Former senator and Democratic vice presidential nominee John Edwards' mug shot was released on Wednesday, following a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request.

Edwards pleaded not guilty earlier this month to federal charges that he solicited and used campaign contributions to hide his mistress and their baby.

Among the charges for which he has been indicted include four counts of illegal campaign contributions, conspiracy and making false statements in connection with a cover-up of his extramarital affair.

Speaking outside the federal courthouse after his June 3 arraignment, the former North Carolina senator admitted to wrongdoing - but maintained that his actions, however unethical, were not illegal.

"There's no question that I've done wrong, and I take full responsibility for having done wrong," he said. "And I will regret for the rest of my life the pain and the harm that I've caused to others."

"But I did not break the law, and I never, ever thought I was breaking the law," Edwards said.

Edwards was offered a misdemeanor plea deal before the indictment, but the deal reportedly fell through because Edwards and his team wanted a chance to make his case for an alternative to prison time, such as home arrest.

• 12 Shares

By Ali Gharib on Jun 15, 2011 at 10:00 am

• 
• 

Mark Gersh is Washington Director of the National Committee for an Effective Congress, and a CBS News Consultant. This is a regular Hotsheet series on redistricting battles across the country.

The stakes are high in California: it holds more congressional districts than any other state, and unlike many states where elected officials (and hence, the party in power) controls drawing the lines, California has tried to remove strict partisanship from the process with an independent and bipartisan commission drawing the new boundaries.

Now, the first of three map proposals that will be finalized later this year is out, and the California redistricting commission signaled that the days of incumbent protection are over.

This new map (at left) would propel Democratic prospects and force numerous incumbents into the same district, where they may end up competing against each other. And in a state that saw no districts change hands in 2010, California could now be poised to become the nation's hottest House battlefield in 2012.

Right now, Democrats hold 33 of the state's 53 congressional districts (and widely expected to return to 34 after a special election in CA36 this summer).

An initial assessment of the likely partisan ramifications, assuming the first proposal replicates the final version, is that 29 seats are certain to elect a Democrat, and 12 a Republican. Twelve seats would be competitive, seven where is the outcome is impossible to predict, four lean Democrat and one leans Republican. Consequently, Democrats should win at least 33 and as many as 41 of the 53 seats. If the toss-ups are split evenly, Democrats would win 36-37 of the 53 districts, a net gain of 2-3 seats.

Democratic incumbents facing serious general election challenges include notable names Lois Capps, Dennis Cardoza, Jim Costa and Loretta Sanchez, and possibly Susan Davis. Republicans who may lose a seat to a Democratic challenger include Brian Bilbray, Elton Gallegly, David Dreier (who was drawn into a heavily Hispanic Los Angeles district), Gary Miller, Dan Lungren, Jeff Denam and possibly Mary Bono Mack.

Also animating the California electoral environment are potential primary showdowns. For example, two long-term Los Angeles area Democrats, Brad Sherman and Howard Berman, were drawn in the same district. Although Democrats Pete Stark and Jerry McNerney were forced into a shared district, McNerney may move east where a sizable segment of his current district is encompassed.

Similarly, Republicans Brian Bilbray and Darrell Issa saw their districts combined, with Bilbray contemplating the option of running in a neighboring and more Democratic district in the San Diego area. In another fascinating decision, all three Central Valley incumbents -Republican Jeff Denham and Democrats Dennis Cardoza and Jim Costa - were merged into one district, although each may opt for a neighboring district.

The redistricting commission went to great lengths to bolster minority representation, reflecting the state's changing demographics. It created 16 majority Hispanic districts, and two others with Asian populations in excess of 40 percent. The residual impact may be primaries between African American and Hispanic candidates. African-American incumbent Laura Richardson may faces a serious challenge from a Hispanic candidate in the Democratic primary. Judy Chu, an Asian-American Democrat, will be able to run in a district that is 49 percent Asian, thus avoiding a serious primary fight against a Hispanic challenger.

From a geographic viewpoint, the map may reflect overall growth in population moving east of Los Angeles County, which would surrender a district to the Inland Empire (San Bernadino-Riverside), and the Central Valley garners an increasing influence over the Bay area.

The evolving redistricting process calls for approval by August 15th by a 14 member citizens commission. It will require an affirmative vote from 9 of 14 commissioners. Overall, the commission consists of five Democrats, five Republicans and four members unaffiliated with either party.

California failed to gain additional congressional seats for the first time in history. Given the absence of competitive congressional races in recent years (no seats changed hands in 2010, and only two were ever in doubt), the parties didn't need to spend large allocations of national party money in the expensive California media markets. That will change in 2012, when California will potentially be the scene of more marginal congressional races than any other state in the country.

More Redistricting Coverage in Hotsheet:

Iowa races could be among 2012's most competitive
Indiana redistricting bolsters GOP prospects
Dems seek big gains after Illinois redistricting

• 2 Comments Have Your Say
• Email StorySend to a Friend
• 4 SharesTell Your Friends
• Tweet ThisTweet This
• MoreShare It

Flying under the radar at the first debate with all of the top GOP presidential contenders, Minnesota Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.) showed why she's been the darling of the Tea Party movement and proved that she's vying not to be just an also ran in the election.

Her down-home folksiness and easy going demeanor allowed her to capture the attention of the audience and stand out among a crowd of serious and sometimes stiff candidates on the stage in New Hampshire. It didn't hurt that Bachmann was the only woman among the seven candidates and her slightly shorter stature allowed her to fly under the radar and steal the thunder from the more known and polished candidates.

