Home Blog Page 2406

Virginia News Headlines: Wednesday Morning

1

Here are a few Virginia (and national) news headlines, political and otherwise, for Wednesday, April 3.

*Conspiracy Theory Poll Results (There are a lot of seriously f***ed up/insane people in this country. For instance, 58% of Republicans say global warming is a “hoax,” and 22% of Romney voters think Barack Obama is the “anti-Christ.” Cuckoo on both counts.)

*Early Look At 2016 GOP Field Shows 5-Way Horse Race, Quinnipiac University National Poll Finds; New Jersey’s Christie Has Just 14%

*Morning Joe poll: 60 percent of Americans want stricter gun laws (“87 percent of Americans support background checks for private gun sales and sales at gun shows, and 59 percent favor legislation that would ban the sale of assault weapons.”)

*UN approval of arms trade treaty sets up Obama, Senate showdown (In a sane country, one where our elected officials didn’t quiver in fear of the  NRA, this would be a no brainer.)

*‘Illegal immigrant’ no more (This is long, long, loooong past due!)

*Schapiro: Big money causes big problems for Bob McDonnell (“The cozy relationship between Star Scientific and McDonnell is not an isolated example, especially of the headaches such entanglements have caused him.”)

*The obvious need for an ethics panel (“The tangled web connecting a fledgling biomedical company to Gov. Bob McDonnell and Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli is the kind of complex political and financial arrangement that erodes the public’s trust in its elected leaders.”)

*Virginia transportation plans expected to survive veto session

*Abortion fight to highlight reconvened GA session

*A politician’s friend in need (“Most of all, we do not know if the governor and attorney general have done anything wrong in their dealings with a struggling friend. We only know that we don’t like how it looks and want to learn more. We will withhold judgment until then.”)

*Amendments and vetoes the Virginia General Assembly will consider on Wednesday.

*McAuliffe officially becomes Democratic nominee for Virginia governor

*Del. Lacey Putney’s seat has 4th GOP aspirant

*LG candidate Snyder pledges no robocalls (Why not, Snyder’s slimeball sugar daddy “Ending Spending” won’t pay for them?)

*Virginia Beach receives private proposal to extend the Tide

*Nearly 80 fires later, Virginia police ‘confident’ serial arsonists in custody

*Fairfax County launches search for police chief

*Dumler recall: Supe has (another) day in court

*Arlington County Board will keep higher child care standards in effect

*Ovechkin leads Caps past Hurricanes

Is Bob McDonnell Putting the Institution of Public, Democratic Education in Jeopardy?

1

( – promoted by lowkell)

Virginians who value public schools, local control of public schools, and public democratic institutions should be afraid. This may be the beginning of the end. Governor McDonnell proposed legislation SB1324 (which passed, though in the Senate by the skin of its teeth) that established a new bureaucratic entity, a statewide school division named the Opportunity Education Institution (OEI).

According to this post, the OEI would take over schools that were denied accreditation, which is done in accordance with “federal accountability data,” also known as standardized test scores. The Institution will be run by a board of gubernatorial appointees, which includes the executive director. There is no guarantee that the board would include any people who know anything about education. The board would contract with non-profits, corporations, or education organizations to operate the schools. Funding for the new bureaucracy would be provided by federal, state, and local taxpayers. The “failing” schools’ local governing bodies would be represented on the board in some way, but they would lose decision-making power and would not be able to vote or, from what I can tell, have much meaningful input, besides providing the same share of local funding and being responsible for maintenance of the school building. As for staffing, current faculty at the schools being taken over could apply for a position as a new employee with the OEI or apply for a transfer.

Meanwhile, for the reconvened session of the Virginia legislature that starts this Wednesday, April 3rd, Governor McDonnell is proposing a replacement bill and amendment that would broaden the scope of the OEI and budget $450,000 more than what was originally granted in SB 1324. SB1324S states that “the local school board shall transfer to the Board the supervision and operation of any school upon being denied accreditation. A local school board may request to transfer to the Board the supervision and operation of any school that has been accredited with warning for three consecutive years.” Budget Amendment 12 says that “… any school that has been accredited with warning for three consecutive years may be transferred to the Opportunity Educational Institution.”

