle three fifths of the income distribution living outside the South to vote fell substantially over those forty years, among whites especially, a shift that was most pronounced from 1972 to 1996. (The decline of labor unions was the single most important reason for that.)

Those changes in who voted regularly had significant implications for national politics. Black women tend to be among the most strongly liberal voters in the country, in the contemporary sense of that word. Most self – described moderates are middle class white people. Substantially more voting by black women has tended to push the more liberal of the two major parties leftward, while substantially less participation by middle class whites has tended to push both major parties away from the moderate middle.

With this history in mind, consider the new eight – year period of reshaping voting rules that began around 2006 and has continued through the present. The major changes have been in the direction of making voting somewhat harder to do, thanks to new requirements to provide identification, restrict early voting, eliminating same – day registration, and barring votes cast in the wrong precinct from being counted at all, to give only four examples. North Carolina has recently been a leader in that regard, but those same kinds of changes have played out in many other states as well. Those changes in voting rules appear likely to reduce voter participation by the one group that gained a lot from the changes of the earlier era, i.e., black women, and the poorer of them especially. (Felony disfranchisement continues to keep voting by black men low irrespective of these changes in voting laws.) At the same time, interest in voting among middle class whites has increased substantially over what it was in the 1970’s, ‘80’s, and ‘90’s. They appear much better able to navigate the current system of voting requirements because middle class whites are significantly more likely to have the forms of identification, flexible schedules, literacy skills and familiarity with local governance needed to do so.

What this suggests is that whatever the intent of recent changes in voting rules, one of its most important consequences will be to strengthen the political power of the center, by discouraging voting somewhat among black women (and the majority among them with low incomes especially), who tend to be strongly liberal, while voting by middle class whites, who tend to be moderate, increases. Strengthening the center, in and of itself, is not so troubling in a country that seems excessively polarized. What is troubling is a way of revitalizing the center that follows, however unintentionally, from reducing access to voting by eligible citizens.  

more commentary...

In the News

Daniel P. Tokaji

Wasserman Schultz says state's ID law struck down by Supreme Court

Professor Dan Tokaji was quoted in a Politifact article on judicial rulings in Wisconsin and Texas on voter identification laws. Several Democratic candidates labeled the decision as "striking down" the laws, something Politifact called into question.

"It’s not accurate to say it was ‘struck down,’ but it’s understandable" given the New York Times headline and other media coverage, said Daniel P. Tokaji, an Ohio State University law professor and expert on election law.

more EL@M in the news...

Info & Analysis

Sixth Circuit Finds Lack of Standing in Ohio Jailed Absentee Voters Case

In a 2-1 opinion issued Friday, a three-judge panel of the Sixth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals determined that a voter outreach organization did not have standing to sue on behalf of jailed absentee voters. The case is Fair Elections Ohio v. Husted.

more info & analysis...