---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Sat, 4 Nov 2000 01:23:28 -0500 (EST) From: Matthew J. Countryman <mcountry@umich.edu> To: hist.fac@umich.edu, historians@umich.edu Cc: AC.Brown.Bags <ac.brown.bags@umich.edu>, caas.fac@umich.edu Subject: website update (fwd) I recently wrote about a project some friends and I started to enable progressive votes to vote strategically by swaping Gore votes in Michigam a swing state, for Nader votes in states certain to go for Bush or Gore. As you may know, there has been a fair amount of controversy of the legality of such voter swaps. Our website, www.nadergore.org, was shut down briefly today by order of the New York State Board of Elections, which made the argument that we were indirectly trading votes for campaign dollars since our goal was to win federal matching funds for the Green Party in the 2004 election. We were able to convince the board to allow us to reestablish the site but only by agreeing to stop matching New York voters. We are, however, continuing to accept Michigan participants-- in fact we have quotes from a spokesperson from the Michigan Secretary of State's office declaring the site fully legal. The U.S. Department of Justice has also stated that vote-exchange plans such as this one are completely legal. Thus, we desperately need to recruit Gore supporters from blowout states other than New York so that we find matches for the hundreds of Michiganders who have already signaled their desire to participate in the vote swap. If you live in one of the following states and would be willing to switch your vote from Gore to Nader, please check out our website. Or if you know of any Gore supporters in one of those states would be willing to vote for Nader in return for Nader supporter switching to Gore in Michigan, please pass the word. The states are: AL, AK, AZ, CT, DC, HI, ID, KS, KY, LA, MD, MA, MS, MT, NE, ND, OK, RI, SC, SD, TX, UT, VT, WY. The website will explain how you can be matched with a Michigan voter. We will give you the Michigan voter's email address and phone number so you can directly correspond with the person to be assured that s/he will change her/his vote. This innovative plan has received considerable media attention in Michigan and we anticipate recruiting over 1000 Michigan Nader supporter willing to exchange votes. We need your help to attract a similar number of Gore supporters in blowout states. We don't want to wake up on November 8th with the same sinking feeling in our stomachs that we had the day after Reagan was elected in 1980! Thanks. Matthew I have included a FAQ written by the Legal Director of the Michigan discussing the legal issues inherent in vote swapping IS THIS LEGAL? We have researched the issue and we strongly believe that the program (1) does not violate any election laws and (2) is protected by the First Amendment. This is a voluntary voter exchange project. No one is being forced or threatened to participate. Additionally, no "valuable consideration" is being given or promised by anyone. The Michigan Secretary of State's office has stated that nadergore.org does not violate Michigan law. "Our election law prohibits the buying or selling of votes, " said Elizabeth Boyd of the Michigan Secretary of State's office. "It does not regulate informal agreements of who the voter will vote for." Boyd said with sites like nadergore.org, "people aren't exchanging anything of value and are just persuading voters to vote a certain way." See 11/2/00 Oakland Press article Similarly, a spokesperson at the U.S. Justice Department, which investigates potential instances of voter fraud, has said that vote-exchange web sites are legal because they "serve as a clearing house. There is no pecuniary exchange, and it is an agreement amongst private parties, no legal violation there in terms of violation fraud. It definitely is an innovative campaign technique, to say the least." See MSNBC article of 10/27.) According to Chris Watney of the Justice Department, such vote trades are kosher as far as the law is concerned. "In general, it's a crime to promise voters anything of value if they vote a certain way," she said. "So this system, where no money is exchanged, is OK." See article "Vote Trade: The Democratic Way" posted at www.wired.com, posted 2:00 a.m. Oct. 31, 2000 PST. Unfortunately, the California Secretary of State and the New York Board of Elections have attempted to prevent voters in California and New York from participating in voter exchanges. On October 30, the California Secretary of State of California shut down two of our sister sites based in California, voteswap2000.com and votechange2000.com, asserting that the web sites violated California law. On November 2, the ACLU of Southern California and San Diego and Imperial Counties, with the help of renowned Harvard Law Professor Lawrence Tribe, filed suit against the California Secretary of State claiming that he was violating the First Amendment. See press release with link to the ACLU complaint and brief. The case is pending. Although New York has an election law that is similar to the Michigan law and federal law, and despite the Justice Department and the Michigan Secretary of State's opinions, the New York Board of Elections sent an email to us on the evening of November 2 claiming that our program violated New York law. Although we strongly disagree with the interpretation, we have agreed to stop accepting requests of New York voters to be matched. Instead we will match Michigan Nader voters with voters from other "blowout" states. In our view, the New York state and California interpretations of the law would lead to absurd results. Under their interpretation of the law, all of the following behavior would be made criminal: ^U Two spouses discuss their vote, realize they disagree on every important issue, and agree that, since they're canceling one another out, neither will vote. ^U Two friendly legislators who disagree with one another's positions arrange not to vote on two separate occasions, when one, then the other, is absent, thus canceling out the effect of their absences on the final decisions made. ^U A politician such as Governor George Bush or Vice President Al Gore offers a monetary inducement in the form of a tax cut to a voter. ^U A politician, during tough economic times, promises "a chicken in every pot" if voters cast their vote for him. ^U A political columnist urges voters to do exactly what the web sites in question urge them to do. ^U One politician agrees to vote for a rival's bill with which she disagrees in exchange for the rival voting in favor of a different bill that she sponsored. *************************************************************************** Matthew J. Countryman Assistant Professor of History and American Culture 1029 Tisch Hall 1003 University of Michigan Ann Arbor, MI 48109 734 647-2434
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : 11/04/00 EST