Election Law

Carolina Academic PressLaw Casebook Series

Advisory Board

¶

Gary J. Simson, ChairmanCornell Law School

Raj K. BhalaUniversity of Kansas School of Law

John C. Coffee, Jr.Columbia University School of Law

Randall CoyneUniversity of Oklahoma Law Center

John S. DzienkowskiUniversity of Texas School of Law

Paul FinkelmanUniversity of Tulsa College of Law

Robert M. JarvisShepard Broad Law Center

Nova Southeastern University

Vincent R. JohnsonSt. Mary’s University School of Law

Michael A. OlivasUniversity of Houston Law Center

Kenneth PortWilliam Mitchell College of Law

Michael P. ScharfCase Western Reserve University Law School

Peter M. ShaneH. J. Heinz III School of Public Policy and Management

Carnegie Mellon University

Emily L. SherwinUniversity of San Diego School of Law

John F. Sutton, Jr.Emeritus, University of Texas School of Law

David B. WexlerUniversity of Arizona College of Law

Election Law

Cases and Materials

Third Edition

Daniel Hays LowensteinProfessor of Law

University of California, Los AngelesSchool of Law

Richard L. HasenProfessor of Law and William M. Rains Fellow

Loyola Law School,Los Angeles, California

Carolina Academic PressDurham, North Carolina

Copyright © 2004Daniel Hays Lowenstein and Richard L. HasenAll Rights Reserved

ISBN 1-59460-081-3LCCN 2004110813

Carolina Academic Press700 Kent StreetDurham, North Carolina 27701Telephone (919) 489-7486Fax (919) 493-5668www.cap-press.com

Printed in the United States of America

ForSharonAaron

Nathan— D.H.L.

ForLori

DeborahShanaJared

— R.H.

To the memory ofOur friend and colleague,

Gary Schwartz— D.H.L. and R.H.

Summary of Contents

Chapter 1 Introductory Readings 3I. Factions and the Public Interest 3II. Citizens and Representatives 11III. Pluralism and Progressivism 15IV. Electoral Process and Democracy 26

Chapter 2 The Right to Vote and Its Exercise 29I. The Right to Vote 30II. Voter Turnout 50III. Voting Technology 69

Chapter 3 Voting and Representation 71I. Voting and Interest Representation 72II. The Right to an Equally Weighted Vote 80III. Equal Protection and the Counting of Votes 116

Chapter 4 Districting Criteria 141

Chapter 5 Minority Vote Dilution 153I. Beyond the Right to Cast a Ballot 153II. Applying Section 5 159III. Applying Section 2 187

Chapter 6 Racial Gerrymandering 245

Chapter 7 Partisan Gerrymandering 317I. Defining and Identifying Gerrymanders 317II. Gerrymandering and the Constitution 326

Chapter 8 Ballot Propositions 361I. Pros and Cons 362II. Content Restrictions 383III. Judicial Review 419IV. Financing Qualification Drives 430

Chapter 9 Major Political Parties 439I. The Party and the Political System 440II. Obligations of Parties under the Constitution 460III. Associational Rights of Parties 472IV. Parties and Patronage 505

vii

Chapter 10 Third Parties and Independent Candidates 533I. Ballot Access 536II. Minor Parties, Public Benefits, and Laws Favoring the Two-Party System 548

Chapter 11 Campaigns 581I. Regulating Campaign Speech 582II. The Intersection of Communications Law and Election Law 595

Chapter 12 Incumbency 605I. The Incumbency Advantage 606II. Perquisites 629III. Legislative Term Limits 647

Chapter 13 Bribery 663I. Bribery of Candidates 664II. The Elements of Bribery 672

Chapter 14 Introductory Readings on Campaign Finance 717I. Empirical Considerations in Campaign Finance 719II. Theoretical Justifications for Campaign Finance Regulation 741

Chapter 15 The Buckley Framework 761

Chapter 16 After Buckley: Who May Be Regulated, and for What Reasons? 797I. Regulating Ballot Measure Campaigns 797II. Targeted Regulations: Limiting the Campaign Finance Activities of

Corporations, Labor Unions, and Others 820

Chapter 17 The New Deference 861I. Revisiting the Constitutionality of Contribution Limits 861II. Regulating Soft Money and Issue Advocacy 892

