Charming as always from these same fine folks: How Do You Get a 100% Rating from the Far-Far-Far Right “Family Foundation?”; The Family Foundation objects to a rainbow flag flying at the Richmond Federal Reserve; Ken Cuccinelli to Rally This Evening with “gay-bashing, abortion-hating, home-school-loving group”; etc. This time, they’re on a rampage against the horrors of one or two little kids possibly going pee-pee in the bathroom. I mean, start down that slippery slope, and next thing you know. “Mr. Smith” could start “wearing a dress” or even become “Ms. Smith.” Yeah, these people have waaaaaayyy too much time on their hands, and are spending waaaaayyyy too much of that time thinking about other people’s private parts, sex lives, etc.

Over the past few weeks, I’ve had the chance to interview (in writing) all five Democratic candidates for Virginia’s 45th House of Delegates district. Here are my composite scores, issue by issue and candidate by candidate, with an overall grade at the bottom. Of course, there’s a lot of subjectivity to this, but I tried to rate the answers on their own merits, as well as to be internally consistent in how I rated the candidates (e.g., in terms of thoroughness, local relevance, progressive and environmental values). As you can see, there are several strong candidates for the Democratic nomnination in the 45th, which is the kind of “problem” voters should want to have!

P.S. Also, just to emphasize, these grades are based on the candidates’ answers to the Blue Virginia questionnaire, not their debate performances, endorsements, fundraising, etc.

1. Tell us a bit about yourself, and specifically, what in your background and/or temperament makes you the best qualified of the Democratic candidates to represent the 45th House of Delegates district in Richmond.

Mark Levine: B+; lengthy and generally very strong answer, except that it doesn’t talk about any local involvement specifically in Virginia and/or the 45th district.

Clarence Tong: A-; strong background in national and local politics, including service as chair of the Alexandria Democratic Committee and as an Obama administration appointee.

Craig Fifer: A-; strong history of involvement in the Democratic Party, as a volunteer, and in his professional work.

Julie Jakopic: B+; good answer, although nothing about Democratic Party activity, volunteering on campaigns, etc.

Larry Altenburg: B; as in “business,” which seems to be his focus.

2. What three issues are you most passionate about and why?  What specifically have you done to further those issues? What would be the first bill you’d introduce in the House of Delegates?

Mark Levine:  A; very strong answer with detailed explanations.

Clarence Tong: A; very strong

Craig Fifer: A+; very strong and detailed answers, also very much like the focus on “effective and transparent government,” a core progressive value and something sorely needed in Virginia these days!

Julie Jakopic: A; strong focus on education and health care, and promoting economic opportunity for all, with detailed answers.

Larry Altenburg: B-/C+; solid background, mostly in business and urban planning, although nothing necessarily jumps out from a progressive or environmental perspective.

3. How would you describe yourself ideologically – “progressive,” “moderate,” “liberal,” or something else?  How does your record of votes, endorsements, employment, and other activities reflect your political ideology?

Mark Levine: A; very strong answer about being a “progressive” and a “liberal.”

Clarence Tong: B; decent answer — “I am proud to call myself an Obama Democrat, although there’s certainly question – even to this day – about what it means exactly to be an “Obama Democrat” (despite the right wing’s feverish imaginings that Obama’s some sort of far-left radical, my views is that he’s a pragmatist who likes to seek consensus and bipartisan compromises).

Craig Fifer: A; good answer — “I’m a progressive” who has worked to “help elect progressive candidates and make our Party stronger and more effective.”

Julie Jakopic: A-; good answer (“results-oriented progressive”).

Larry Altenburg: C; my preferred answer to this question would have been “progressive” or “pragmatic progressive,” as I’m not sure exactly what a “pragmatic Democrat” would be in practice, given the current reality of politics in Virginia (e.g., a House of Delegates overwhelmingly controlled by hard-right Republicans).

4. Who is your favorite and who is your least favorite current Virginia politician and why?

Mark Levine: A-; very strong answer on the favorite (Mark Herring), interesting (if a bit obscure) answer on the least favorite (Phil Puckett).

