In Pennsylvania, the Lancaster Online discusses the progress of the voter photo ID measure.

Daily Caller opines on voter fraud

Guilty Plea in California voter registration fraud case

The Washington Post claims: “Meanwhile, in a number of states efforts are underway to shorten or abolish the early voting period. A new law in Florida
substantially cuts the early voting period, while lawmakers in Ohio are
contemplating legislation that would slash their state’s pre-election
registration period from 35 to 14 days.” and then “making early voting more difficult for
people who may not be able to turn out on Election Day (a workday for
most) also will suppress turnout…. and will dampen
participation in a chilling way.”

Analysis:  While Florida decreased the total number of days available for early voting (normally two weeks), they significantly increased the hours each day to include the pre and post-work population of voters who work outside the traditional 9-5 work period.  In the end, the proposed hours equal the same hours under the old law so unless someone has some right to have 14 instead of 8 days to vote during an early voting period, it is hard to see any harm.  Often, these working voters are unable to take off from their duties to stand in line or vote at an early voting site during work hours.  The voters most positively impacted will be those blue collar voters who are simply unable to vote during normal voting hours because of restrictions at work.  The Washington Post also claims that early voting changes may increase or decrease overall voter turnout.  In truth, while early voting may be a convenience to voters, virtually every study available shows that early voting has not impacted turnout in either a positive or negative manner.  With the exception of Presidential elections, the early vote period has very low turnout and an extended period of time is a waste of resources. The truth is that too many hard-working Americans simply want to exercise their right to vote but have to put off their voting franchise during the early voting period because they cannot make enough time during the daily work period to drive, stand in line and vote at a early voting site. Election officials will tell you that the biggest turnout is at the
beginning and end of each day as people flock to the polls before work or before the polls close. The Florida bill simply allows some time prior to and after the normal work day to accommodate these voters. This law will allow election officials to go the extra mile with longer working hours during the day and early evening and allow adequate time for these working voters to participate in the electoral process.   

It appears the Washington Post simply copies Democratic Party press releases for their editorials.  

Reuters reports that the NC Democratic Governor Beverly Perdue vetoes the voter ID bill. 

Key paragraphs:

Republican-controlled legislatures around the
county have cited fraud as they push for voter ID bills. Fourteen states
now ask voters to show photo identification at the polls or have passed
laws to do so, according to the National Conference of State
Legislatures.

North Carolina is the fourth state where a
Democratic governor vetoed a voter photo ID bill this year, said Keesha
Gaskins, senior counsel for the Democracy Program at the Brennan Center
for Justice in New York. Vetoes were upheld in Minnesota and Montana,
and a veto is pending in Missouri.

Republicans
in North Carolina enjoy a veto-proof majority in the state Senate, but
will need the help of several Democrats in the House to reach the
three-fifths super majority required to override a veto.

The debate on the floor started yesterday on whether to add the EAC to the list of spending cuts on the block. 

The Hill reports on this first vote on whether to dissolve the EAC.  A yea vote of 2/3rds of the House of Representatives is necessary with this type of bill.  

The FayObserver provides a peek at the North Carolina house and senate redistricting plans.

two key sections:

The new maps include 24 majority-black districts in the N.C. House and 10 in the Senate, according to an attached memo. Currently, there are 18 black House members and seven black Senators.

Under the prior maps, districts designed to favor minorities sometimes had fewer than 50 percent minorities by population. Court rulings since those maps were drawn have imposed tighter restrictions on the minimum requirements for minority districts

Roll Call reports on some of the inside baseball and the politics of NC congressional redistricting. 

Word out of New Orleans yesterday was that the Louisiana state house plan has been precleared by the Department of Justice.  The article quotes a Lousiana legislative leader as stating this is the first time any initial redistricting plan has ever been precleared by DOJ since the enactment of the Voting Rights Act. If true, this is a testament to the Republican legislative majority and the strategy of going to Federal court to hold DOJ’s feet to the fire.   

The Washington Post reported earlier that the civil rights community saw this as the “crucial test of the Voting Rights Act.”  Of course, the plan was wholly unacceptable to an assortment of liberal interest groups even though the plan actually increased black representation in the face of decrease in the New Orleans black population due to Hurricane Katrina.  The one-sided media storm showed that when many liberal interest groups cry foul, they are actually crying wolf, and their real goal was to overtly pressure DOJ to use the civil rights laws to their partisan advantage.  

The fact that Louisiana simultaneously submitted its plan to the U.S. District Court in Washington on a parallel litigation path resulted in more timely approval and less nit-picking by DOJ of minor details of a perfectly acceptable (but not NAACP endorsed) plan. The strategy provided an appropriate degree of pressure on the Voting Section to prevent political interference by liberal interest groups, and even the Obama political leadership itself at the Civil Rights Division. 

This common sense strategy to go to Federal court actually streamlined the preclearance review process in both Virginia and Louisiana.  By going to court, Louisiana helped prevent the type of undue influence exerted by interest groups that was found in Miller v. Johnson to have resulted in the Civil Rights Division unlawfully pressuring jurisdictions in the maximization of minority seats.  

Unable to shield their analysis from the sunlight, the Voting Section attorneys do not want to be in a position where they would have to explain to a Federal court unique theories on retrogression, justify cryptic findings of discrimination, or defend against real or perceived political interference that would reveal itself in litigation. 

Instead, the Voting Section was required to do a realistic analysis of the redistricting plans that would almost certainly be reviewed by a panel of federal judges or the next step of review – the Supreme Court. 

The Voting Section knows that Section 5 hangs in the balance for constitutional reasons and that overstepping may well result in a constitutional challenge and mean the end of the control they now exert over voting changes in the South. 

Not surprising, the Washington Post described the decision to go to Federal Court by the first two Section 5 states involved with this decade’s redistricting as an “unusual strategy.”  Actually, It is a smart and prudent strategy. The mainstream media fails to recognize that states have no faith in the Department of Justice to do the right or fair thing on the issues such as voter ID or citizen verification much less state redistricting plans that will impact them directly.  This lack of faith is directly attributed to the highly partisan and suspect leadership of  the head of the Civil Rights Division Tom Perez and AG Holder.

With this success, there is a possibility that every Section 5 state on deck will either utilize the dual path preclearance process that has worked so effectively for Georgia, Virginia, and Louisiana or go solely to Federal court, bypassing entirely the administrative review process at DOJ.  

It seems the unusual strategy has already reaped some unusual and significant dividends, including the first ever Louisiana redistricting plan adopted right out the gate since the enactment of the Voting Rights Act.