Editorials: The Supreme Court’s Threat to the Voting Rights Act: A History | Andrew Cohen/The Atlantic

At 10 a.m. next Wednesday, the justices of the United States Supreme Court will hear oral argument in a case styled Shelby County v. Holder, one of the most anticipated of the current Term. Agreeing to review an argument made by an Alabama county that it ought finally to be free from one of the key requirements of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, the justices will have an opportunity both to lead and to follow the nation as it roils anew in political and legal battle over the rights of the poor, the ill, the young, the car-less, the black, the Hispanic, and the Native American to vote. Nearing its 50th birthday, the act has become a part of our national lore. One of the crowning achievements of the civil rights movement (and of the Johnson Administration), it was designed by its creators to finally give meaningful legal remedies to minority citizens — blacks, mostly, but not exclusively — who for generations had been precluded from voting (or from having their votes fairly counted) by a dizzying flurry of discriminatory state practices. The act didn’t just expand the scope of existing federal civil rights laws. It completely changed the dynamic between voters and state and local governments. And the results are indisputable: There is far less discrimination in voting today than there was half a century ago — and many millions more minority voters.

Alaska: Lawmakers begin debate on voter ID | Peninsula Clarion

Lawmakers have begun deliberations on a bill that would require voters to present photo identification when casting their ballots, but one critic said the geography and ethnic makeup of the state would likely make the law unconstitutional if passed. The House State Affairs Committee began discussing HB3, by Reps. Bob Lynn and Wes Keller, on Thursday. Lynn and Keller serve as the chair and vice-chair of the committee, respectively. “Voting is the very foundation of our Democratic republic,” Lynn said to the committee. “To protect that foundation, voters must be who they say they are.” The bill, as currently drafted, could pose unique practical and constitutional problems for Alaska due to its geography and large native population, the head of the American Civil Liberties Union in Alaska said.

Editorials: McCutcheon case could give Citizens United a run for its money in Supreme Court | The Washington Post

McCutcheon could be the new Citizens United. The Supreme Court’s decision Tuesday to hear a campaign finance case, McCutcheon v. Federal Election Commission, in its next term gives the justices a chance to continue their dismantling of restrictions on money in politics, most notably with the landmark Citizens United v. FEC decision of early 2010. With the new case, the court could strike a blow against fundraising limits for federal candidates and political parties. The case does not challenge the $2,600 cap on donations to a single candidate’s campaign but rather the overall limit — $123,000 — that one person can give over a two-year election cycle. Removing that ceiling would allow a single donor to give the maximum amount to more candidates and, crucially, to political parties such as the Republican National Committee, which brought the lawsuit along with Shaun McCutcheon, an Alabama businessman and conservative activist. The court decided decades ago that the government is constitutionally permitted to limit donations to candidates with the goal of fighting corruption. But the RNC argues that there’s no constitutional rationale for limiting how much one donor can give to many candidates. The thinking goes that because each candidate receives only $2,600, none of them ends up corrupted.

Editorials: Oscars put online voting problems back in the spotlight | Rep. Rush Holt/NJ.com

The announcement of this year’s Best Picture winner on Sunday will culminate an experiment unprecedented in the 85-year history of the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences. For the first time, Oscar winners will be determined largely by votes cast online. At a time when New Jersey and other states are considering holding more consequential elections over the internet, we should ask: How did the Oscar experiment go? Unfortunately, it went poorly, for reasons that shed light on the inherent difficulty of conducting secure, accessible, credible elections online. Problems for Oscar voters began at the beginning: logging in. Voters were required to create special, complex passwords, but when they tried to log in to the Oscar website, many found their passwords rejected. After re-entering passwords several times, voters were locked out of the site entirely and forced to call a help line. Many then had to wait for new passwords, delivered by snail-mail. Even relatively young and tech-savvy voters weren’t immune. As 42-year-old documentarian Morgan Spurloch told the Hollywood Reporter, “There’s even some young farts like myself that are having problems.”

Florida: Miami-Dade has authority to enact absentee ballot law, judge rules | Miami Herald

In its effort to crack down on voter fraud, Miami-Dade County has the authority to limit how many absentee ballots a voter can possess, a judge ruled Friday. The ruling came in the case of Sergio “El Tio” Robaina, whose lawyers had challenged a county ordinance that makes it a misdemeanor to collect multiple absentee ballots. Prosecutors say Robaina, 74, illegally collected absentee ballots and filled out two against the wishes of two voters, one of them a woman with dementia. He faces two felony counts of voter fraud and two misdemeanor counts of illegally possessing absentee ballots. The Miami-Dade County Commission, worried about the perception of election fraud, passed the ordinance two years ago. A person may turn in only two absentee ballots in addition to their own: one belonging to an immediate family member and another belonging to a voter who has signed a sworn statement designating that person as responsible.