Clarence Tong: B-; easy answer (Warner and Kaine), but not one that I find particularly inspiring, as Mark Warner has been basically an old-style moderate Republican,  not particularly progressive on economic issues, and mediocre (at best) on energy/enviro issues.

Craig Fifer: C; didn’t directly answer the question, and while in theory I also strongly believe “that politics should be about ideas and not about personalities,” in reality that’s rarely the case.

Julie Jakopic: B; goes for the political pick on “favorite” with her long-time friend Rob Krupicka, who has endorsed her for this election; very strong answers on “least favorite,” picking two politicians who, in their own ways, have violated the public trust.

Larry Altenburg: D; didn’t directly answer the question, also used a false equivalency, criticizing any politician – progressive, conservative, libertarian, green, whatever – who is “entrenched in ideology.”

5. If you had been in the House of Delegates at the time, would you have voted for a) HB 2313, the comprehensive transportation package passed in 2013; b) repeal of Virginia’s estate tax, which is costing our state around $130 million a year in order to benefit a few hundred of the wealthiest Virginians; c) the 2011 redistricting bill HB 5001, which gerrymandered the state and helped to lock in a Republican majority in the House of Delegates for the rest of the decade; or d) the 2014 and 2015 ethics reform packages, which many (myself included) have criticized as extremely weak, possibly even a step backwards in the case of the most recent “reforms.”

Mark Levine: B; the answers are fine (although I think the transportation bill was seriously flawed and needed multiple changes), but little elaboration as to his thinking behind them.

Clarence Tong: B; the answers are fine, but no elaboration about his thinking behind the answers.

Craig Fifer: A; very strong answers and reasoning — nice job.

Julie Jakopic: B; solid answers.

Larry Altenburg: B; solid answers.

6. What is your vision for Virginia’s energy future? Do you support any of the following: offshore oil drilling, natural gas “fracking,” new natural gas pipelines (e.g., Mountain Valley Pipeline, Atlantic Coast Pipeline) uranium mining, new coal-fired power plants, mountaintop removal coal mining? If not, what will you do to fight against these things, and to fight for a healthy environment, energy efficiency, and renewable power?

Mark Levine: A; very strong answer.

Clarence Tong: A-/B+; generally strong answers, except for being open to new natural gas pipelines, although that does seem to be consistent with the position of the friendly-towards-natural-gas environmental group (Environmental Defense Fund) he works for.

Craig Fifer: A; very strong answers, as well as reasoning behind them.

Julie Jakopic: A-/B+; generally strong, although I am not a fan of her answer on natural gas pipelines (“I remain undecided about construction of major new natural gas pipelines across Virginia.”).

Larry Altenburg: B; generally strong, but didn’t answer my question about new natural gas pipelines, also left the door slightly ajar to offshore oil drilling.

7. Yes or no answers. Do you support:

a) a strongly progressive tax system, including a reasonable estate tax on the wealthy; b) “Dream Act” for Virginia; c) allowing gay couples to adopt; d) closing the “gun show loophole” and taking other commonsense gun measures; e) raising the gas tax and/or instituting a carbon tax (revenue-neutral or otherwise)?

Mark Levine: A-; very strong answers, although no elabaration at all as to his thinking on them.

Clarence Tong: A-; very strong answers, although no elabaration at all as to his thinking on them.

Craig Fifer: A+; very strong answers as well as reasoning behind the answers.

Julie Jakopic: A-; very strong answers, although not a great deal of explanation.

Larry Altenburg: C+; strong answers on most of the questions, with two important exceptions — 1) he did not endorse a “progressive tax system, including a reasonable estate tax on the wealthy” (although in another answer, he said he would NOT have voted to repeal the estate tax, which I’m glad to see!) instead calling for “a much more simple and common sense tax regime;” 2) he rejected a carbon tax, apparently even one that is revenue-neutral (e.g, all the revenues could be returned to people in a progressive manner), in favor or a cap-and-trade system, which is fine as well but no reason to reject a carbon tax.