According to the VEA’s understanding, under the new plan, teachers at the OEI schools would not have to be licensed, so the students who need the most experienced teachers would be getting the least experienced. Nor would those OEI teachers be entitled to the benefits, pay, or job protections that other Virginia teachers are, even if they were employed by the school being taken over prior to takeover. Who will want to work at such schools, or schools that look likely to be taken over? Interestingly enough, the members of the new OEI bureaucracy would be eligible for VRS (Virginia Retirement System) and other benefits that the teachers would lose.

So, why should you be opposed to this?

First of all, the following Virginia education stakeholder organizations are all opposed to these measures: Virginia Association of Counties, Virginia Municipal League, Virginia School Boards Association, Virginia Association of School Superintendents, Virginia Association of Secondary School Principals, Virginia Association of Elementary School Principals, Virginia PTA, Virginia First Cities, and Virginia Education Association.

Second, although there are under ten schools currently slated to be part of the OEI, with the new more “rigorous” (read: more tricky) SOL tests, and no end in sight to unreasonable federal accountability mandates, many more schools, such as one in your community, could find themselves getting swallowed up by the OEI.

Third, there’s no evidence that state takeover of struggling schools and districts helps. In fact, the evidence is at best mixed. The Governor and his policy allies are basing this approach on the system in New Orleans, which thus far has not proven successful. That Virginia would use as a model a city that hasn’t had much educational success doesn’t make sense. Michigan has also turned many public services over to the private sector, including the schools of Muskegon Heights. So far, that approach has been a disaster.

Finally, eliminating democratic institution and processes in a democratic society is not a cure for dysfunction or low test scores. Certainly, mass failure on the SOL tests signals a problem, but before the state blames and disenfranchises school communities, it really needs to figure out what that problem is and then target its resources accordingly. While many majority poor schools do just fine on standardized tests, I think we all know that the schools with low standardized test scores are often majority poor. Last I checked, being poor isn’t a reason to disenfranchise communities and hand their schools over to outsiders.

So, I urge you to contact Governor McDonnell (804-786-2211) and your state legislators ASAP to state your opposition to the Opportunity Education Institution and to tell them to vote against SB1324S and amendment 12. This bill is likely unconstitutional and it’s bad for Virginia–bad for public education and bad for democracy.

This was cross-posted at All Things Education.

The Silence is Deafening: Bell, Obenshain Remain Mum Over Cuccinelli’s Conflict of Interest

0

From the Mark Herring for Attorney General campaign (note: that’s Mark Obenshain pictured to the far right, appropriately enough, of the screen):

Leesburg – On Sunday, the Washington Post revealed Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli’s conflict of interest with tobacco and drug company Star Scientific.  The Post reported that Cuccinelli failed to disclose substantial stock holdings in the company and then failed to recuse himself when the company sued Virginia over taxes it allegedly failed to pay to the state.

“The silence is deafening.  Republicans Rob Bell and Mark Obenshain want to be Virginia’s Attorney General but are conspicuously silent over Ken Cuccinelli’s blatant conflict of interest,” Democratic candidate for Attorney General State Senator Mark Herring (Loudoun & Fairfax) stated. “Apparently for them, there are two sets of laws, a special one for Republican allies and another for the rest of Virginia.  It’s time we get the politics out of the Attorney General’s office.  Rob Bell and Mark Obenshain are not the people to do it.”

“Virginians deserve an Attorney General who will be a true guardian of the public interest and put the law first, not politics.  As the people’s lawyer, it is imperative to avoid even the appearance of any conflict of interest and as Attorney General, I would have immediately recused myself from such a case,” Herring stated.

Herring then challenged his Republican opponents, Delegate Rob Bell and State Senator Mark Obenshain, to join him in his pledge to recuse themselves from cases if similar conflicts arise if they were to become Attorney General.

“Virginians also deserve to know where the candidates running to fill Ken Cuccinelli’s shoes stand.  Do Delegate Bell and Senator Obenshain agree with Cuccinelli’s decision to double down on his conflict of interest, or would they put the best interest of Virginians first?” Herring stated.