Florida: House gives Democrats minimum number of early voting hours | Tampa Bay Times

A House committee gave Democrats a victory in the hard-fought effort to find a fix to the long lines at the polls that embarrassed the state during the last election. The House Approriations Committee unanimously passed a bill to extend early voting hours, provide voters with more polling places for early voting and give elections officials more flexibility in setting the early voting sites. The measure, which restores 14 days of early voting and imposes a maximum of 168 hours, restores many of the changes made in 2011. Republican lawmakers pushed legislation that year that limited elections supervisors to eight days of early voting and a maximum of 96 hours, sparking the waiting lines and delayed results that gave Florida another Election Day black eye. But the Republican-controlled committee agreed with Rep. Alan Williams, D-Tallahassee, and passed his amendment that to set a floor of 64 hours of early voting, rather than the 48 hours the original proposal would have allowed. Other Democrats were not as successful.

Kentucky: Plan to let deployed soldiers email ballots stalls | Cincinnati.com

Kentucky soldiers deployed overseas won’t be able to send election ballots back to the state via email, fax machine or any other form of electronic transmissions, at least for now, under legislation that has been revamped by Senate Republicans. The Senate Committee on Veterans, Military Affairs and Public Protection removed that provision from a bill on Thursday before sending it to the full Senate for consideration. Senate President Robert Stivers, the Manchester Republican who sponsored the measure, proposed the amendment striking electronic transmission of ballots in an effort to protect the integrity of elections and the anonymity of voters. He said he did so after concerns were raised about the potential for hackers gaining access to the ballots.

South Carolina: State Officials Divided on Challenge to Voting Rights Act | wltx.com

Aggressive enforcement of the 1965 Voting Rights Act transformed American politics, especially in the South, by making sure minorities had a clear path to the ballot box and an equal shot at public service. Forty-eight years later, after the re-election of an African-American president, the heart of that law is on trial. The Supreme Court will hear oral arguments Feb. 27 in a case that is sure to ignite a national debate over how far the country has progressed on racial issues and whether minority voters still need extra protection. State officials in South Carolina, where one of the first challenges to the Voting Right Act originated in the 1960s, are split in how they see the most recent case. The case began when Shelby County, Ala., opposed by the Justice Department and civil rights groups, asked courts to declare two key sections of the Voting Rights Act unconstitutional.

Virginia: Legislators Approve Voter ID Law, May Kill Chances for Federal Bailout | The Nation

Earlier this week, the Virginia House of Delegates passed a photo voter ID law that narrows the list of identification voters are required to show on Election Day to vote. The bill, which now sits before Gov. Bob McDonnell to sign or veto, would allow only a driver’s license or U.S. passport to vote. Without either of those, a voter would have to file a provisional ballot, and then bring the required photo ID to the election board by the Friday after Election Day. If McDonnell signs it, it wouldn’t go into effect until 2014 — when the mid-term congressional elections are held — but it would have to be approved by the federal government first. Since Virginia is a covered jurisdiction under the Voting Rights Act’s Section 5, any election law they make has to be pre-cleared by the U.S. Justice Department or the U.S. District Court in Washington, D.C.

Barbados: DLP retains government in Barbados general election | Caribbean360

Barbadian voters kept with tradition and provided the incumbent party with a second consecutive term in power following a nerve jangling general elections here on Thursday. According to the preliminary results, the Democratic Labour Party (DLP) won 16 of the 30 seats in the elections with the remainder going to the main opposition Barbados Labour Party (BLP). In the 2008 general election, the DLP won 20 seats. Prime Minister Freundel Stuart in thanking supporters for the narrow victory, said “we are not here tonight celebrating the victory because of any sponsorship or support from the …fortune tellers of Barbados, the dividers or even the obeah men of Barbados. “We celebrating tonight because of the confidence which ordinary men and women….who have not arrogated to themselves the right to what the future holds,” he told supporters, adding “we are celebrating because this organisation during the last five years touched actual lives by its policies and programmes, not to any sample, but to the population itself”.