8. Given that the 45th House of Delegates district is a solid “blue” district, and thus a “safe seat,” it is crucial that whoever is elected has a plan to help elect Democrats – preferably progressives – across Virginia. That includes fundraising, organizing volunteers, and maximizing turnout in the 45th district for statewide and Congressional elections. Do you agree with this vision for the Delegate from the 45th district, and if so, what exactly is your plan to accomplish it?

Mark Levine: B+; good answer, although the knock on Mark has been that he has NOT been focused or heavily involved locally in the 45th district, would love to hear more about that.

Clarence Tong: A; very strong answer, backed up with a track record of working to elect Democrats.

Craig Fifer: A; very strong answer, backed up by a track record of helping to elect Democrats.

Julie Jakopic: A; very strong answer, backed up by a track record of helping to elect Democrats.

Larry Altenburg: C; I found this answer confusing, not sure if he’s fully committed to working to elect more Democrats, let alone progressive Democrats.

9. Do you agree or disagree that Richmond is broken – for instance, the tremendous influence of money, lobbyists and corporations (e.g., Dominion Virginia Power, car title/payday lenders) on legislation – and needs major ethics reform? More broadly, if elected to the House of Delegates, would your general attitude be more “go along, get along” with this system or to “shake things up?”  Please be as specific as possible in your answer.  For instance, would you support campaign finance reform that sharply curtails the power of corporations, lobbyists, and special interests?

Mark Levine: A; excellent answer, although more of a national than Virginia-specific focus.

Clarence Tong: A; excellent answer, albeit not a great deal of elaboration.

Craig Fifer: A+; this answer was absolutely superb, he really gets it on this subject!

Julie Jakopic: C; we definitely disagree on this one, as I see Richmond as almost comically (tragicomically?) broken (e.g., a government bought-and-paid-for by big corporations like Dominion; Democrats with only 32 seats out of 100 in the House of Delegates due in large part to odd-year elections, gerrymandering and a no-limits campaign contribution system) and she says, “I would not characterize Richmond as ‘broken.'” She does support “further ethics reform” and redistricting reform, both of which are sorely needed.

Larry Altenburg: D; I respectfully, but strongly, disagree with his “both sides” false equivalency, in which (supposedly) “Richmond is broken since Democrats and Republicans aren’t working together to find solutions to our most basic problems.” I further disagree that the problem in Richmond is “partisan bickering” per se. Instead, I believe the problem is a system which is fundamentally corrupt, also one which discourages compromise, mostly these days since Republican incumbents fear a challenge from their above all else, ergo are not willing to meet anywhere near the middle.

10.  Please tell us how you would stand up to party leadership, and even to a Democratic

governor, if you believed that they were wrong about an issue and/or that it would hurt the 45th district.

Mark Levine: B; solid answer (other than misspelling “McAuliffe” twice), although more focused nationally than specifically here in Virginia.

Clarence Tong: B-; there’s nothing wrong with this answer, but I’m not sure I’m specifically and convincingly hearing how he’d “stand up to party leadership, and even to a Democratic governor, if you believed that they were wrong about an issue.”

Craig Fifer: B-; there’s nothing wrong with this answer, but I’m not sure I’m specifically and convincingly hearing how he’d “stand up to party leadership, and even to a Democratic governor, if you believed that they were wrong about an issue.”

Julie Jakopic: B; I’m not sure I heard a clear answer to this question, but she certainly was willing – as she notes – to stand up Don Beyer on things she cared about, and that seems to have led to a positive outcome.

Larry Altenburg: B-; there’s nothing wrong with this answer, but I’m not sure I’m specifically and convincingly hearing how he’d “stand up to party leadership, and even to a Democratic governor, if you believed that they were wrong about an issue.”

