Back in 2007, the SCOTUS ruled that greenhouse gases could be regulated by the EPA under the Clean Air Act. The EPA has adopted some rules in this area and Greg Abbott and some other idiots sued arguing that the science was not conclusive and that the EPA should not rely on the IPCC and other peer reviewed type sources. A fairly conservative panel of the DC circuit rejected Greg's stupidity http://www.cadc.uscourts.gov/internet/opinions.nsf/52AC9DC9471D374685257A290052ACF6/$file/09-1322-1380690.pdf

EPA simply did here what it and other decisionmakers often must do to make a science-based judgment: it sought out and reviewed existing scientific evidence to determine whether a particular finding was warranted. It makes no difference that much of the scientific evidence in large part consisted of “syntheses” of individual studies and research. Even individual studies and research papers often synthesize past work in an area and then build upon it. This is how science works. EPA is not required to re-prove the existence of the atom every time it approaches a scientific question.

It is great watching the courts actually use scientific concepts and research and come to the correct conclusion. Greg Abbott is simply too stupid to understand science and this opinion was a good smackdown of the pseudo science pushed by Greg

Russell Lloyd is the GOP nominee for the 127th Harris County District court. I looked at this candidate's "accomplishments" and was truly shocked and disgusted to see that this potential judge brags about being the head of the GOP Harris County "Ballot Security" program in 1982. http://www.judgerusselllloyd.com/accomplishments.htm Ballot Security is a GOP codeword for voter suppression and voter caging. http://www.brennancenter.org/content/resource/ballot_security_and_voter_suppression/
In 1982, the DNC obtained an injunction against the GOP "Ballot Security"
program because the key element to such program was voter caging and voter suppression. The DNC has maintained that injunction in effect since 1982 and the RNC is prohibited from engaging in "ballot security" and/or voter caging/voter suppression.

Former CJ Rehnquist got his start in GOP politics as a member of a GOP "Ballot Security" team in Arizona where non-white voters were challenged at the polls. I personally doubt that Rehnquist could be confirmed in today's environment due to his participation in the GOP voter suppression program.
http://www.wmitchell.edu/lawreview/documents/3.davidson.pdf and http://www.votelaw.com/blog/blogdocs/GOP_Ballot_Security_Programs.pdf

A federal circuit court just recently affirmed the extension of the injunction against the RNC ballot security program and that opinion as well as the current injunction discusses "ballot security" and voter caging.http://electionlawblog.org/wp-content/uploads/rncvdnc.pdf

I am truly shocked and sadden that a candidate for judge would brag about being part of an illegal voter suppression operation. There is a clear difference between the parties. Republicans want to take the vote away from people and suppress voting rights and Democrats want to protect voting rights. I would hate to see this GOP candidate become judge in that he would replace a good Democratic Judge.

Don Bankston from my county got this added to the Texas Democratic Party Platform http://thinkprogress.org/culture/2012/06/18/501639/marijuana-decriminalization-makes-it-onto-texas-democratic-platform/

Marijuana is no more dangerous than alcohol or tobacco. Recent polls show over 50% of Americans believe marijuana should be decriminalized. While arrests for marijuana since 1965 have been over 20 million citizens, marijuana is more prevalent than ever before.

There is no evidence that marijuana is a “gateway” drug leading to the use of more lethal drugs. 75% of citizens arrested for marijuana are under 30. Minorities account for a majority of those arrested for marijuana. Criminal conviction permanently scars a young citizen for life.

Texas Democrats urge the President, the Attorney General and the Congress to support the passage of legislation to decriminalize the possession of marijuana and regulate it’s use, production and sale as is done with tobacco and alcohol.

We further urge the immediate decriminalization of the possession and use of medical marijuana.

