Link to excellent PolicyMic analysis of the top Senate races in 2014.  Some of the ground is favorable to Republicans but the candidates need to be smart.  The environment of the races (whether the wind is at their back or in their face) is yet to be determined.

The legislative process begins with the Senate leader laying out the parameters of the voter ID bill.

Sen. Phil Berger, the top leader in
the N.C. Senate, says any new law requiring voters to show
identification at the polls should include a photo ID requirement. 

“It
does not have to be a drivers license as far as I’m concerned,” Berger
said. “For me, there are two requirements. One, that it’s a photograph
— a government issued some sort of photograph. And two, that the bill
will meet the constitutional standards that have been laid down.”

A voter ID bill that would require identification at the polls will again be up for consideration this legislative session.  The
bill, which was filed by Iowa Secretary of State Matt Schultz, would
require a state-issued or student ID to vote and would implement several
other voting reforms including adding a written, rather than spoken,
oath requirement for people vouching for other peoples’ identities.

Full story

I received this email from a legislative observer in Richmond where the James O’Keefe video capturing voterfraudster/thug  Pat Moran discussing how to doctor a utility bill became the basis for a real voter ID law in Virginia.  The observer writes:

“Senator Black in committee today read verbatim from the transcript of the fraud video and then the Senator showed how a utility bill could be fraudulently altered with Microsoft. We now have Exhibit A, B, and C for photo ID bills for this session. He had Governor McDonnell’s name fraudulently interposed on his utility bill and a Senate subcommittee had some fun with the issue.”

Virginia needs a real voter ID law, like the one that passed in South Carolina and the federal court approved.  As we saw, even someone like Pat Moran knows how to beat the system.

 NRO.

 Washington Times

“. . . Prohibiting felons from voting is also a moral imperative. Those who have shown contempt for criminal laws should have no voice in the process of writing them. Giving felons a say in the legislative process means laws will naturally skew more toward the criminal, to the detriment of the law-abiding citizen.

It is immoral to reward criminals and automatically give them a voice in the legislative process equal to those who never committed felonies.

We find that every single voter in the Branchville South Carolina special election had voter ID.

The State:

“The state held its first voter ID election last week in the Town of Branchville in Orangeburg County. All of the 205 people who voted in that election had a photo ID, Andino said, and no one requested an exemption. ”

“Hamilton County officials are prepared to refer five cases of potential vote fraud in November’s election to prosecutors and have ordered further investigation into about two dozen other voters’ actions that also could result in criminal charges,” including incidents of double voting, cross-state voting, and at least one apparent case of voter impersonation:

“In one, for example, an Avondale woman voted absentee at the Board of Elections office Nov. 1, but her signature also appeared in her precinct’s poll book, indicating an Election Day vote in her name also was cast. The poll book signature, however, does not match her signature on other documents, and the woman denied voting at her precinct polling place.”

The 1982 Republican National Committee consent decree that “effectively put the national party on the sidelines as concern about voter fraud became more and more pronounced” will stay in effect as is through 2017, as the US Supreme Court has declined an RNC petition to review the case.

The Boston Review (circ. 40,000) has this piece about problems with the disenfranchisement of prisoners, but consider the source. (Pam Karlan).