From a Voting ID Case to Leisure Sickness
Robert Barnes reports on the voting identification case now before the Supreme Court:
The Supreme Court will open the new year with its most politically divisive case since Bush v. Gore decided the 2000 presidential election, and its decision could force a major reinterpretation of the rules of the 2008 contest.
The case presents what seems to be a straightforward and even unremarkable question: Does a state requirement that voters show a specific kind of photo identification before casting a ballot violate the Constitution?
The answer so far has depended greatly on whether you are a Democratic or Republican politician -- or even, some believe, judge.
Matthew Mosk writes that the "upbeat pre-Christmas tone of the 2008 presidential campaign is about to shift" as independent expenditure groups join the fray. In Opinion, Emily Yoffe looks at the Clintons and wonders if this could be "the first presidential election in which the public's feeling about a candidate's spouse is a deciding factor."
And finally, for those ambivalent about the holiday season, Lindsay Minnema in the Health section unpacks the idea of "leisure sickness" and why some Type A folks have such a hard time adjusting to rest and relaxation.
The comments to this entry are closed.