Italy: Europe waits for Italy elections | BBC

There was a time when Italian elections were frequent and forgettable. Prime ministers were discarded like last season’s clothes. All of that has changed. What happens in Italy affects the rest of Europe. Campaigning ends on Friday. The result could rattle the eurozone and remind the markets of how little has been settled in the continent’s real economies. The favourite to win is an ex-Communist from the centre left, Pier Luigi Bersani. He is decidedly Mr Normal. There is nothing extravagant or flamboyant about him. There are no sharp suits. He likes the occasional cigar but he is almost an anti-candidate conducting a low-key conversation with Italy.

Pakistan: No legislation required for overseas Pakistanis’ voting rights | Dawn.com

A three-member Supreme Court bench on Friday observed that without the participation of eligible overseas Pakistani voters, elections could not be called fair and transparent. The bench, comprising Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry, Justice Khilji Arif Hussain and Justice Sheikh Azmat Saeed, was hearing a petition filed by PTI chief Imran Khan seeking voting rights for Pakistanis living abroad. The bench noted that participation of overseas Pakistanis in the upcoming general elections was possible given right steps are taken by concerned authorities.

National: Internet Voting—Not Ready for Prime Time? | The Canvass

We transmit money, legal documents, medical reports and other sensitive information via the Internet. Shouldn’t we be able to vote over the Internet, too? “No,” say some observers. “Right now, there is no way to meaningfully secure an election by Internet voting, and we’d be inviting serious potential for fraud on a scale that’s never been experienced in election administration before,” says Doug Kelleher, co-chair of New York’s State Board of Elections. “Until methods can be designed to secure the election so that you know that every vote is being counted the way the voter cast it, I am opposed to Internet voting.” “Yes,” say others—including a group of seventeen computer scientists who signed on to a National Defense Committee statement in January, supporting more research on Internet voting specifically for military voters. “The only foreseeable option to allow military members to achieve first class voter status is through remote electronic voting that provides for electronic delivery of military members’ voted ballots,” says the statement. Still others might say “it depends on what you mean by ‘Internet voting.’” That term can be shorthand for at least three options, and we’ll look at each of them separately—and whether experts give them a green, yellow or red light (at least for now).

National: Advocates Warn Of Dire Consequences If Voting Rights Act Loses In Supreme Court | TPM

Supporters of the Voting Rights Act are painting a bleak picture of what it would mean for the rights of minority voters if the Supreme Court were to strike down the landmark 1965 law’s Section 5, which requires state and local governments with a history of disenfranchising minority voters (i.e. mostly in the south) to receive preclearance from the Justice Department or federal court before changing laws that affect voting. “Broadly speaking, if we didn’t have Section 5 we would find that minority voters are in many places around the covered jurisdictions will have their ability to equally participate in the political process severely compromised,” Julie Fernandes, a civil rights activist and former deputy assistant attorney general at the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division, said this week. “We’ll see a lot more of the diluting tactics that we used to have.” The Supreme Court hears oral arguments Wednesday in Shelby County v. Holder, the most serious challenge to Section 5 of the Voting Right Acts in the nearly 50 years since its enactment. The liberal-leaning Center For America Progress held a briefing with reporters in advance of the Supreme Court hearing where experts, including Fernandes, made the case for the validity and necessity of Section 5. Nervous that their side will face five very skeptical justices at oral arguments, they described the part of the law as critical to protecting minority voters’ rights.

Editorials: Supreme Court Could Create System of Legalized Bribery | Fred Wertheimer/Democracy21

There are enormous stakes for the country in the campaign finance case the Supreme Court agreed to review this week. If the Supreme Court strikes down the existing limits on the aggregate amount an individual can give to all federal candidates and all party committees in a two-year election cycle, the Justices will create a system of legalized bribery in Washington. Such a decision by the Court would be a gold mine for big donors interested in buying  government decisions and would wreak havoc on the interests of ordinary Americans. McCutcheon v. Federal Election Commission, the case to be considered by the Supreme Court, involves a challenge by Shaun McCutcheon and the Republican National Committee to the constitutionality of the federal aggregate contribution limits, upheld by the Supreme Court in 1976 in Buckley v. Valeo.

Editorials: The partisan politics of election laws | Guy-Uriel E. Charles and Luis Fuentes-Rohwer/The Great Debate (Reuters)

Many commentators assume that the conservative Supreme Court justices will strike down Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act. Like Abigail Thernstrom, however, we are not so sure. Congress clearly has the authority to continue to maintain Section 5. If the court does strike it down, though, it will give Congress an opportunity to update the act for the 21st century.  In 2012, state legislatures passed many partisan initiatives designed to constrain the right to vote ‑ ranging from efforts to end same-day registration to adding voter identification laws. In Virginia, state senators used one colleague’s absence to pass a new, arguably discriminatory redistricting plan. In Indiana and North Carolina, new proposals would make it harder for some students to vote. Some states are considering tinkering with the way they choose electors to the Electoral College.

