In North Carolina, Obama won by only 12,000 votes. In Indiana, his lead is only 23,000 votes. In Missouri, McCain leads by a mere 6,000 votes. If Obama was sitting on 298 electoral votes rather than 338 (without those states included in the tally), we would no doubt be hearing a demand for recounts that would throw the outcome of the election in doubt and we would be facing Florida times three.

That is already likely to happen in some non-presidential races. In Minnesota, for example, the Senate race between Al Franken and Norm Coleman remains a nail-biter. With 99% of precincts reporting, Coleman leads by less than 800 votes out of almost 2.5 million cast. There will be a recount there.

Ted Stevens appears to have been reelected to the Senate despite his recent conviction on federal corruption charges. I think this opens up an opportunity for Sarah Palin. The Senate will likely expel Stevens early next year, which means Alaska will have to call a special election to fill his seat. If she wants to make a serious run at the White House, she needs to go to the Senate where she can be a national figure rather than the governor of a remote state.

Michigan passed both ballot proposals, one to legalize the medical use of marijuana and the other to legalize stem cell research, both by fairly comfortable margins. This is a good thing, in my view. Unfortunately, the federal government can still enforce the Controlled Substances Act in this state against medical marijuana users despite the new law, even if people have a prescription. In California, which has a similar law, people are still arrested and jailed even though they are fully licensed by the state to distribute it and even if they the patients have a prescription to receive it.

You can thank the Supreme Court for that, by the way. In Gonzales v Raich, the 2005 case over California’s medical marijuana law, the court handed down one of the worst rulings in its history. And in case you think this is a liberal or conservative issue, you may be surprised to hear how the vote broke down. All four liberals on the court (Justices Breyer, Stevens, Ginsburg and Souter) voted in favor of allowing the federal government to continue to arrest and prosecute users of medical marijuana despite state law. They were joined by the more moderate Justice Kennedy and the arch-conservative Justice Scalia. Only Justices O’Connor, Rehnquist and Thomas dissented.

There may be some reason to hope that under Barack Obama the federal Department of Justice and the Drug Enforcement Agency will find other priorities and stop going after sick people who are only following their state laws to find some relief from their pain, but keep in mind that Joe Biden is the most zealous of drug warriors. He is the primary architect of the asset forfeiture laws that allow the government to seize any assets they think are even remotely connected to the use or distribution of drugs, even if they never actually convict or even charge the person with any crime. That doesn’t exactly inspire confidence.

Speaking of courts, the defeat of Michigan Supreme Court Justice Cliff Taylor by Diane Hathaway has to rank among the most significant and surprising things to happen last night. Taylor had incumbency on his side along with a massive war chest (he raised more money than any judicial candidate had ever raised in this state, breaking his own record) and the overwhelming support of Republicans and the business community. He is a virtual icon among conservatives, not just in Michigan but around the country as well. I can’t help but think that Elizabeth Weaver, a fellow Republican who has long feuded with Taylor, is smiling right now.

The victory for stem cell research brings Michigan out of the 19th century. I was astonished to find out only a few months ago that Michigan actually made it a felony for researchers to develop new stem cell lines in this state. Last night’s victory for Proposal 2 is a win for science, reason, and the victims of many terrible diseases. And it should make life a lot easier for at least one stem cell researcher from the University of Michigan, who has had to do her work in a lab in California because of the Michigan laws that were overturned last night.

Sadly, this was not a good night for equality. California’s Prop 8, which overturns a state Supreme Court ruling allowing gay marriage, appears to have passed. In one of the most disturbing statistics I’ve ever heard, 95% of African-Americans in California voted for Barack Obama, but 69% of them also voted to deny equal rights to gay and lesbian couples. Are memories so short? Only last year we celebrated the 40th anniversary of the Supreme Court ruling that overturned state bans on interracial marriage, a tremendous moment for equality and civil rights.

That’s not the only cloud in this silver lining. Arizona and Florida also passed bans on gay marriage, while Arkansas passed a referendum prohibiting gay couples from adopting children.