Protecting Both Gun Rights and Public Safety

0

An interesting editorial from Senator Dave Marsden

http://www.burkeconnection.com…

It was an historic year in the Virginia General Assembly. We passed a once-in-a-generation transportation funding bill and laid the foundation for 400,000 thousand Virginians to gain health insurance through an expansion of Medicaid that will create nearly 30,000 new health care jobs.

But which issue do you think generated the most e-mails and phone calls to my legislative office? The Second Amendment. A few constituents called for an all-out ban on certain high capacity magazines and assault weapons, and a few others expressed a desire to close the “gun show loop hole” to stop the private sale of weapons at commercial gun shows without background checks. But the majority of the communications defended the Second Amendment and asked me not to support any changes, at all, to our gun laws. A large number of these folks passed on form-messages written by gun advocacy groups. A much smaller number of email writers provided thoughtful ideas and suggestions of their own. In responding to these messages by e-mail, or by phone calls and in-person meetings, it is my experience that the Second Amendment proponents who contacted me fell into three broad categories:

 

 1.Thoughtful people with genuine concerns about the constitutional ramifications of the Second Amendment and our nation’s problem with violence. These individuals tended to be willing and able to hold an open dialogue about the problems our communities face with gun violence.

2.People who passed on pre-written messages that said that they are responsible gun owners, who are sorry about what happened in Sandy Hook, Conn., but who do not want the guns or ammunition they may purchase, or the method by which they might procure them, to be changed in any way. These individuals tended to explain gun violence as stemming from mental health problems, criminal activity, video games and violent themes in movies, television and music. When pressed for more dialogue, they tended to have little more to add other than a suspicion that the government wants to take their guns away and that the Second Amendment is absolute.

3.The last and fortunately smallest group were those who tended to tell me who they might need to shoot and under what circumstances. They imagined situations where they have to take down a shooter in a mall, defend their home from a street gang, or defend themselves from the tyranny of the government. These individuals generally believed that the only answer to gun violence is more guns.

I support the Second Amendment, quite simply, because it is the constitutional law of the land and I took an oath to defend the constitution. That is an oath I take very seriously. However, we now lose more people every year to firearm deaths than we do to traffic accidents. That is a situation that alarms me greatly.

When people purchase a gun, it is usually for a good reason. They purchase a gun to protect themselves or to participate in shooting sports. Yet, while that gun never changes its nature, the life situations and circumstances of the gun owner often change dramatically. No one ever foresees that their adorable toddler may grow up to be an angry and disturbed adolescent, or that their occasional drinking in young adulthood will turn into raging alcoholism, or that a sane and well-adjusted family member will deteriorate over the years into mental illness and despair. In these cases, that same responsible gun owner’s gun may be used in ways the owner never could have imagined. Working as I did for many years in the juvenile court and running our juvenile detention center in Fairfax for 17 years, I have seen the look on too many peoples’ faces who never imagined that the device they bought for self-defense or sport would be used in a tragic shooting or a criminal act.

I do not have the answer as to how we protect Second Amendment rights while still addressing public safety needs. I don’t believe that there is any one answer. What does strike me, however, is that some elements of the gun owning community (the ones that tend to be the loudest) exhibit very little willingness to compromise. That is a problem for all of us. Over 70 members of the Virginia Citizen’s Defense League visited me in Richmond this year, mostly carrying weapons. These constituents were adamant and sincere in their beliefs that restricting gun ownership, regulating sales, or adding any additional requirements would infringe on their constitutional rights while doing nothing to promote public safety. In their view, the more guns we have the safer we become. With over 300 million weapons in circulation and gun deaths continuing to be a national crisis, there continues to be a far too limited number of individuals and advocacy groups willing to engage in meaningful compromise.

I agree that guns are often not the problem, but all too often they are. Many people believe that criminals establish the intent to commit crimes and then seek out a weapon to execute that intent. In reality, especially with young people, they come across a gun first and then develop the intent to do harm. When youths find guns, it does not lead to thoughts of shoplifting or vandalism  it leads to violence. The gun becomes the parent to the act.