OVERALL GRADE

Mark Levine: A-/B+

Clarence Tong: B+

Craig Fifer: A-

Julie Jakopic: B+

Larry Altenburg: C+/C

It was a packed house at Los Tios Restaurant in Alexandria a bit earlier today, as State Senator Adam Ebbin – first elected to the Virginia House of Delegates in 2003, then succeeded Patsy Ticer to the State Senate in 2011 – kicked off his reelection campaign. In addition to Sen. Ebbin, speakers at the event were Alexandria Commonwealth’s Attorney Bryan Porter and Attorney General Mark Herring. Just a few others in attendance today included: all five candidates (Julie Jakopic, Craig Fifer, Mark Levine, Clarence Tong, Larry Altenberg) running for the 45h House of Delegates district seat being vacated by Del. Rob Krupicka (who was also there today); State Senator Barbara Favola; ACDC Chair Kip Malinosky; Mt. Vernon Democratic Committee Co-Chair Kate Spears; 8th CD Democratic Committee Chair Margo Horner; Fairfax Sheriff Stacey Kincaid; Fairfax County School Board member Ilryong Moon; Alexandria City Council members Tim Lovain, Justin Wilson and Del Pepper; “Ready for Hillary” co-founder Allida Black; etc.

To the right is video of AG Mark Herring’s speech, in which he talked about several of the many accomplishments his office has achieved in just 15 months or so. According to AG Herring, he is “really proud” to have helped bring marriage equality to Virginia (he noted that Republicans filed bills to impeach and disbar him over this), which has helped allow “over 1,500 same-sex couples [to] have married in Virginia.” AG Herring noted that in Virginia’s history, there have been times when the state’s Attorney General “went to the Supreme Court and argued on the wrong side of key, major, landmark civil rights cases in the past, but this time I was there on behalf of Virginians and standing up for equal rights for all Virginians, and it’s a great feeling.”

Herring also talked about helping “all of our students have a better opportunity for an affordable college education.”  That includes allowing in-state tuition for the children of undocumented immigrants (aka, “DREAMers”). This allows talented young people to “climb the ladder of success” here in Virginia, which they wouldn’t have been able to afford otherwise.  

Herring further discussed fighting “the heroin and prescription drug abuse spike,” “finding concrete ways to stop sexual assault on our college campuses” and to treat victims with the “respect and compassion they deserve.”

Herring noted that these are “not just independent  hodgepodge or random decisions we’ve taken, but rather they are connected.” To the contrary, it demostrates “just what an Attorney General can do for” Virginians. Of course, Herring pointed out, none of this would have happened if he hadn’t won an extremely close election, which he pointed out is why we have to work so hard to elect Democrats like Adam Ebbin.

With regard to Sen. Ebbin, AG Herring talked about how he’s shown “true leadership” on issues ranging from clean energy to LGBT equality to one of the earliest version of a Virginia DREAM Act.

Finally, AG Herring argued that Democrats have a “great opporunity to get a majority back in the Senate, which is absolutely critical.”

(For video of Adam Ebbin and Bryan Porter, see the comments section)

( – promoted by lowkell)

In March, I posted here the video and text of my press conference in which I announced that I was running against Mark Obenshain for the state senate seat in the 26th District. I said there that Mr. Obenshain was on the wrong side of the two big (and related) issues that will do most to determine what kind of Virginia, and what kind of America, our children and grandchildren will live in: climate change, and the theft of our democracy by big money.

Here are the video and the text of that speech.

I have a lot I want to share, from my heart as a patriot.

Our founders made it very clear what they wanted American patriots to protect, above all. What they required is a solemn pledge to defend the system of government they bequeathed to us. Not the homeland, not the flag, but this government of, for, and by the people.

That system is threatened now in a way we’ve never seen. And that’s why the choice between Mark Obenshain and me is important. That’s why even conservatives should consider me – the Democrat in this race – as the choice of real patriots.

When I announced my campaign, I spoke of how Big Money is getting too many of our legislators – including Mr. Obenshain – to serve its interests at the expense of ordinary Virginians.

One response I got was, “Corruption has always been around. What’s the big deal?”

It’s true; corruption is nothing new. But in America today, we’ve got a new kind of corruption that is a much greater danger.  And the need to stop it is a big deal.

The old kind of corruption is like a parasite, living off the body of America. Those with more money buy more clout and use it to take more than their fair share. But they aren’t trying to fundamentally change America.