Chapter 18 Public Financing 957I. Public Financing: Voluntary or Coercive? 960II. Existing Public Financing Systems 973III. Proposals for Reform 981

Chapter 19 Campaign Finance Disclosure 989

viii SUMMARY OF CONTENTS

Contents

Chapter 1 Introductory Readings 3I. Factions and the Public Interest 3

James Madison, The Federalist Papers, No. 10 4II. Citizens and Representatives 11

Edmund Burke, Speech to the Electors of Bristol 11III. Pluralism and Progressivism 15

Richard J. Ellis, Pluralism 15IV. Electoral Process and Democracy 26

Irving Kristol, Reflections of a Neoconservative 26

Chapter 2 The Right to Vote and Its Exercise 29I. The Right to Vote 30

A. The Extension of the Suffrage 301. The Attainment of White Male Suffrage 302. The Fifteenth Amendment and Its Betrayal 323. Votes for Women 364. The Reenfranchisement of African Americans in the South 375. Additional Extensions of the Franchise 40

B. Should Aliens Vote? 43Skafte v. Rorex 43

II. Voter Turnout 50A. Why Don’t (Do) People Vote? 52B. Who Votes? 61C. Using Law to Increase Voter Turnout 64

III. Voting Technology 69

Chapter 3 Voting and Representation 71I. Voting and Interest Representation 72

Kramer v. Union Free School District No. 15 72II. The Right to an Equally Weighted Vote 80

Reynolds v. Sims 81Lucas v. 44th General Assembly of Colorado 83Avery v. Midland County 93Salyer Land Co. v. Tulare Lake Basin Water Storage District 101

III. Equal Protection and the Counting of Votes 116Bush v. Gore 120

ix

Chapter 4 Districting Criteria 141Legislature v. Reinecke 144

Chapter 5 Minority Vote Dilution 153I. Beyond the Right to Cast a Ballot 153

Allen v. State Board of Elections 154II. Applying Section 5 159

Beer v. United States 159Georgia v. Ashcroft 171

III. Applying Section 2 187Thornburg v. Gingles 189Holder v. Hall 237

Chapter 6 Racial Gerrymandering 245Shaw v. Reno 249Miller v. Johnson 274Easley v. Cromartie 307

Chapter 7 Partisan Gerrymandering 317I. Defining and Identifying Gerrymanders 317II. Gerrymandering and the Constitution 326

Vieth v. Jubelirer 331

Chapter 8 Ballot Propositions 361I. Pros and Cons 362

Richard J. Ellis, Democratic Delusions: The Initiative Process in America 362

II. Content Restrictions 383People’s Advocate v. Superior Court 383In re Advisory Opinion to the Attorney General 397Senate of the State of California v. Jones 403

III. Judicial Review 419Wyoming National Abortion Rights League v. Karpan 421

IV. Financing Qualification Drives 430Meyer v. Grant 430

Chapter 9 Major Political Parties 439I. The Party and the Political System 440

Morris P. Fiorina, The Decline of Collective Responsibility in American Politics 443

II. Obligations of Parties under the Constitution 460A. The Federal Interest in Regulating Party Primaries 461B. The White Primary Cases and the State Action Doctrine 462

Daniel Hays Lowenstein, Associational Rights ofMajor Political Parties: A Skeptical Inquiry 465

C. The Constitution and the Party in the Legislature 469Ammond v. McGahn 469

III. Associational Rights of Parties 472Tashjian v. Republican Party of Connecticut 479California Democratic Party v. Jones 493

x CONTENTS

IV. Parties and Patronage 505Elrod v. Burns 508Rutan v. Republican Party of Illinois 517

Chapter 10 Third Parties and Independent Candidates 533I. Ballot Access 536

Munro v. Socialist Workers Party 538II. Minor Parties, Public Benefits, and Laws Favoring the Two-Party System 548

Buckley v. Valeo 549Timmons v. Twin Cities Area New Party 558Arkansas Educational Television Commission v. Forbes 569

Chapter 11 Campaigns 581I. Regulating Campaign Speech 582

State of Washington v. 119 Vote No! Committee 582II. The Intersection of Communications Law and Election Law 595