When I am able to talk to individuals in the first category mentioned above, we typically can agree that requiring background checks on private sales at commercial gun shows would offer real safety benefits without interfering with any law abiding citizen’s ability to obtain firearms. I thank these individuals for their thoughtful contribution to my knowledge of this subject area. Sadly, most of the people who communicate with me are unwilling to give an inch. For many good people, there is an obsession with guns and their rights surrounding them that precludes meaningful dialogue. No one in the legislature wants to take guns away from anyone who obeys the law and does not suffer from certain mental health infirmities. Many of us, however, do want to reduce the dangers of guns without unduly restricting gun rights.

I introduced two bills this year to do just that. They both dealt with gun owner responsibility and accountability. The first would have held gun owners civilly responsible if it could be shown through clear and convincing evidence, the highest civil standard, that the owner did not take reasonable measures to prevent the theft or misappropriation of their gun and the gun was then used in a crime. The second bill required gun thefts to be reported to police. Responsible gun owners should be open to this, but both bills were defeated in sub-committee with little attention or debate.

I will continue to further the discussion around protecting both the Second Amendment and public safety. Improving mental health outreach and reducing media violence should also be on the table. Not doing anything is unthinkable.

Exclusive Interview: Arlington County School Board Member James Lander

0

Several weeks ago, I interviewed Barbara Kanninen, who is challenging Arlington County School Board incumbent James Lander for his seat on the board. This was the firs time I’d ever sat down for an extended conversation with James Lander, and I definitely was impressed with his knowledge of, passion for, and commitment to public education in general, and the Arlington County school system specifically. Here are a few highlights from our (2-hour) interview.

First, Lander and I talked about why he first decided to run for the school board four years ago. Lander talked about his interest in leveraging what he calls the “stakeholders triangle” – parents, the community, and the school system itself, all of which have a stake in the success of children (who are in the “center of the triangle,” as “they are the focus”). As Lander explained, “kids require supportive homes…support and reinforcement from the community…as do each member of the stakeholder’s triangle depend on one another.” According to Lander, 83% of Arlingtonians don’t currently have kids in the school system, but everyone has a stake in the success of the public schools.

In addition, Lander said he had “participated extensively as a parent advocate…in leadership positions at the PTA level at my daughter’s school, vice president of the PTA…representative to the county council of PTAs…I learned how the schools at the operational level, and what I realized is there were some things that I could hopefully impact positively at a policy level…some of these things don’t translate well from the board table to the operational level, I [was] seeing gaps.” Lander felt that he could bring that operational level experience – at the local school and the county PTA level – to the board table, effect the policies, and “be a voice for parents who…sometimes your voice isn’t heard.”

As for his biggest accomplishments, Lander pointed to: 1) the impact he’s had “directly on students” (e.g., “providing more support and mentoring for middle school students”); 2) his initiation of “the Color of Leadership Conference,” which provides “mentoring opportunities” to students, and which teaches kids about “citizenship and all the things you don’t learn necessarily in school” (e.g., how to tie a necktie, how to interview, how to present themselves, about health and their bodies); 3) his work on expanding the STEM (science, technology, math) program (Lander noted that he’s an engineer with a degree from UVA); 4) his efforts to “expand some of the partnerships that we have,” such as with the National Association of Black Chemists and Chemical Engineers, on teacher development for STEM and helping to get students into science competitions to help foster their interest in STEM; and finally 5) “I’ve really enjoyed being an advocate for parents who don’t know how to navigate the school system,” being highly accessible to parents (e.g., giving out his personal cell phone number).

I asked Lander whether he agreed with something Barbara Kanninen said in our interview, that she does “not believe people should run for the School Board…who have not seen the whole process,” and that she doesn’t “know how someone who’s only experienced elementary school can make informed decisions about what might be happening in high school.” More broadly, I was curious whether he thinks there are particular qualifications – education, having kids in the system, etc. – that people must have in order to serve on the Arlington County School Board. Lander argued that “diverse backgrounds add value to the school board and to the community.” Lander added, “I don’t think there are litmus tests, because people bring talents from their experiences that aren’t always evident until you have the opportunity to see and hear from them.”