The Texas Democratic Party has a very progressive party platform

Texas A&M has a new study out on the effects of Stand Your Ground Laws that I tend to agree with this study (btw, in the interst of full disclosure both of my sibliings are AGGIES)http://www.burntorangereport.com/diary/12379/study-stand-your-ground-laws-are-failed-policy

The new study, from the Department of Economics at Texas A&M, comes to a devastating conclusion in its first page:

"We find no evidence of deterrence; burglary, robbery, and aggravated assault are unaffected by the laws. On the other hand, we find that murder and non-negligent manslaughter are increased by 7 to 9 percent. This could represent either increased use of lethal force in self-defense situations, or the escalation of violence in otherwise non-lethal situations. Regardless, the results indicate that a primary consequence of strengthening self-defense law is increased homicide."

I do not like stand your ground laws and hopefully the case of Zimmerman and the idiot in Houston will show these laws to be dangerous. Here is a link to the story about the Houston idiot who tried this defense http://www.chron.com/news/houston-texas/article/Houston-stand-your-ground-defendant-found-guilty-3630968.php

Intrade had Walker at 93.5% to win earlier today but I just looked at the current price at 87% http://www.intrade.com/v4/markets/contract/?contractId=759686 Some investors/bettors are getting nervous. These investors may have seen the exit polling data and may be getting out.

The DOJ is going to be monitoring the Texas primaries next week in a couple of counties including Fort Bend http://txredistricting.org/post/23736139553/doj-to-monitor-texas-primary-elections

JUSTICE DEPARTMENT TO MONITOR ELECTIONS IN TEXAS

WASHINGTON – The Justice Department announced today that it will monitor primary elections on May 29, 2012, in Fort Bend, Harris and Jefferson Counties in Texas, to ensure compliance with the Voting Rights Act of 1965 and other federal voting rights statutes. The Voting Rights Act prohibits discrimination in the election process on the basis of race, color or membership in a minority language group. In addition, the act requires certain covered jurisdictions to provide language assistance during the election process.

Under the Voting Rights Act, the Justice Department is authorized to ask the U.S. Office of Personnel Management (OPM) to send federal observers to jurisdictions that are certified by the attorney general or by a federal court order. Federal observers will be assigned to monitor polling place activities in Fort Bend and Jefferson Counties based on the attorney general’s certification. In addition, Fort Bend is subject to a court order entered in 2009, which requires the jurisdiction to comply with the minority language and assistor of choice requirements of the Voting Rights Act, as well as the requirements of the Help America Vote Act. The observers will watch and record activities during voting hours at polling locations in these counties, and Civil Rights Division attorneys will coordinate the federal activities and maintain contact with local election officials.

In addition, Justice Department personnel will monitor polling place activities in Harris County. A Civil Rights Division attorney will coordinate federal activities and maintain contact with local election officials.

Each year, the Justice Department deploys hundreds of federal observers from OPM, as well as departmental staff, to monitor elections across the country. To file complaints about discriminatory voting practices, including acts of harassment or intimidation, voters may call the Voting Section of the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division at 1-800-253-3931.

I attended a press conference held by Congresswoman Sheila Jackson Lee and Congressman Al Green on the Texas voter id law and on concerns about possible restrictions on Sunday voting. The Texas Sec. of State has refused to attempt to educate the public at the status of the Texas Voter ID law (SB14) and so many people think that can not vote with out the proper ID. Congresswoman Jackson Lee has asked the Texas Secretary of State to inform voters about the status of the law and there has been no efforts to do. State Senator Rodney Ellis asked the Secretary of State to issue some guidance and to attempt to educate voters back on May 11 and the Secretary of State also ignored Senator Ellis' request http://www.texastribune.org/texas-politics/voter-id/sos-asked-tell-public-voter-id-not-effect/

Is anyone surprised by the refusal of the Texas Secretary of State to take steps to educate voters as to the status of the law?

As for early voting on Sunday, the states of Florida, North Carolina and Ohio are attempting to restrict early voting on Sunday. So far, the efforts to restrict early voting in Sunday in Ohio are suspended by the voter imitative rules and the attempt to eliminate early voting in Sunday has been objected by the Department of Justice under the Voting Rights Act.