Radio-Television News Directors Association v. FCC 595

Chapter 12 Incumbency 605I. The Incumbency Advantage 606

A. The Permanent Campaign 606Hedrick Smith, The Power Game 606

B. Incumbency and Electoral Competition 6141. Extent of the Incumbency Advantage 6152. Causes 6203. Conclusion 628

II. Perquisites 629People v. Ohrenstein 629

III. Legislative Term Limits 647Bruce E. Cain, Political Science and the Term Limits Debate 648William Kristol, Term Limitations: Breaking Up the Iron Triangle 655Nelson W. Polsby, Some Arguments Against Congressional

Term Limitations 657

Chapter 13 Bribery 663I. Bribery of Candidates 664

People v. Hochberg 664II. The Elements of Bribery 672

A. Corrupt Intent 674B. Anything of Value 675

People ex rel. Dickinson v. Van de Carr 675C. Intent to Influence 678

State v. Agan 680McCormick v. United States 690United States v. Sun-Diamond Growers of California 701

D. Official Act 710State v. Bowling 710

xi

Chapter 14 Introductory Readings on Campaign Finance 717I. Empirical Considerations in Campaign Finance 719

A. What Do Campaign Contributions Buy? 719Frank J. Sorauf, Money in American Elections 720

B. Incumbency and Campaign Finance 727Gary C. Jacobson, Enough Is Too Much: Money and

Competition in House Elections 727II. Theoretical Justifications for Campaign Finance Regulation 741

A. Preventing Corruption 741Daniel Hays Lowenstein, On Campaign Finance Reform:

The Root of All Evil Is Deeply Rooted 741B. Promoting Equality 747

Edward B. Foley, Equal-Dollars-Per-Voter: A Constitutional Principle of Campaign Finance 747

Chapter 15 The Buckley Framework 761Buckley v. Valeo 763

Chapter 16 After Buckley: Who May Be Regulated, and for What Reasons? 797I. Regulating Ballot Measure Campaigns 797

First National Bank of Boston v. Bellotti 797II. Targeted Regulations: Limiting the Campaign Finance Activities of

Corporations, Labor Unions, and Others 820Federal Election Commission v. Massachusetts Citizens for Life 828Austin v. Michigan Chamber of Commerce 840

Chapter 17 The New Deference 861I. Revisiting the Constitutionality of Contribution Limits 861

Nixon v. Shrink Missouri Government PAC 862II. Regulating Soft Money and Issue Advocacy 892

A. Soft Money 893McConnell v. Federal Election Commission 893

B. Issue Advocacy 937McConnell v. Federal Election Commission 937

Chapter 18 Public Financing 957I. Public Financing: Voluntary or Coercive? 960

Daggett v. Commission on Governmental Ethics and Election Practices 962II. Existing Public Financing Systems 973

A. In the States 973Herbert E. Alexander, Reform and Reality: The Financing of

State and Local Campaigns 973B. In Presidential Elections 978

III. Proposals for Reform 981

Chapter 19 Campaign Finance Disclosure 989Buckley v. Valeo 990McIntyre v. Ohio Elections Commission 998McConnell v. Federal Election Commission 1017

Table of Cases 1025Table of Authorities 1037Index 1065

xii

Introduction to the Third Edition

The first edition of this book was published in 1995 and the second edition in 2001.The Voting Rights Act is scheduled to come up for renewal in 2007, and we supposedthat would be a good year if a third edition was warranted by sufficient interest in thebook.

But as admirers of Scottish poetry are well aware, plans of mice and men, howeverwell-laid, are apt to go agley, and the same applies to the plans of casebook authors.In 2002, Congress passed the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act, the most importantrevision of federal election campaign law since 1974, and in December, 2003, theSupreme Court upheld most of the BCRA’s provisions in McConnell v. Federal ElectionCommission. In addition, there have been important developments in redistrictinglaw since our second edition, especially the Supreme Court’s revisiting the question ofpartisan gerrymandering in Vieth v. Jubelirer. We reluctantly concluded that to at-tempt to deal with these developments in supplements would be too cumbersome.

This third edition is not a comprehensive revision. Indeed, if it were software wewould probably call it Version 2.1. We have thoroughly revised the later chapters oncampaign finance and made significant revisions to the redistricting chapters. Someother chapters, such as the one on ballot measures, have also been overhauled. But manychapters are virtually unchanged. We still intend to prepare a more thorough revision in2007, and will welcome comments and suggestions by students, instructors, and otherswho use the book.