So, bottom line, Lander says he disagrees with Kanninen’s statement, quoted above. Lander noted that right now on the board, there’s a PhD in education (Emma Violand Sanchez), a lawyer (Abby Raphael), a stay-at-home dad (Noah Simon), a single parent of two boys (Sally Baird), and a degreed engineer who has a military background (James Lander), all of whom “add value in our particular ways.” Lander specifically said he thought it was fine if someone who never had kids in the school system to run for school board, as long as “they had been involved and committed time to education.” Lander added: “If we are the most diverse party, seeking the Democratic endorsement, how do we tell people don’t run – anyone and everyone should run for the school board.

Lander talked about the importance of expanding the opportunities for vocational education in Arlington County public schools. Why? Because “not every young lady or young man will go to college as the next step, for a number of different reasons – cost, interest…we have to educate them too.” So, one of the things Lander is working on is a vision for the Arlington Career Center and for students who are not necessarily college bound, including things like a “gap year.” The most important thing, in Lander’s opinion, is to look at students as individuals, not to lump kids together arbitrarily into groups, and to “leverage their strengths.”

I asked Lander whether he felt parents were satisfied with the school board, or whether – as Barbara Kanninen said – “there’s a lot of parent anger at the current board” over what she called a “total failure of process, communication, and common sense” on the decision to cut school bus routes. Lander responded that there’s a tremendous amount of diverse opinion out there on various issues and stances that the board takes, and it’s “unrealistic” that we’d get agreement among the community of “22,000 students and roughly 40-some thousand parents or guardians.” Lander said he wouldn’t agree that there’s “widespread anger” out there. Having said that, Lander acknowledged that communication on the school bus issue was “absolutely bad,” so “since then we’ve taken deliberate steps to make adjustments.”

The issue with the school buses, according to Lander, was that there was no “safety accountability” with the way the buses were being run previously, “no tracking system in place,” so the system definitely needed to be changed (“we needed to address the safety concerns immediately; we could not go through another year and not know where our children were”). Lander makes no excuses, acknowledges that the communication and parental involvement should have been better, but he points out that this was a complex situation with “multiple moving parts.” Overall, in Lander’s view, “parents…and the Arlington community is happy with our school system – that’s why folks move here, that’s why folks stay here, that’s why we keep growing every year, almost an elementary school a year, because people are happy with the job we’re doing; we can always do better…but I think that to categorize parents as angry towards the school board, I think that’s inaccurate.

On the issue of school boundaries, Lander feels that it was “a flawed process” before he got on the board, as it “created this adversarial relationship between neighborhoods.” Lander pointed out that there’s “no magic boundary we could draw” that would perfectly split up the county. Lander said it’s “flat-out inaccurate” that we have “extra space in South Arlington,” as Barbara Kanninen has asserted. Lander added, “There is no extra space in the county; all of our schools are approaching or near 100%, and it’s growing every year…but it doesn’t grow evenly around the county.” Dealing with this requires an inclusive [composition] of these stakeholders…because we all have a stake in how [the boundaries are] drawn up.”

I asked Lander why he thought he was being challenged for reelection. He responded that he doesn’t know Kannninen, hasn’t “spoken to her,” has “only met her once in passing,” so he’s not sure why she’s running against him. Having said that, he added that “I embrace the opportunity to come before the parents [and make my case for reelection]…there are no free rides…I have embraced this opportunity…to go out to speak to parents, to speak to community members, to speak to teachers.” He noted that he’s proud to have been endorsed by the Arlington Education Association. He said he felt he’d be “victorious because I think I have a better vision on how we move forward, I have far more experience,” and that the board is working well together (with a “good chemistry”) and should be given “an opportunity to succeed.”

We talked about the importance of diversity (of all kinds) on the school board. Lander said he “absolutely believe[s] we benefit from a diverse community,” noting that if “for some reason” he’s not victorious, “we will have four board members all from the same zip code on the board…80% of the board from the same zip code isn’t a good reflection of…what Arlington [is all about].” The process “should be inclusive of everyone,” and everyone should be focused on students.

