More at the Bigs.  Thank heavens they didn’t do this in a place that has criminalized deceptive campaign practices.

In 1963, when the vilest of structural systems denied blacks the right to vote in the South, groups like the NAACP devoted enormous resources on efforts to enfranchise the disenfranchised.  Civil Rights groups like the NAACP focused on voter registration drives during the Freedom Summer of 1964. They took people to register to vote.  They fought to overcome the most entrenched, most racist, most violent barriers to the ballot box by real tangible action with real voters.

Passess the Senate.

The Press Release.  Advantage, GOP:

“Our staff’s analysis leads to the conclusion that while the new State House map creates one less Republican district (defined as a district being over 50% Republican) than the map drawn by the Legislature – it is an improvement over the previous map issued by the San Antonio three-judge panel, which drew three less Republican districts. Thus, Attorney General Abbott’s appeal of the interim maps to the Supreme Court has yielded two more Republican districts than if he had not appealed. In addition, the new map creates the same number of districts as the original legislative map which are over 48% Republican, that being 102. This represents an improvement of one over the previous map drawn by the San Antonio three-judge panel. The new map also creates three more Republican districts over 55% than the previous map drawn by the San Antonio three-judge panel, although this is four districts less than the original legislative maps. However, the new map actually has three more districts over 55% than existed in 2010.”

All in a day’s work, the San Antonio Federal Court’s new interim maps endanger at least two incumbents: one of the few Hispanic Republicans and few White Democrats.  Apparently, the court believes neither are protected by the Voting Rights Act.  For different reasons, Democrats and Republicans thought their candidate was worthy of protection but the court disagreed. To the story:

A Texas court has released the new interim redistricting maps for the
state, giving both Democrats and Republicans a little of what they want
and potentially endangering Reps. Lloyd Doggett (D-Texas) and Francisco
Canseco (R-Texas).

…The
political ramifications of the map are a new heavily minority district
near Dallas that will likely be won by a Democrat and a restoration of
Canseco’s district lines, making it Democratic-leaning.  Because of
that change, Canseco will have an uphill battle to win the seat. He
would have had a better chance under the GOP’s original map.

Doggett
also could suffer from the new plan. Like the original GOP map, it
shatters his Austin district and draws the heart of it into a
Hispanic-majority district stretching all the way to San Antonio.
Doggett will likely face a primary challenge from a Hispanic Democrat,
if not this year then in the future.

…The likely partisan composition of the new map would give Democrats
11 seats and a good shot at 12 if they can beat Canseco, up from the
nine seats they currently have. Republicans will have 24 seats and
Canseco might be able to hold on to a 25th. Currently, Republicans have 23 seats and Democrats have nine.

link at the Hill

The Texas House
and congressional districts drawn by a San Antonio federal court appear
to be largely identical to a controversial deal negotiated between
Abbott and the Latino Redistricting Task Force, which was rejected by
other minority and Democratic groups suing the state earlier this month.

Like that compromise, the court’s congressional map would create
two new majority-minority congressional districts and preserves the
Republican-dominated Legislature’s decision to split Austin into five
districts, forcing U.S. Rep. Lloyd Doggett, D-Austin, to run in a new, heavily Hispanic district that stretches from San Antonio to Austin.

Renea
Hicks, an attorney for Travis County, which is suing the state over the
five-way split, took a tougher line than Angle: “We’re very displeased
with (the interim redistricting maps), but we’re still evaluating.”

full story

Montana has been taking it on the chin lately with their disclosure and campaign finance laws.  Multiple provisions on disclusre and alleged misrepresentation of another candidates’ voting record were found to be unconstitutionally vague.     

More at Ballot Access News.

Attorney General Eric Holder is defending the Justice Department’s opposition to some state laws requiring voters to present photo IDs when they go to the polls.  At a House appropriations subcommittee hearing, Holder says the federal government must think long and hard about the negative impact that photo identification requirements have on the ability of minorities, the elderly and young people to vote. 

DOJ is only opposing those Voter ID laws where they can play political games with the Section 5 preclearance process.

Link here.

 Link here.

Senator Feingold comments provide ELC readers and First Amendment lovers a reminder on the lawlessness and unconstitutionality of the tortured McCain-Feingold scheme that stifled First Amendment political speech.  Excerpt from article :

Calling a Supreme Court decision “lawless” and warning of “corporate domination of our political process,” former Senator Russ Feingold (D-Wis.) spoke Monday night about the dangers stemming from the recent removal of restrictions on financial contributions to political groups.  Feingold spoke out against the Jan. 2010 Supreme Court decision in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, arguing that it opened the door to increased corporate influence in politics.

“The decision issued by the court’s majority was essentially a lawless decision,” Feingold said, “not only because the substance of it gave corporations free reign over our political process — which is so fundamental to our democracy — but also because of its blatant disregard for the mores and traditions of the Supreme Court in handling difficult cases.”