In the Introduction to the second edition, we mentioned two then-new resources inour field. One was the Election-Law Listserver, a forum for exchange of informationand debate on developments in election law. If you’d like to subscribe, you may do soat . The other wasthe inauguration of the quarterly Election Law Journal, published by Mary AnnLiebert, Inc., and edited by the two of us, assisted by attorney Sam Hirsch and an out-standing Editorial Advisory Board. As this is written, ELJ is completing its third vol-ume. For information, visit . Or flip through somecopies in your local law library. If the Election Law Journal is not there, the librarianwill no doubt appreciate being advised of this deficiency.

Election law has not been immune to the recent “blogging” phenomenon. One blogthat is perhaps occasionally eccentric but always well-informed is owned and operatedby Rick Hasen, who recused himself from participation in this paragraph. Hasen imag-inatively entitled his blog “Election Law.” Visit him at .

xiii

Other blogs of interest include Robert Bauer’s blog on campaign finance issues, Ed Still’s “Votelaw” blog , and Dan Tokaji’s blog on voting technology issues . These and other election law resources are linked on the right side ofthe “Election Law” blog.

Acknowledgments

To our cumulative list of acknowledgments we add the name of Richard Ellis, a polit-ical scientist who, having been good enough to write an essay on pluralism for our firstchapter, which we carry over from the second edition, for this edition has—togetherwith his publisher, the University Press of Kansas—kindly permitted us to reprint achapter from his book on initiatives. In addition we thank the students who have assistedus on the supplements since the second edition or worked directly on the third edition:Landon Bailey, Peter Bartle, Justin Bowen, Grant Davis Denny, Nicole Drey, Amber StarHealy, Michael Kovaleski, Tamara McCrossen, Matt Richardson, Eugene Rome, andJesse Saivar.

Daniel Hays LowensteinRichard L. Hasen

Los AngelesJune 2004

xiv INTRODUCTION TO THE THIRD EDITION

xv

Introduction to the Second Edition

The introduction to the first edition of this book (reprinted below) stated that“election law has not been a subject in the university.” Much has changed in the lastsix years. Election law is a course that now is taught in a large number of universi-ties, is the subject of regular symposia in law reviews and, with the controversy overthe 2000 presidential election, had its fifteen minutes as a subject of popular interestas well.

Those readers who have a strong interest in the field should note two developments.First, in January 1996, the election-law “listserver” was born. A listserver is an e-mailsystem by which any member of the group can post a message that is simultaneouslydelivered to all other members of the group. The election-law listserver is devoted todiscussion of current developments in election law as well as related research and peda-gogical issues. If you would like further information, point your web browser to .

Second, the editors of this casebook have agreed to serve as editors of a new quar-terly, peer-reviewed scholarly publication, the Election Law Journal. More informationabout the journal is available at .

Changes in the Second Edition

Although instructors who have used the first edition will find much here left intact,the book does make some significant changes. Some chapters were added simply tokeep up with issues that have arisen in the last six years, such as the explosion of softmoney and issue advocacy (see Chapter 18). Other chapters were added to expand cov-erage of the book, such as in the area of campaigns (Chapter 11) and campaign financedisclosure (Chapter 21). Of course, no book on election law in 2001 would be completewithout a discussion of the 2000 presidential election controversy. Chapter 3 and PartIII of Chapter 4 tackle issues related to the Florida recount. Finally, we have droppedsome cases and added others as appropriate. Users of the second edition who wish to

xvi INTRODUCTION TO THE SECOND EDITION

copy portions of deleted material from the first edition for classroom use have permis-sion to do so.

Acknowledgments

We appreciate the helpful comments and suggestions from a number of our colleaguesincluding Heather Gerken, Craig Holman, Antoinette Sedillo Lopez, Lance Olson,Nathaniel Persily, Melissa Saunders, Roy Schotland, David Schultz, Eugene Volokh, andAdam Winkler. The book would not have been possible without the generous support ofour deans, David Burcham of Loyola Law School and Jonathan Varat of UCLA.

