Washington Times.

The evidence of the politicization of the Voting Section and the photo ID issue continues to be exposed. In 2007, the current Voting Section Chief, Chris Herren, helped draft the amicus brief from the Department of Justice supporting Voter ID and also assisted with the oral argument preparation for Solicitor General Paul Clement.  Sources (formerly employed at DOJ) reveal that Chris Herren has inexplicitly reversed himself from the DOJ amicus brief supporting voter ID laws, a position he worked on just a few years ago. Of course, it is very possible that he caved to pressure from the Obama political appointees, which caused his abrupt reversal.

In late 2007, the Department of Justice filed an amicus brief to the Supreme Court asserting that the photo ID provision would not impose any severe burden on voters and that the law had no discriminatory impact on minorities. The amicus was fully briefed and argued as the position of the Department of Justice to the Supreme Court in the seminal photo ID case of Crawford v. Marion County.  Sources indicate that even though his name was not included on the brief, then Deputy Chief Chris Herren was indeed part of the team that drafted and reviewed the amicus brief for content and prepared the arguments for then U.S. Solicitor General Paul Clement.

These same sources also claim that Chris Herren was one of the senior members of the Voting Section to assist the Solicitor General in multiple oral argument prep sessions.  Herren was then one of the senior deputy chiefs in the Voting Section.  The audio and transcript of the oral argument can be found here.

These sources indicate that Herren signed off on the eventual amicus brief that was filed in the Supreme Court and that during the preparation of the brief, he did not support some changes that had been suggested by then Section Chief John Tanner.

How ironic that Herren, now promoted Voting Section Chief, has suddenly reversed himself and is now objecting to a voter ID law in which the former Solicitor General Clement he assisted will be defending all the way to the Supreme Court. Was he wrong then, or is he wrong now? Or is he just a tool easily influenced by the Obama political appointees?

Lee Stranahan walks you through the statistical sleight of hand employed by some inside the DOJ Voting Section to puff up the South Carolina Voter ID objection.  He names the names of media outlets who fell for the trick, all here at BigGovernment.com.

This analysis by Peach Pundit shows that many liberals are not happy with either the timing or substance of DOJ’s approval of historic redistricting maps in Georgia.  The approval put a stamp of approval of an absolute Republican realignment in the Peach State.  The Democrats should not be surprised at DOJ approval as the proposed maps actually increased minority representation in the legislature.  Minorities should take note how long the Democratic Party establishment kept minority representation numbers artificially low.  The answer would be decades.

Republican political consultant Mark Rountree estimates the new maps will give Georgia a constitutional majority in both the House and Senate, with at least 2/3 of each body held by Republicans. He estimates 122 of 180 Georgia House seats will be held by Republicans, while 37 of Georgia’s 56 Senate seats maintained by the GOP. In Congress, John Barrow’s 12th district will see the largest change, with the district now drawn to heavily favor a Republican challenger.

The officials elected from these new maps will most likely reflect the new racial realities of Georgia politics. Using Rountree’s estimates, the number of elected white Democrats in the Georgia General Assembly will likely be measured in the teens. Should the power of incumbency not outweigh the partisan math of the redrawn 12th district, Georgia’s Congressional delegation will be composed of 10 Caucasian Republicans and 4 African American Democrats. The coalition of urban African American and rural white Democrats which ruled Georgia for decades is now officially a relic of history.

This transition was exacerbated by several mostly rural white Democrats switching to the Republican Party in advance of the redistricting session. Salt was poured into this wound when Rep Doug McKillip, recently elected Minority caucus chairman, bolted from the Democrats to join the GOP.

For the first time in more than a century (and possibly in North Carolina’s history), Republicans in 2011 took control of drawing legislative and congressional voting districts.

The design of district maps is a powerful tool that could influence the outcome of elections. Democrats used it for more than a century to hold down their opposition. Now the Republicans have hit them back.

The new maps in the 2012 elections appear likely to give the Republicans as many as 10 of the 13 congressional seats (Republicans hold six of the seats now), unless the Democrats can persuade the courts to toss out the maps.

Similarly, the new state House and state Senate districts solidify the Republicans’ control of the legislature

Full story at the link.

USA Today reports that the Justice Department’s rejection of South Carolina’s voter ID law probably won’t prevent other states from adopting similar measures, analysts say.

According to media reports, Rhode Island’s voter ID law has gone into effect in the overwhelming Democratic controlled state as it did earlier this year with Union elections.

Two America’s in the Holder DOJ:  Democrats and their Union allies who can freely implement voter ID laws and then Republicans who will be pilloried as racists and Jim Crow.

Stumping in Iowa, Gingrich became the third presidential candidate in the last week to directly criticize Attorney General Holder and his objections to voter ID laws.  Earlier this week Santorum and Romney similarly blasted President Obama for blocking the South Carolina voter ID proposal.  

The Washington Post/AP characterizes the Gingrich blast:  

During a campaign stop in Council Bluffs, Iowa, the former House speaker questioned why Attorney General Eric Holder is “so determined not to identify if people are not eligible to vote”   Gingrich went on to say that, “you have to ask, why is it that they are desperate to retain the ability to steal elections and I think that’s what it comes down to.”

And the Miami Herald quotes Santorum:

On Thursday, former Sen. Rick Santorum of Pennsylvania also blasted the Justice Department ruling, accusing the administration of pursuing “common-sense anti-fraud measures that states have put in place all because they believe it’s a partisan advantage for them to get people who probably shouldn’t be voting to help them and their political cause.”

CBS News reports that Occupy protests are interfering with the Republican Party’s attempt to conduct an primary election for federal office.  The protests are forcing GOP vote counters to find a secret location.  It is clear that Occupy protesters will try to disrupt the 2012 elections.

The Iowa Republican party is moving its caucus night vote counting operation to an undisclosed location because of planned “Occupy Iowa Caucus” protests. State GOP chair Matt Strawn was critical of the protests and said it’s ironic that the Occupy movement is focusing on the Iowa caucuses.

“There’s really no more grassroots process in American politics than the Iowa caucuses,” Strawn said in an interview. “So it’s a little puzzling why they’d choose to disrupt that process.”  Strawn said the party is coordinating with local law enforcement to ensure smooth operations next Tuesday at the 1,774 precincts around the state.

“We’re taking additional safeguards when it comes to the counting and tabulating and reporting of the caucus night results to make sure they’re done in a timely and accurate fashion,” he said

I wonder what federal agency is charged with protecting the fundamental right to vote without threat of violence or interference.  It appears that the Obama DOJ is ignoring the escalating violence.  The Occupy protesters must fall within the same “off-limits” category as the Black Panthers as they look for voter ID laws to object to. 

Question to ponder:  Will there have to be actual violence in the polling place before the FBI and DOJ act decisively?  Waiting until election day is too late.

Washington Times: The most consequential election in our lifetime is still 10 months away, but it’s clear from the Obama administration’s order halting South Carolina’s new photo ID law that the Democrats already have brought a gun to a knife fight. How else to describe this naked assault on the right of a state to create minimal requirements to curb voter fraud.