Some of these initiatives may have a disparate racial impact — and might be actionable under Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act. Some may even have been motivated by an intent to discriminate. But many of the actions that affect racial minorities seem to do so for partisan political purposes, not racial reasons.

Unless Congress can stop these partisan initiatives, the parties will increasingly target the other side’s voters for political gain. The American public, meanwhile, ends up as collateral damage.

Verified Voting in the News: Internet voting, the third-rail of elections | electionlineWeekly

There are no two words that get elections officials, scholars, vendors and geeks more riled up than Internet voting. The emotions on both sides often run so high that at times it can seem almost impossible to even have a conversation about the concept of casting a ballot online. But with concerns about long lines on Election Day, with the U.S. Postal Service cutting services, and elections officials concerned about getting ballots to voters overseas or in times of emergency, is it possible to discuss the possibilities? “Is there anything not controversial related to voting?  If voting machines had to go through acceptance that Internet voting is facing, they wouldn’t have been rolled out,” said Brian Newby, Johnson County, Kan. election commissioner. “The movement has pretty successfully been slowed by emotion and in particular, emotion masquerading as fact.” According to Newby, beyond the technological issues, there are some who are very impassioned because it takes away the spirit of community that comes with voting. “I respect that opposition because at least they are saying they don’t like Internet voting because of the way they feel. That’s an emotional argument that’s fair because it’s called out from the beginning as being emotional. Newby acknowledged that it is a difficult conversation, in part, because the country is no closer to Internet voting in the United States, really, than it was five or 10 years ago. “Discussion has been successfully stonewalled, so why fight with success?” Newby said. ”The best argument that could be made would be that there is a growing use of Internet voting options for military and overseas voters, but even those options have been much more evolutionary than revolutionary.”

Voting Blogs: “Fixing that”: States identify technological, personnel solutions to election delays | State of Elections

One of the biggest stories talked about in the wake of Election Day 2012 were the long lines at the polls. As Election Night played out in real time on television, people were able to see firsthand–or not see, as the case was–the votes come in from districts in states that had closed their polls hours ago. Jump over to any local station in these areas, and you could probably find a local reporter talking to prospective voters, many of whom said they had been waiting in line for hours. President Obama, speaking the day after, declared: “we have to fix that.” Some states have already started to address these problems. Florida Secretary of State Ken Detzner filed a report earlier this month with his findings as to the best ways to reduce long lines and streamline elections. Florida saw some of the worst lines last year. Chief among Detzner’s proposed solutions include requiring county commissioners to pay for technological upgrades, giving election administrators greater leeway to make decisions that will shorten lines, and requiring that legislators have a word limit for the constitutional amendments they place on the ballot. He also suggested that, besides unpreparedness among election officials, one of the greatest problems leading to Election Day lines was the cutback passed by the state legislature on the number of early voting days and locations. He says that, despite the budget concerns that led to these being cut back after the 2010 election, they remain a pivotal reason why lines were so long.

Alaska: Voter ID proposal under fire in Alaska Legislature | Alaska Dispatch

A bill before the Alaska Legislature requiring tough photo ID rules for voting is running into some bipartisan criticism. At a hearing Thursday, the bill sponsored by state Rep. Bob Lynn, R-Anchorage, came in for both for criticisms and questions that couldn’t be readily answered during a House State Affairs Committee hearing. Efforts to require identification before voting are described by supporters as a way to prevent voter fraud, but are seen by critics as a way to disenfranchise certain voters, especially among the elderly or poor who are less likely to have the necessary ID or documentation to get it, and to those Alaskans living far from the DMV offices where they can obtain photo IDs. “The proposal to require (ID), I think, will disenfranchise many of our people in the villages,” said Myron Nanchang, president of the Association of Village Council Presidents in Bethel, representing 56 Yukon-Kuskokwim Delta villages in Southwest Alaska. Bill sponsor and committee chairman Lynn denied the bill is intended to suppress traditionally Democratic votes in the dozens of roadless villages dotting the Alaska hinterland. “Absolutely not,” he said. “Everybody’s vote is as good as anybody else’s vote, no matter how they vote, whatever their party.”