"It's a thrill to be here tonight in the live free or die state" she said to opening applause in her introductory statement.

Top 5 takeaways from the GOP debate
GOP candidates split on marriage amendment
GOP Town Hall offers some surprising candor
MoneyWatch.com: GOP debate short on economic solutions

She quickly hit her stride attacking government regulation. She called the Dodd-Frank wall street reform bill "over-the-top" and said it will "actually lead to more job loss." And hit on early on her favorite line of attack, on President Obama's health care reform. While the other candidates often spoke of serious policy issues and disagreements, Bachmann kept her answers conversational, folksy, and casual, but direct.

"I want to make a promise to everyone watching tonight, as president of the United States: I will not rest until I repeal Obamacare. It's a promise, take that to the bank, cash the check, I will make sure that that happens," she said.

Bachmann quickly honed her attack on the Obama administration's penchant for government regulation at the expense of job creation.

"What could the president be thinking passing a bill like this, knowing full well it will kill 800,000 jobs," she asked about health care reform, citing a government study for the statistics.

"Every time the liberals get into office, they pass an omnibus bill of big spending projects, what we need to do is pass the mother-of-all repeal bills but it's the repeal bill that will get at job killing regulations," she added, saying the Environmental Protection Agency should be renamed the "Job Killing Organization of America."

When asked about the influence of the tea party, the chair of the House Tea Party caucus hit her stride.

"It's a wide swath of America coming together, I think that's why the left fears it so much, because its people who simply want to take the country back, they want to country to work again," she said of the Tea Party movement.

But she didn't stop there.

"No question this election will be about economics. How will we create jobs?... It's a great story for Republicans to tell, President Obama can't tell that story... Republicans have an awesome story to tell," she said, noting the tea party's focus on the economy. But she asked Republicans to join together.

"We need everybody to come together. Because we are going to win! Make no mistake about it. I want to announce tonight: President Obama is a one-term president," she said to boisterous applause. Camera shots of the crowd showed more smiles and approval for that line than at any other time in the debate.

Michelle Bachmann announces presidential run
GOP candidates split on federal marriage amendment
Tim Pawlenty calls Obama "declinist," backs off "Obamneycare" line
Will backing off "Obamneycare" in GOP debate hurt Pawlenty's campaign?

Bachmann started the night with announcing her official candidacy, saying she filed the paperwork to declare her candidacy with the Federal Election Commission.

CNN host John King explained to the crowd what her filing was compared to the other candidates and joked, "I'm sure they welcome you to the fray"

Little did they know that Bachmann's easy-going, friendly demeanor coupled with her serious but not wonky policy discussions showed after the first debate that her voice will have an impact on the race whether they welcome it or not.

• Share This

The seven Republican presidential candidates onstage at a debate in New Hampshire Monday night split on whether they support passage of a constitutional amendment to define marriage as between one man and one woman, while one - Rep. Michele Bachmann - seemed to trip over the question.

Within the context of New Hampshire's law allowing gay people to marry, Bachmann was asked what influence she would use as president "to try to overturn these state laws despite your own personal belief that states should handle their own affairs whenever possible."

"I do believe in the 10th amendment and I do believe in self-determination for the states," Bachmann responded, adding that she also sees marriage as "between a man and woman." Later, she said that she doesn't "see that it's the role of a president to go into states and interfere with their state laws."

The comment generated applause and was taken by debate moderator John King as Bachmann saying she would not interfere with the New Hampshire gay marriage law. Later, however, the Minnesota Republican clarified her position - saying she did back a federal marriage amendment.

"I do support a constitutional amendment on marriage between a man and woman, but I would not be going into the states to overturn their state law," said Bachmann.

Two of the candidates - Herman Cain and Rep. Ron Paul - suggested they opposed a federal marriage amendment. (Cain said it should be up to the states, while Paul stressed the federal government should not be involved in marriage at all.)

Newt Gingrich said that if the Defense of Marriage Act - which the Obama administration is now declining to defend in court - is overturned, "at that point you have no choice but a constitutional amendment."

Both Mitt Romney and Tim Pawlenty said they backed a constitutional amendment. So did Rick Santorum, who also suggested that the position didn't constitute overriding states' rights.

"The constitutional amendment includes the states," he said. "Three-quarters of the states have to ratify it. So the states will be involved in this process. We should have one law with respect to marriage. There needs to be consistency as something as foundational as what marriage is."

The candidates were also asked whether they would try to reinstate the "don't ask, don't tell" policy barring gay men and women from serving openly in the military. Cain said that he wouldn't have overturned the policy, but "now that they have changed it, I wouldn't create a distraction trying turn it over as president."

Paul said he would not work to overthrow the repeal of "don't ask, don't tell," saying individual rights are paramount. He said behavior should be what matters, "not the person who belongs to which group."

Pawlenty declined to answer - saying he would defer to military commanders - while Romney chafed at the question, saying "we ought to be talking about the economy and jobs." He then declined to answer the question as well, though he said he believed the policy should not have been overturned in the first place.

Gingrich signaled that he opposed overturning the policy, but like Pawlenty said he would defer to military commanders. Bachmann said she supported the policy - but also said she would confer with military commanders.

The only unequivocal answer to reinstate the policy came from Santorum, who is known for his social conservatism.

"The job of the United States military is to protect and defend the people of this country," he said. "It is not for social experimentation. It should be repealed."

The top five takeaways from the GOP debate

Michele Bachmann announces presidential campaign

Tim Pawlenty calls Obama "declinist," backs off "Obamneycare" line

The candidates were also asked their perspective on the separation of church and state. Watch below:

• 3 Shares