Not so this New Corruption.  If we look closely, we can see a Big Money power working to subvert our very democracy in order to grab ever more money and power.

We can see it in our Supreme Court, where five justices, in the Citizens United decision, opened wide the floodgates to let the money pour into our elections, as never before, putting our government up for auction.

The result is that increasingly, a whole lot gets decided before the people even vote-decided by who gathers the millions of dollars or even, at the presidential level, hundreds of millions of dollars necessary to compete.  The role of that kind of money gives billionaires and giant corporations more and more say in who will rule us, and therefore what path America will take.

Our elections here in Virginia are 10 times more saturated in money than they were just 20 years ago.

This flood of money is terrible for our democracy.

The presidential hopefuls of one of our major parties recently went to kiss the ring of one billionaire whose endorsement is worth the votes of countless regular American citizens.

In this new corruption, the money power is destroying our democracy, turning our country into a place where the few rule the many. We can see this transformation happening with a shadowy organization — one that has escaped most people’s awareness — called ALEC.

Growing up in America, we’re taught that our laws are written by the legislators we elect. That is becoming less and less true. In state after state – including Virginia – laws are being passed that are written by this organization – ALEC – that advance the interests of Big Money, often at the expense of average citizens. Sure, the laws get passed by the legislators, but those laws have been written by the Big Money people who can bankroll our legislators’ re-election campaigns.

Over 50 bills, essentially written by ALEC, have been introduced in the Virginia legislature- our legislature.

And no one better represents this democracy-destroying new corruption than two men whose private wealth of almost $100 billion has been funding not only ALEC but many other efforts that are quietly but effectively using their money to get what they want, at our expense. I’m talking about the Koch Brothers.

The Koch Brothers have worked with untiring zeal and an absolutely brilliant strategy to transform the America our founders gave us into one where the few call the shots and the many are forced or conned into going along.

Because the Koch Brothers are so good at using their money to buy political power, you don’t have to be a Sherlock Holmes to understand the meaning of the following fact:  when Mark Obenshain ran for statewide office here in Virginia in 2013, he was given a big chunk of money by the Koch Brothers. We can assume they had good reason to believe that Mr. Obenshain could be relied on to advance their anti-democracy agenda.  (And advance it he already has-sponsoring multiple bills written not by lawmakers but by corporations, through ALEC).

This anti-democracy agenda takes advantage of divisive issues to cancel out the will of the people, leaving the field clear for Big Money to call the shots and for ordinary citizens to get the shaft.

It’s an agenda at work on a national scale, and right here in Virginia.  Do you suppose the rising power of this New Corruption has anything to do with the fact that the proportion of our national income going into corporate profits is at an all-time high, and the proportion going into the wages of average American workers is the lowest it has been in living memory?

It would be a big enough deal if Mr. Obenshain were only bought into the Old Corruption, doing the bidding of Dominion Power, giving it more than its fair share at the expense of 37,000 households right here in the district our senator is supposed to be serving.

But in addition to his being an accomplice to this Old Corruption, Mark Obenshain has been chosen by the leaders of this New Corruption.  

I’m running against Mark Obenshain because, in our times, stopping the advance of this subversive force is the first duty of any real American patriot.

If we are not willing to fight to protect the great gift our founders gave us, what would we fight for?

That’s what America needs now from its patriots.

A recent poll shows that 96% of Americans believe that money plays too big a role in our politics.  People are aware of the problem. But the same poll shows 91% believe there’s nothing we can do about it.  

Think of the feeling of helplessness that reveals!

But we have a chance — here in the 26th district — to show those 91% of our fellow Americans that We the People are not helpless!  

We have a chance to show that we are the worthy heirs of our founders.

Because that’s what this contest between Mark Obenshain and me is about. Not between conservative vs. liberal, as he would have you believe. But between Government by Big Money… and government by the People, as our founders intended!

So let’s set aside our differences and fight together to take back the gift our Founders gave us.  

United We Stand!

_______________

My campaign website — which will shortly become much spiffier — can be found here.

You can donate to my campaign here.