We gratefully acknowledge the research assistance of Michael Sweet, who helpedwith the 1996 supplement, Susan Bang and Mark Burnstein (1997), Beth Correia andMatthew Gorman (1998), Julie Caron Remer and Timothy Tozer (1999), and GregGrossman (2000). We also thank Sofya Bendersky, Meghan Crowley, Caroline Djang,and Denise Waller for help on the second edition. The staffs of the Loyola and UCLAlaw libraries have been tremendously helpful to us as well.

We also thank Karen Mathews, Ann Palmer, Thelma Wong Terre and the faculty sup-port staffs at Loyola and UCLA for exemplary administrative support, Tim Heindl forcomputer support, and the folks at Carolina Academic Press for putting it all together.

Hasen thanks his wife Lori Klein for judicious advice, patience, love, and support,especially when preparing the book seemed like caring for an additional child.

Since the first edition of this book was published, Lowenstein’s sons, Aaron and Nathan,have (unexpectedly) grown up, and both are working in political jobs—Aaron for a citycouncil member in New York City, Nathan as a redistricting analyst in California. Thoughthey apparently have failed to learn from the error of their father’s ways, their conscien-tiousness and sense of high purpose entitles them to be added to the list of family membersmentioned in the previous introduction, from whom Lowenstein has received guidance.

xvii

a. This case has been demoted to a note case on page 1016 in the third edition.

Introduction to the First Edition

This book is based on the proposition that elections are important and that thestructure and rules that govern them deserve the attention of citizens in general and ofscholars and legal professionals in particular.

As the American university is constituted, election law falls at junctures formed byother subjects. This has not been an advantage, because junctures — these junctures, atleast — have been peripheries. Most legal scholars who have considered election law is-sues have done so in pursuance of a different subject, most commonly constitutionallaw. In political science, election law falls at the juncture of two subdisciplines, Ameri-can politics and public law. Most political scientists who specialize in American politicshave no particular interest in law. Most political scientists who specialize in public lawhave no particular interest in electoral politics.

So election law has not been a subject in the university. But the confrontation ofelectoral politics and legal regulation has been pervasive and consequential in the pastthree or four decades. That election law has not been a subject is the university’s lossand the university’s failure.

Election law has been a growing subject in courtrooms, legislative chambers and po-litical headquarters. One consequence has been increased work for lawyers. To preparefor such work is one good reason for law students to study election law. This book at-tempts to assist students in that preparation, but not in what might be termed a nuts-and-bolts fashion. There are some nuts and some bolts in this book (certainly the for-mer!), but they are not presented exhaustively or systematically. Lawyers who needtechnical information about the Federal Election Campaign Act or the Voting RightsAct can find it easily enough. Indeed, details learned in law school are likely to havechanged by the time the student is ready to apply them.

What distinguishes an outstanding legal professional from an ordinary one in thefield of election law is the ability to understand the details of legal regulations as they af-fect and at least aspire to benefit the democratic political system. The sometimes mind-less actions of election authorities (see Barker v. Wisconsin Ethics Board in Chapter 13for one examplea) provide evidence that not all lawyers practicing election law have an

xviii INTRODUCTION TO THE FIRST EDITION

adequate sense of their mission or the ability to carry it out. One goal of this book is toprovide stimuli to law students that may help them develop this sense and this ability.

The broader purposes of the book go beyond professional preparation. Study of anddebate over democratic institutions are activities that enrich our lives as citizens andthat enhance our ability to serve the society in which we live.

The book is interdisciplinary. Not because of a general belief in interdisciplinary studies,but because study of a subject at the juncture of other subjects must be interdisciplinary.

More concretely, the book assumes that lawyers and political scientists have much tolearn from each other about election law. The lawyers, judges, and legal scholars whobelieve they have proved a point because they have shown that a given cause could havea given effect are neither imaginary nor extinct. Neither are the political scientists whoconclude their rigorous empirical studies with casual and sometimes foolish assertionsof their normative or policy implications.

Lawyers can benefit from exposure to the empiricism of political science. Politicalscientists can benefit from more focused attention on the legal questions to which theirempirical studies may be relevant. Legal questions, after all, are normative questions ofa particularly concrete and immediate nature.