In 2010, Democrats in Fort Bend County in Texas did not pay attention to a congressional district race that we knew that the GOP was going to win. A LaRouche cult member named Kesha Rogers won the Democratic nomination in 2010 and after the she had the nomination we found out that she was running on the platform of impeaching President Obama and starting a colony on Mars. Please watch out for these pretend Democrats. In the general election, Kesha Rogers got only 29% of the vote which was 10% less than the other Democrats running that year received (it was a bad year for Democrats in Texas). In Texas straight party ticket voting is good for party building and we could not encourage our voters to vote a straight party ticket because that meant that they would be voting for a cult candidate who wanted to impeach President Obama. Kesha Rogers averaged 10% less than other Democrats running that year because we got people to split ticket vote which hurt our GOTV efforts.

Diane Sare who is running for the Democratic nomination in New Jersey CD5 is a LaRouche cult follower and is also running on the platform of impeaching President Obama and building a colony on Mars. I just spent two hours calling voters in Texas to alert these voters about Kesha Rogers and I would hate to see the Democrats in New Jersey face the same issues that we went through here in Texas CD22. I know that a Republican currently holds this seat but it will still be a pain if the Democratic candidate for this seat is a LaRouchie. Having a LaRouche cult member on the ticket will drain resources and hurt the GOTV efforts.

Please be careful and do not let another LaRouche get the chance to hurt the party and President Obama. I have watched a couple of Sare's videos and she is just as nutty as Kesha Rogers.

In Texas in 2010, Democrats in Fort Bend County in Texas did not pay attention to a congressional district race that we knew that the GOP was going to win. A LaRouche cult member named Kesha Rogers won the Democratic nomination in 2010 and after the she had the nomination we found out that she was running on the platform of impeaching President Obama and starting a colony on Mars. Please watch out for these pretend Democrats. In the general election, Kesha Rogers got only 29% of the vote which was 10% less than the other Democrats running that year received (it was a bad year for Democrats in Texas). In Texas straight party ticket voting is good for party building and we could not encourage our voters to vote a straight party ticket because that meant that they would be voting for a cult candidate who wanted to impeach President Obama. Kesha Rogers averaged 10% less than other Democrats running that year because we got people to split ticket vote.

Dave Christie who is running for the Democratic nomination in WA CD9 is a LaRouche cult follower and is also running on the platform of impeaching President Obama. I just spent two hours calling voters in Texas to alert these voters about Kesha Rogers and I would hate to see the Democrats in Washington State face the same issues that we went through here in Texas CD22. Congressman Adam Smith appears to be a good democrat and hopefully will have no trouble with the LaRouche candidate but I urge Washington DUers to be careful. LaRouchies are dangerous and can sneak up on you.

One of the key issues in both the redistricting case and the vote id cases pending before the DC Circuit is the constitutionality of Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act which requires certain actions to be pre-cleared. The DC Circuit just upheld the constitutionality of Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act in a split decision http://txredistricting.org/post/23297804975/breaking-dc-circuit-upholds-the-constitutionality-of

In a 2-1 decision this morning in the Shelby County case, the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the continued constitutionality of section 5 of the Voting Rights Act.

Writing for the majority, Judge Tatel said:

In Northwest Austin, the Supreme Court signaled that the extraordinary federalism costs imposed by section 5 raise substantial constitutional concerns. As a lower federal court urged to strike this duly enacted law of Congress, we must proceed with great caution, bound as we are by Supreme Court precedent and confined as we must be to resolve only the precise legal question before us: Does the severe remedy of preclearance remain ‘congruent and proportional’? The legislative record is by no means unambiguous. But Congress drew reasonable conclusions from the extensive evidence it gathered and acted pursuant to the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments, which entrust Congress with ensuring that the right to vote - surely among the most important guarantees of political liberty in the Constitution - is not abridged on account of race. In this context, we owe much deference to the considered judgment of the People’s elected representatives.

The constitutionality of Section 5 was bifurcated in the voter id lawsuit and would only be addressed if and when the DC court held that the Texas voter id law violated Section 5. The state of Texas in effect has the burden of proving that the Texas voter id law did not affect minority voting rights and Texas is going to have a hard time meeting that burden without having Section 5 declared unconstitutional

This is great news but means that the SCOTUS will be looking at Section 5 in the next session