Every election season, before the contest begins choking news cycles, state governments try to pass laws and regulations that will help push one party or another to victory. Republicans and Democrats tweak election laws that detail who can vote, when, where and how easy it will be, all in the belief that these administrative structures can predetermine, to a certain extent, which types of voters will come to the polls and therefore which party will have an edge.
There's a debate brewing on Capitol Hill about which bits of the energy industry the federal government should be supporting with tax breaks and tax incentives. The Senate's proposal from a couple months back to eliminate tax breaks for the biggest oil and gas companies did not pass; another proposal in the Senate, to eliminate subsidies for corn-based ethanol, did pass yesterday.
The House Natural Resources Committee has been [trying for a little while](http://naturalresources.house.gov/Issues/Issue/?IssueID=5921) to pin environmentalists with responsibility for the man-made drought in California. How can a drought be man-made? In this case, irrigation to the state's Central Valley was scaled back after environmentalists argued successfully in court that diverting the water from the Sacramento-San Joaquin delta was killing endangered fish. The man-made drought is simply the Valley dealing with its natural water supply, or lack thereof.
He just might be right, because, really, what else is Weiner going to do? He's spent his entire career working in politics; unlike Eliot Spitzer, who ended up in TV anyway, he doesn't have a quiet law office to retreat to. And because there is such a demand from cable TV networks for politicians to go on air and spout off, Weiner has been training for a TV news job. And TV does have an allure for someone who likes to be looked at.