Conventions Used in This Book

In the interest of saving the publisher’s space and the reader’s time, most of the ma-terials reprinted in this book have been significantly edited. Insertions are indicatedwith brackets. Deletions are indicated with brackets or ellipses. However, footnoteshave been deleted and citations have been deleted or altered without signalling. Some-times, formatting of the original sources has been revised. For example, I do not fol-low the Supreme Court’s practice of surrounding indented quotes with quotationmarks. For purposes of serious research, the reader should consult the originalsources.

Footnotes that are signalled with a number are from the original work and retain thenumbers that they have in the original. Footnotes signalled with a letter are mine.

Opinions differ on the extent to which law school casebooks should contain refer-ences to the scholarly literature. The interdisciplinary nature of this book has persuadedme that heavy annotations are appropriate. Very few readers of this book — whether in-structors, students, or general readers — will have a strong background on all the sub-jects presented. The references are intended to facilitate further reading on matters ofinterest and to provide a head start on research projects. They are not intended to be in-timidating, and I hope they will not have that effect.

Although the references are extensive, they are not remotely exhaustive. In mostcases they should be sufficient to get you into the literature that interests you.

INTRODUCTION TO THE FIRST EDITION xix

b. This chapter is now Chapter 9 in the third edition. — Eds.

Acknowledgments

This book was conceived more than a decade ago over breakfast with Andy Schep-ard at a long-since defunct restaurant in Westwood. Andy and I decided that thereought to be an election law textbook and that we should compile it. Shortly thereafter,circumstances enticed Andy into other enterprises, a misfortune for which there issome consolation in the thought that election law’s loss has been family law’s gain. Thiswould have been a better book if Andy had been able to stay with it. Only a few of hiswords remain (primarily in Chapter 7b), but I like to believe that some traces of Andy’senergy, enthusiasm, and incisiveness have continued to animate the project.

Steve Ansolabehere, Bruce Cain, Morgan Kousser, and Ray Wolfinger read portionsof the manuscript of this book and gave me helpful suggestions.

Aside from judicial decisions, this book draws primarily on academic materials.Nevertheless, I hope there are some politics in the book. If so, and if the politicsmake any sense, it is only because my activities in and around politics have allowedme to be associated with people of extraordinary talent and understanding. Thisgroup has included Howard Berman, Michael Berman, Jerry Brown, CarlD’Agostino, Doug Faigin, Jean-Marc Hamel, Pierre-Marc Johnson, André Larocque,Tom Quinn, Tony Quinn, Keiko Shimabukuro, Jonathan Steinberg, Bob Stern, andHenry Waxman.

I have been equally fortunate in academic associates. Marlene Nicholson and JohnShockley deserve very special mention. Through their participation in the Law and thePolitical Process Study Group, as well as through their writings, they have done as muchas anyone to earn recognition for election law as an academic subject in its own right.Others who have been particularly consistent sources of stimulation and support in-clude David Adamany, Steve Ansolabehere, Bruce Cain, Mike Fitts, Steve Gottlieb,Bernie Grofman, Morgan Kousser, Jerry López, Mark Rush, Gary Schwartz, SteveShiffrin, and, recently, three of my younger colleagues, George Brown, Dan Bussel andEugene Volokh.

I thank Deans Bill Warren and Susan Prager individually for the tangible and intan-gible assistance they have provided and also as surrogates for the entire UCLA LawSchool Faculty. One could not hope for a more supportive group of colleagues. Simi-larly, I should like to express my appreciation to Joel Aberbach, Kathy Bawn, ShantoIyengar, and John Petrocik for their friendship and assistance, but also as representa-tives of their colleagues in the very strong UCLA Political Science Department.

Many groups of UCLA students have struggled with these materials in versions evencruder than the present published version. Each group has helped me understand thesubject better. Particular mention should be made of the many able research assistantswho have worked with me. Those who worked most directly on this book were DonDeyo, Todd Schwartz, Michael Sweet, and Stacy Weinstein.

There is no need to thank Myra Saunders and the UCLA Law Library staff. Theirinvariable helpfulness and friendliness, and the miraculously speedy retrievals thatthey produce upon demand are things we have learned to take for granted at the lawschool.

xx INTRODUCTION TO THE FIRST EDITION

But I do need to thank the clerical assistants who have worked with me over theyears. Karen Mathews played this role down the home stretch, and she was almost toogood to be true.