And we can lay this one almost entirely at the feet of religion-inspired bigotry. In California, exit polls showed that those who attended church regularly voted against marriage equality 83-17%. Those who attended church only occasionally voted for marriage equality 60-40%. Those who do not attend church at all voted for marriage equality 86-14%. There is still much work to be done.

House Judiciary Committee Chair Rep. John Conyers

The U.S. Justice Department will “continue to monitor closely” reports that a Michigan Republican Party official planned to use home foreclosure lists to challenge voters’ eligibility on Election Day.

“If those allegations were true, it would be a concern to us in the Civil Rights Division,” Grace Chung Becker, the acting assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights, told lawmakers at a joint hearing of the House Judiciary and Administration Committees on Wednesday.

Becker also informed lawmakers that criminal prosecutors from the Justice Department would not monitor polling stations.

The renewed attention on voter suppression was prompted by a story reported in Michigan Messenger earlier this month. Having failed to win the last two presidential elections, there is growing concern among Democratic officials that Republicans are engaged in efforts to suppress voter turnout. Republicans used the hearing to argue that fraud is a bigger problem.

While lawmakers debated whether suppression or fraud was a bigger problem, election officials from Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Virginia, testified that they faced more pressing and practical problems on Election Day, including the right number of paper ballots, voting machines, and security issues.

“We’re going to be hit with a tsunami,” said Doug Lewis, the director of the National Association of Election Officials. “We may be overrun in this election.”

While these officials did not dismiss fraud as a problem — they described it as one that was manageable -– they emphasized the need for more resources to address shortcomings that led to the Florida recount in 2000 and the allegations of voter suppression, malfunctioning equipment and long lines in Ohio in 2004.

The hearing illustrated how local election procedures are fast becoming a national issue. Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) complained to David Ferrell, the deputy assistant Secretary of State in Ohio, that Secretary of State Jennifer Brunner had decided to let voters who register apply for absentee ballots on the same day. The law requires a 30-day waiting period.

Her decision, Jordan said, could lead to “mischief and problems.”

(McCain’s campaign has sued to overturn the decision.)

The hearing made clear how the parties are maneuvering for advantage as polling place officials prepare for the more than 130 million voters expected to cast their ballots for Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.), Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) or various third party candidates on Nov. 4.

Democrats charge that Republicans seek to suppress turnout from certain groups of voters and argue themselves for polling practices that will make it it easier to vote. Republicans complain that voter fraud –- whether it is people who falsely represent themselves registering or voting –- is the chief threat to the election’s integrity, even though there are relatively few cases of fraud.

Rep. Vern Ehlers (R-Mich.) at Wednesday

The debate led to a moment of friction early in the hearing when Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D-Calif.), the chair of the House Administration election subcommittee, demanded that Rep. Trent Frank (R-Ariz.) provide evidence that ACORN, a liberal community action group, had been involved in widespread voter fraud.
“I’m appalled that you would make a statement that you cannot back up,” Lofgren said.

Frank responded saying his information was based on media reports in the Pittsburgh Tribune Review, a newspaper backed by conservative banker Richard M. Scaife, and John Fund, a conservative editorial writer for the Wall Street Journal.

“It’s a red herring,” Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-N.Y.) said, referring to voter registration fraud. “The overwhelming problem is that legitimate voters are being denied the right to register and to vote.”

With Congress facing the prospect of voting on a $700 billion bailout for Wall Street banks and having to approve legislation necessary to keep the government running, the hearing was sparsely attended. By mid-afternoon, only House Judiciary John Conyers (D-Mich.) and Rep. Henry Gonzalez (D-Texas) remained.
Still, lawmakers seemed well aware of the rising stakes of another hard fought, closely contested election.

“The past two elections left a very bad taste in mouths of Americans,” California rep. Lofgren said. “If that happens again, if half of America thinks the election is not fair… Americans will feel that something funny was going on.“

Congressional Democrats have put renewed emphasis on voter suppression issues in the few days before they recess for six weeks. Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-Ohio) introduced legislation preventing political parties from using lists of foreclosed homes to challenge one’s eligibility to vote, and the House Administration elections subcommittee will hold a hearing on Thursday on the suppression of student voters.

Jonathan E. Kaplan is Washington correspondent for the Center for Independent Media’s network of online news sites.