Regarding his reelection campaign, Lander said he’s focused on “articulating clearly and communicating our accomplishments and our vision for the future.” He said the campaign has picked up its efforts as “folks are starting to pay attention.” So, Lander explained, “we are making a deliberate effort to inform voters of the choices and the differences between myself and Dr. Kanninen.” The good thing about Dr. Kanninen’s challenge, in Lander’s view, is that it opens up the opportunity to talk to voters and say, “I want to tell what we’ve done; I’m excited to say, let me tell you what we’ve done…now, there’s an opportunity to say, pay attention, this is what it means, this is why you have to stay engaged.” Lander said he loves the service to the community, but he’s still “embracing the politics” part of it.

We touched on Bob McDonnell’s plan to put letter grades on schools. Lander said he thought that was a “narrow view to marginalize the great work that’s going on in schools.” He added: “education isn’t just about giving a letter grade…I tell my daughter all the time, I want you to be educated, not trained, that means the ability to think, and so the harm McDonnell does is by limiting and categorizing schools to letter grades…it creates this adversarial competition between schools because they’re fighting for grades…[instead] the children have to be the focus.”

A funny moment in the conversation: Lander joked that George W. Bush graduated from Yale and Harvard, while Thurgood Marshall graduated from Lincoln and Howard, and “I’d take Thurgood Marshall over George Bush any day.” In all seriousness, Lander stated, “What I tell parents is you should be able to go to any school in this county and expect a quality education.” Lander added that “we shouldn’t measure schools, we should measure achievement of students...if you say failing school, what do you mean by this…and what angers me is it puts you in a box…[we shouldn’t] let socioeconomic, language, disability, race be a limiter to how successful you can be; if we’re doing our job, you come to school and we’re meeting your needs.”

Finally, I asked Lander what the three most pressing issues facing the Arlington County Public Schools right now. Lander said if he had to pick three, he’d say budget priorities, student achievement, and our growing student enrollment. Lander said he could add recruiting and retaining and developing quality educators and keeping them in Arlington.

Bottom line: James Lander is passionate, dedicated, and extremely well informed about education in general, and the Arlington County public schools specifically. He is looking forward to serving for another term on the board, and asks everyone for their votes.

DPVA Certifies all five statewide candidate petitions

0

From the Democratic Party of Virginia. Game on!

McAuliffe becomes Democratic nominee for Governor

RICHMOND — Yesterday afternoon the Democratic Party of Virginia informed the Virginia State Board of Elections that it has certified the petition signatures submitted by all five statewide campaigns. Terry McAuliffe is the only candidate who qualified for the 2013 gubernatorial primary ballot and becomes the Democratic nominee for Governor. Senator Ralph Northam and Aneesh Chopra qualified to be Democratic candidates for Lieutenant Governor and Senator Mark Herring and Justin Fairfax qualified to be Democratic candidates for Attorney General. All move on to the June 11th primary.

“We believe that this is the most signatures any candidate has collected for Governor in Virginia history,” said DPVA Chair Charniele Herring. “The momentum from volunteers and outpouring of support across the Commonwealth is a true sign of the energy behind Terry McAuliffe’s campaign.

“Virginians deserve a Governor who will focus on mainstream ideas to make Virginia better for business, not implementing his own divisive ideological agenda.”

Virginia News Headlines: Tuesday Morning

0

Here are a few Virginia (and national) news headlines, political and otherwise, for Tuesday, April 2.

*Hillary Clinton’s 2016 campaign starts with Terry McAuliffe’s Virginia governor race

*James E. Hansen Retiring From NASA to Fight Global Warming

*Virginia Republicans’ One-Two Punch of Financial Scandals (“Coming up on a pivotal governor’s election, two of the state party’s leading figures are fending off questions about their ties to a corporation under fire.”)

*Poll shows Mark Warner beating Bob McDonnell easily for Senate (“Ken Cuccinelli race with Terry McAuliffe for governor tight”)

*Top Dem Governor: Ken Cuccinelli Makes Romney’s 47 Percent Tape Look Moderate

*Cuccinelli’s conflict (“The attorney general and gubernatorial candidate should recuse his office from a tax suit because of his financial ties.”)