Keith Sipe, Mayapriya Long, Andrew Wilson, and the other folks at Carolina Acade-mic Press are patience incarnate.

Although I have not attempted to conceal my own views on the subjects treated inthis book, I have tried to assure that the book is not a brief for those or any other views.But I hope the book is animated by a respect for truth and a regard for the public good.My parents taught me this aspiration, and their teaching has been reinforced by the ex-ample set by my wife, my sister and a gaggle of cousins, aunts, uncles, and in-laws.

Copyright Acknowledgments

We gratefully acknowledge the permission granted by authors, publishers, and organi-zations to reprint portions of the following copyrighted materials.

Alexander, H., Reform and Reality: The Financing of State and Local Cam-paigns (1991). Published by The Twentieth Century Fund Press. Reprinted by per-mission.

Barone, M., The Almanac of American Politics: 1994, Copyright National Journal.Reprinted by permission.

Bowman, C., We Don’t Want Anybody Anybody Sent: The Death of Patronage Hiringin Chicago. Reprinted by special permission of Northwestern University School ofLaw, Northwestern University Law Review, Volume 86, Issue #1, pp. 77–78(approximate), (1991).

Briffault, R., Distrust of Democracy. Published originally in 63 Texas Law Review1347 (1985). Copyright © 1985 by the Texas Law Review Association. Reprinted bypermission.

Cain, B., Political Science and the Term Limits Debate. Unpublished paper, Bruce E.Cain, Professor of Political Science, U.C. Berkeley. Reprinted by permission.

Charlow, R., Judicial Review, Equal Protection and the Problem with Plebiscites, 79Cornell Law Review 527 (1994). Reprinted by permission.

Chemerinsky, E., Protecting the Democratic Process: Voter Standing to ChallengeAbuses of Incumbency, 49 Ohio State Law Journal 773 (1988). Reprinted bypermission.

CQ Press, Illustration: North Carolina — Districts Established February 6, 1992; inCongressional Districts in the 1990s: A Portrait of America (1993).Reprinted by permission.

Ellis, R., Democratic Delusions: The Initiative Process in America 26–43 (2002).Copyright 2002 by the University Press of Kansas. All Rights Reserved. Reprintedby permission.

Eule, J., Judicial Review of Direct Democracy. Reprinted by permission of The Yale LawJournal Company and Fred B. Rothman & Company from the Yale Law Journal,Vol. 99, No. 7 (1990), pages 1503–1590.

Fiorina, M., The Decline of Collective Responsibility in American Politics. Daedalus,Vol. 109 (1980), American Academy of Arts & Sciences. Reprinted by permission.

Fiss, O., Free Speech and Social Structure, 71 Iowa Law Review 1405 (1986).Reprinted by permission.

Foley, E., Equal-Dollars-Per-Voter: A Constitutional Principle of Campaign Finance, 94Columbia Law Review 1204 (1994). Reprinted by permission.

xxi

Grofman, B., et al., Minority Representation and the Quest for Voting Equal-ity (1992). Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1992. Reprinted with the per-mission of Cambridge University Press.

Guinier, L., Groups, Representation, and Race-Conscious Districting: A Case of theEmperor’s Clothes. Published originally in 71 Texas Law Review 1589 (1993).Copyright © 1993 by the Texas Law Review Association. Reprinted by permission.

Guinier, L., The Triumph of Tokenism: The Voting Rights Act and the Theory of BlackElectoral Success, 89 Michigan Law Review 1079 (1991). Reprinted by permis-sion.

Jacobson, G., Enough is Too Much: Money and Competition in House Elections; fromElections in America, Allen & Unwin (1987). Reprinted by permission.

Kousser, J.M., Beyond Gingles: Influence Districts and the Pragmatic Tradition in Vot-ing Rights Law, 27 University of San Francisco Law Review 551 (1993).Reprinted by permission.

Kristol, I., Reflections of a Neoconservative (1983). Published by Basic Books.Reprinted by permission.

Kristol, W., Term Limitations: Breaking Up the Iron Triangle, 16 Harvard Journal ofLaw & Public Policy 95 (1993). Reprinted by permission.

Lindgren, J., The Theory, History, and Practice of the Bribery-Extortion Distinction,141 University of Pennsylvania Law Review 1695 (1993). Copyright © 1993 bythe Trustees of the University of Pennsylvania. Reprinted by permission.