Guam: Election Commission presents findings of precinct handcount | KUAM.com

After five weeks of handcounting ballots from the 2010 general election, the Guam Election Commission presented its findings to commissioners that had some speculating a change in the results, not in the gubernatorial race, but for the Legislature. It took a little over one month to handcount five precincts from the 2010 general election and during its GEC meeting Wednesday night, executive director Maria Pangelinan reported the results. “The difference of the gubernatorial race was minimal,” she said. Of the hand count summary of the five precincts, results showed Gutierrez-Aguon receiving five less votes from the certified results, whereas Calvo-Tenorio received two additional votes. “Between a handcount and machine tabulation there are bound to be differences,” Pangelinan said.

Hawaii: Hands Off! Bill Bars Candidates From Touching Voters’ Ballots | Honolulu Civil Beat

Political candidates will shake hands, kiss keiki and sign-wave like crazy during election season — anything to get elected. Under proposed legislation, one thing they would not be allowed to do is touch a voter’s ballot. Senate Bill 827 would prohibit candidates from physically handling or possessing absentee ballots and voter registration forms. It seems to be another piece of legislation related to allegations of voter intimidation in the 2012 primary. SB 827 brings to mind House Bill 1027, which aims to ensure the integrity of absentee ballots. That measure would require that absentee ballots include information about election and voter fraud, and prohibit employers, unions and candidates “or their agents” from assisting voters in completing absentee ballots.

Kentucky: Senate panel halts proposal for overseas military to vote electronically | Kentucky.com

A Senate committee applied the brakes Thursday to a proposal by Secretary of State Alison Lundergan Grimes to let overseas military members vote electronically, citing concerns about the potential for hackers to alter ballots. At the urging of Senate President Robert Stivers, R-Manchester, the committee voted along party lines to amend the bill to require ballots to be returned by mail, instead of fax or electronic transmission. The amendment also set up a study of electronic voting, to be completed by Nov. 27. After the committee unanimously approved the amended version of Senate Bill 1, Stivers acknowledged that he had consulted with U.S. Sen. Mitch McConnell about the measure. McConnell, a Republican, is seeking re-election next year. Many Democrats are urging Grimes to run against him. “We asked Sen. McConnell’s office to look at it because he has been involved in it,” said Stivers, adding that McConnell’s office is aware of voting procedures prescribed by the U.S. Department of Defense. Stivers said McConnell did not recommend changes to the bill. “No, these were from the county clerks association,” he told a reporter after the meeting.

Maine: Early voting backers seek statewide vote to amend Maine Constitution | Bangor Daily News

It will take a state constitutional amendment to allow Mainers who vote early to place their ballots directly into a ballot box or voting machine rather than placing an absentee ballot into an envelope that’s sealed until Election Day. Advocates for that change gathered Wednesday at the State House to urge passage of LD 156, a bill that would trigger a statewide referendum to change language in the Maine Constitution to allow early voting. The bill would require two-thirds majority votes in both chambers of the Legislature. Early voting, which takes place in 32 other states, differs from in-person absentee ballot voting, which Maine now allows without proof of hardship by the end of a municipality’s business day on the Thursday before Election Day.

Maryland: Slew of election bills introduced after busy ballot season | SoMD News

Following an election season marked by long lines and long ballots, Maryland lawmakers are confronting a flurry of bills aimed at tweaking the voting process. “Just after an election, everyone wants to make corrections,” said Del. Sheila Ellis Hixson (D-Montgomery), chairwoman of the House Ways and Means Committee, where 16 bills dealing with elections are scheduled to be heard Thursday. “We had a lot of long lines, so a lot of the bills are to fix logistical sort of stuff,” she said. “We also had five referendums on the ballot, more than ever before, so we want to make sure we clean it up, make sure those rules are fair.” One of the bills is from Gov. Martin O’Malley’s administration and would expand the days, hours and locations for early voting.

Mississippi: State Senators refuse funding to defend Voter ID law | The Commercial Appeal

State senators balked Thursday at giving Secretary of State Delbert Hosemann $395,000 to spend on lawyers from former Gov. Haley Barbour’s law firm to defend Mississippi’s Voter ID law. Republicans were caught off guard when they didn’t have enough members in the Senate chamber to pass the $15.3 million budget that included $395,000 for private lawyers in the 2014 fiscal year that begins July 1. The bill failed on a vote of 23-17. The state Constitution requires a majority of elected members — the Senate has 52, but one seat is vacant — must vote for approval before a measure can pass. Supporters plan to try again next week. Hosemann, a Republican, and state Atty. Gen. Jim Hood, a Democrat, signed a contract with the Butler, Snow, O’Mara, Stevens and Cannada law firm in September that authorizes the outside lawyers to represent the state “on all issues related to pre-clearance of that legislation and any related legislation, rules or regulations and all litigation that may arise or be instituted in connection with pre-clearance.

