Hans A. von Spakovsky

Though the polls were scheduled to close at 7 p.m., long lines in Fairfax County — the most populous jurisdiction in Virginia — kept some voters waiting until 10:30 to vote last Tuesday. The reason, according to election officials, was a shortage of poll workers partially caused by the Republican majority on the county’s three-member electoral board. One of those Republicans is controversial former Federal Election Commissioner Hans A. von Spakovsky, a George W. Bush recess appointee to the Commission and prominent advocate for strict voter ID laws.

Washington Post columnist Robert McCartney reported Thursday that General Registrar Cameron Quinn (R) said a major cause of the long lines was that she had 250 fewer poll workers than in the 2008, and 28,000 more voters. But, once parties nominate elections officials, they must be first approved by Quinn’s office, next be okayed by the electoral board, and then finally be trained for several hours:

By the week before the election, Quinn’s office had not acted on Democratic nominations of about 250 elections officials, Farrell said. The office cited a lack of paperwork or other shortcomings that Farrell said had not caused such delays in previous elections.

Moreover, at the same time, 140 Democratic-nominated officials had been approved by Quinn’s office and were ready to get the okay from the Electoral Board. But the two GOP-appointed members of the three-member board chose not to hold a meeting as scheduled on the Friday before the election.

That final meeting was cancelled, over the objection of Electoral Board Chairman Seth Stark (D), by the board’s two Republicans. Hans von Spakovsky’s official rationale was that senior staff requested the cancellation as they had lost election preparation time to Hurricane Sandy.

Faifax County Board of Supervisors Chairman Sharon Bulova (D) has proposed a bipartisan commission to examine the causes of the long lines. In his story, McCartney urged that this commission “should include an aggressive look at whether the GOP’s political interest in a low Fairfax turnout contributed to the Election Day problems.”

Republicans enjoy a majority on the electoral board because Virginia’s Governor, Bob McDonnell, is a Republican. But like other Washington, D.C. suburbs, Fairfax is a Democratic-leaning county. More than 108,000 of President Obama’s less-than-150,000 vote statewide margin came from Fairfax.

Long lines plagued elections in other swing states as well, prompting President Obama to note “we have to fix that,” in his election night victory speech.

Michigan’s ban on affirmative action was struck down for a second time by a federal appeals court Thursday – this time on rehearing by the full panel of judges on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit.

In a strong defense of minorities’ access to the political process, an eight-judge majority struck down the state constitutional amendment passed in 2006, holding that the amendment imposed a constitutionally impermissible burden on those seeking to implement a race-conscious admissions policy above and beyond the burden imposed on others seeking to change admissions criteria. Judge R. Guy Cole Jr. wrote for the majority:

A student seeking to have her family’s alumni connections considered in her application to one of Michigan’s esteemed public universities could do one of four things to have the school adopt a legacy-conscious admissions policy: she could lobby the admissions committee, she could petition the leadership of the university, she could seek to influence the school’s governing board, or, as a measure of last resort, she could initiate a statewide campaign to alter the state’s constitution. The same cannot be said for a black student seeking the adoption of a constitutionally permissible race-conscious admissions policy. That student could do only one thing to effect change: she could attempt to amend the Michigan Constitution—a lengthy, expensive, and arduous process—to repeal the consequences of Proposal 2. The existence of such a comparative structural burden undermines the Equal Protection Clause’s guarantee that all citizens ought to have equal access to the tools of political change.

The Sixth Circuit first heard the case more than a year ago, and rejected the ban under similar reasoning. As in the initial ruling, when the judges split 2-1, the full panel of judges split in the case 8-7, signaling a continuing ideological divide on the contentious issue of affirmative action.

Citing existing Supreme Court precedent, the majority in this case assumed the constitutionality of the university’s power to “even consider using race as a factor in admissions”, but this power may take a fatal blow this term when the John Roberts-led court reviews the University of Texas’ race-conscious admissions policy.

Karl Rove

The non-partisan Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) filed complaints Thursday with both the Federal Election Commission (FEC) and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) alleging that Karl Rove and his secretive Crossroads GPS violated election law and may have engaged in a criminal conspiracy to do so.

Under campaign finance law and FEC regulations, 501(c)(4) groups, like Crossroads GPS, can raise unlimited funds from wealthy individuals and corporations without having to disclose their donors. The only time donors to these secretive groups must be disclosed is when donors give more than $200 explicitly “for the purpose of furthering an independent expenditure.”

According to CREW, Rove expressly asked for and received millions of dollars in contributions specifically to fund an independent expenditure effort in support of unsuccessful Republican Ohio Senate nominee Josh Mandel:

Federal law requires any outside group that makes an independent expenditure to disclose the donors who contributed to pay for such ads. Groups like Crossroads GPS normally evade this law by claiming none of their contributions were earmarked for a specific purpose. At an August 2012 fundraiser, however, Rove said an anonymous donor gave Crossroads GPS $3 million specifically for the Ohio Senate race, and told Rove it was a “matching challenge” dependent on the group raising another $3 million for the race. Crossroads GPS ended up spending $6.36 million on independent expenditures in the Ohio race, but did not disclose any donors in nine reports the group filed with the FEC.

CREW also notes that, in a 2011 letter to the FEC, Crossroads GPS said that it “understands the applicable reporting regulations” and that, should it receive “any contributions that are required to be reported,” it would do so as required. Given this, CREW argues, the violations “were deliberate” and “are subject to criminal as well as civil penalties.”

The Rove comment in question was reported in Bloomberg Businessweek in September. That article quoted Rove as saying a donor told him “I’ll give ya’ $3 million, matching challenge,” and that “Bob Castellini, owner of the Cincinnati Reds, is helping raise the other $3 million for that one.” Crossroads GPS would end up spending just over $6 million on the Ohio Senate race.

Tara Malloy, senior counsel at the Campaign Legal Center, told ThinkProgress that if the allegations are true, it “seems reasonable to assume the main contributor gave for the purpose of furthering that expenditure or at least that these allegations warrant an FEC investigation.” But, she notes, the three Republican appointees on the deadlocked six-member Federal Election Commission often block enforcement efforts of this type and have previously noted a difference between contributions furthering independent expenditures in general — and contributions specifically furthering a particular independent expenditure. Even if Rove raised the money to fund independent expenditures in the Ohio Senate race, that interpretation of the rule would require proof that he discussed with them the exact ads before the donation.

Still, she observed, “The allegations are troubling… One would hope the FEC might investigate this matter.”

Crossroads GPS may also be in hot water for its apparent failure to register as a charity in Virginia, as required by law.