Lowenstein, D., A Patternless Mosaic: Campaign Finance and the First AmendmentAfter Austin. Originally published in the Capital University Law Review, 21 Capi-tal University Law Review 381 (1992). Reprinted by permission.

Lowenstein, D., Associational Rights of Major Political Parties: A Skeptical Inquiry.Published originally in 71 Texas Law Review 1741 (1993). Copyright © 1993 bythe Texas Law Review Association. Reprinted by permission.

Lowenstein, D., On Campaign Finance Reform: The Root of All Evil is Deeply Rooted,18 Hofstra Law Review 301 (1989). Reprinted by permission.

Lowenstein, D., The First Amendment and Paid Initiative Petition Circulators: A Dis-senting View. Copyright © 1989 by University of California, Hastings College of theLaw. Reprinted from Hastings Constitutional Law Quarterly, Vol. 17, No. 1,pp. 184–87, 199–200, by permission.

Lowenstein, D. & Steinberg, J., The Quest for Legislative Districting in the Public Inter-est: Elusive or Illusory? Originally published in 33 UCLA Law Review 1. Copyright© 1985, The Regents of the University of California. All Rights Reserved.

Magleby, D., Direct Legislation (1984), pp. 181, 225–229. Copyright © 1984 JohnsHopkins University Press. Reprinted by permission of the Johns Hopkins Univer-sity Press.

Mayhew, D., Congress: The Electoral Connection (1974). Copyright © 1974 YaleUniversity Press. Excerpts are reprinted by permission.

Nicholson, M., Buckley v. Valeo: The Constitutionality of the Federal Election Cam-paign Act of 1974, 1977 Wisconsin Law Review 323 (1977). Reprinted by permis-sion.

Nicholson, M., The Supreme Court’s Meandering Path in Campaign Finance Regula-tion and What it Portends for Future Reform, 3 Journal of Law and Politics 509(1987). Reprinted by permission.

xxii COPYRIGHT ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

Pildes, R. and R. Niemi, Expressive Harms, “Bizarre Districts,” and Voting Rights: Eval-uating Election-District Appearances After Shaw v. Reno, 92 Michigan Law Re-view 483 (1993). Reprinted by permission.

Polsby, D., Buckley v. Valeo: The Special Nature of Political Speech, 1976 SupremeCourt Review 1. Copyright © 1977 by the University of Chicago. All Rights Re-served. Reprinted by permission.

Polsby, D., Ugly: An Inquiry Into the Problem of Racial Gerrymandering Under theVoting Rights Act, 92 Michigan Law Review 652 (1993). Reprinted by permis-sion.

Polsby, N., Some Arguments Against Congressional Term Limits, 16 Harvard Journalof Law & Public Policy 101 (1993). Reprinted by permission.

Powe, Jr., L., Mass Speech and the Newer First Amendment, 1982 Supreme Court Re-view 243. Copyright © 1983 by the University of Chicago. All Rights Reserved.Reprinted by permission.

Rossiter, C. (ed.), The Federalist #10 (Madison), The Federalist Papers, NAL/Dutton(1961), pp. 77–84.

Schattschneider, E., excerpt from Party Government, copyright © 1942 and renewed1969 by E.E. Schattschneider. Reprinted by permission of Holt, Rinehart and Win-ston, Inc.

Smith, H., The Power Game. (1988). Copyright © 1988 by Hedrick Smith. Reprintedby permission.

Sorauf, F., from Money in American Elections. Copyright © 1988 by Frank J. Sorauf.Reprinted by permission of HarperCollins Publishers, Inc.

Strauss, D., Corruption, Equality, and Campaign Finance Reform. This article origi-nally appeared at 94 Columbia Law Review 1369 (1994). Reprinted by permis-sion.

Swain, C., Black Faces, Black Interests (1993). Reprinted by permission of the pub-lishers from Black Faces, Black Interests: The Representations of AfricanAmericans in Congress, Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, Copyright©1993 by the President and Fellows of Harvard College. All Rights Reserved.

Thompson, D., Mediated Corruption: The Case of the Keating Five, 87 American Po-litical Science Review 369 (1993). Reprinted by permission.

COPYRIGHT ACKNOWLEDGMENTS xxiii