Editorials: New York Should Hate the Voting Rights Act | Slate Magazine

Next week, the Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in the highly anticipated case Shelby County, Ala. v. Holder. At stake is the constitutionality of Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act, the provision that requires jurisdictions with histories of voter suppression and disenfranchisement to “preclear” any proposed change in electoral procedures with federal authorities before implementation, in order to ensure that they have no discriminatory effects. Unsurprisingly, many of the jurisdictions covered by Section 5 have lined up with Shelby County, urging the court to strike down a provision they believe punishes them for the sins of their grandfathers. Pro-Shelby County amicus briefs, which allow interested third parties to weigh in on the constitutional issues at hand, have been filed by the Republican attorneys general of Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Georgia, South Carolina, South Dakota, and Texas. But a handful of covered jurisdictions have weighed in on the other side. Most notable among them is New York City, which asserts that Congress is within its constitutional authority to subject the city to special procedures on account of discrimination dating back nearly a century. The reasons why Southern states like Alabama and Georgia are covered by Section 5 are well known. At the close of Reconstruction, the resurgent white elite in these states relied on dastardly legal strategies and violence, up to and including outright murder, to keep African-Americans from voting, especially in the majority-black counties that blanket the Deep South. In other historically majority-minority sections of the country, native-born whites used similar albeit generally less violent voter suppression schemes to keep Latinos from voting, in states like Arizona and Texas, and Native Americans from casting ballots, in places like Alaska and South Dakota.

Ohio: Did nun vote for dead colleague? | Cincinnati.com

A Greater Cincinnati nun is suspected of illegally casting a ballot for another nun who died before last November’s election, a new case of alleged vote fraud that emerged as local officials move to wrap up their investigation into election improprieties last fall. Sister Rose Marie Hewitt, 78, died Oct. 4 after a 59-year career as a Sister of Charity that included service in schools here and across the country, as well as in various other positions in Cincinnati and Northern Kentucky. Although her death occurred before absentee ballots had been mailed to voters throughout Hamilton County, a completed ballot was returned to the elections board in Hewitt’s name.

South Dakota: Senate passes absentee voting bill | The Argus Leader

The Senate wants to put a stop to Election Day requests for absentee ballots. South Dakota law requires counties to provide absentee ballots in person until 3 p.m. on Election Day. Senate Bill 130 would push the deadline back to 5 p.m. the day before an election; voters still could turn in absentee ballots the day of an election. The Senate on Wednesday voted 32-1 in favor of the proposal, sending it to the House.

Tennessee: Shelby County Election Commission Still at Odds Over Errors | Memphis Daily News

At one point during the Wednesday, Feb. 20, meeting of the Shelby County Election Commission, chairman Robert Meyers interrupted a detailed and lengthy lecture by election commissioner George Monger by saying, “I object to the leading question.” It drew the only laughs during the three-hour session that marked the end of election administrator Richard Holden’s probationary period. Monger made public records requests to assemble a chain of emails between Holden and his staff as they tracked down the source of problems in the November elections. The particular problem Monger tracked involved voters in one split city-county precinct being given the wrong ballots because their addresses were listed incorrectly as in the county outside Memphis when they were in the city of Memphis. Monger’s specific point was that Holden instructed the staff to delete a report in its summary to election commissioners.

Virginia: Lawmakers Pass Photo-ID Voting Requirement | NYTimes.com

Virginia lawmakers on Wednesday adopted a strict photo identification requirement for voters, a contentious issue nationally in last year’s presidential election. The Republican-dominated House of Delegates approved a bill passed earlier by the State Senate to require voters to show a government-issued document like a driver’s license, passport or special voter-identification card with a photograph at the polls. If signed into law by Gov. Bob McDonnell, a Republican, Virginia would join four other states with equally strict voter-ID requirements. A similar law in Pennsylvania was temporarily suspended by a state court before the November election. Attempts by Texas and South Carolina to adopt such strict requirements have been turned back by the federal government as violations of the Voting Rights Act. Supporters of voter photo-ID requirements say they prevent fraud. Opponents argue that the laws are meant to suppress turnout by poor and minority voters.