Assessing the Nonpartisan Model in Election Administration, Redistricting, and Campaign Finance (English)
Election Law Symposium recorded September 14, 2012.
For many years, especially since the 2000 presidential election controversy, scholars have debated whether nonpartisan actors should replace partisan actors or a bipartisan commission in administering elections, conducting redistricting, and policing the campaign finance system. Some states recently have adopted more nonpartisan models, including California's redistricting commission and Wisconsin's Government Accountability Board, although most states have retained partisan or bipartisan control.
This symposium, sponsored by the UC Irvine School of Law, the UC Irvine Law Review, and the UCI Center for the Study of Democracy will offer empirical, legal, normative, theoretical, and historical perspectives on the use of partisanship in the agencies governing election administration, redistricting, and campaign finance laws. How should the success or failure of such institutions be assessed? Are nonpartisan agencies normatively preferable to partisan and bipartisan agencies in achieving the goals of the political system? What explains why jurisdictions adopt or fail to adopt nonpartisan institutions? The symposium will bring together leading scholars in the field of election law and political science to consider such questions in the weeks leading up to the presidential election of 2012.
- Authors Various
Assessing the Nonpartisan Model in Election Administration, Redistricting, and Campaign Finance is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.