*Cuccinelli should quit — seriously

*A Few Moments with Senator Mark Warner

*Terry McAuliffe: Virginia community colleges key to job creation

*Cuccinelli, Democrats trade April Fools’ pranks

*Kaine’s first Senate bill seeks to help vets get jobs

*Kaine hears plenty from military families

*Sullivan’s Plan Optimizes UVa’s Institutional Self Interest

*It’s time for Virginia to join the push for marriage equality

*Then and now (“In 2006, the people spoke. If given a chance to speak again they might say something different. The vote in favor of the [Marshall-Newman] amendment was misguided.”)

*Judge says Virginia marriage law unfair to Sikhs

*Opportunity calls at Va. port (“State leaders are preparing for the expansion of the Panama Canal.”)

*Virginia Beach water main repair faces deadline: Memorial Day

*D.C. area forecast: One last winter gasp

*Bryce Harper hits two homers in Washington Nationals’ 2-0 opening day win over Miami

Video: Breaking: Dominion to Go Carbon Neutral! (April Fool’s)

0



See the Chesapeake Climate Action Network for more about how “Dominion is taking us in the wrong direction” and not providing the leadership we need to move towards a sustainable, efficient, clean energy future as rapidly as possible.  

Smoking: Star Scientific Carries GOP Warning Label

2

by Paul Goldman

At 200-proof, we know our political whiskey: moonshine wouldn’t do here, we like the real stuff, what Al Capone and the boys got from Canada illegally during Prohibition, what Joe Kennedy got from England legally after Prohibition.

Now, a good 200-proof whiskey often goes down better with a 200-proof smoke. So we naturally re-read yesterday’s Washington Post story about His Excellency the Governor and Star Scientific, a publicly held Virginia company that use to trade under a different stock name, but now goes by CIGX.  It was once the rage of a few stock jockeys when it sued, if I remember, Atria, claiming Big Tobacco owed teensy, weensy Star Scientific a lot of money because they were using something Star claimed to have invented relative to tobacco processing. Whatever.

A lawyer friend of mine followed the case for years, an expert on such litigation. He asked my legal opinion. I thought it was a scam then, and still do: the judge, or maybe it was a jury, agreed with me. But it did get past a motion to dismiss, so on that score, perhaps my judgement is too harsh.

I read about Cuccinelli and the stock last week, but didn’t really gave it any attention. However, when the Washington Post put on a 200-proof effort to connect the company to the governor of Virginia and the First Lady, then of course 200proof politics has to go out and find a bottle of that stuff. We can guess what aides to Republicans McDonnell and Cuccinelli are saying this morning:

The Post hates all Republicans, now that they got McDonnell to break his pledge and give them their transportation taxes, those liberals are doing what they always do, go after Republicans, first McD, then Cuccinelli, then the Republican behind the tree. Come on, this is penny ante, McD made no money personally, Cuccinelli made $7,500 profit or so, why don’t the liberals at the Post go after McAuliffe, Warner, the guys who make the really big money, yada, yada, yada, yada?

If you read the books on Johnson and Nixon and Reagan and Clinton and McCain, go back to Caesar, it is always the same reaction: everyone plays the victim of a double standard. I have been there: the Post went after Doug Wilder for a business deal, actually a reporting thing with the Conflict of Interests statement, all bs really when you knew the facts, even forced the Attorney General to investigate. As I say, it turned out to be nothing. BUT: He was the sitting Lt. Governor.

McDonnell is the sitting Governor, Cuccinelli the sitting Attorney General. The rules are different for those in public office as opposed to those out of public office. So at 200-proof we say: You play, you pay, it is all fair game. If you can’t stand the heat, then take President Truman’s advice and stay away from the cooking shows on cable.  

Moreover, at 200-proof, we have been through the game enough to know the following: Every official candidate gets their turn in the barrel on this stuff. Warner got it, Kaine got, they had to defend business deals, clients, whatever. No one forced you to run for the job.

I am sure Republicans see some grand conspiracy here, aimed at helping Democrats win this Fall. As the saying goes: even paranoids have enemies. Here at 200 proof, we say: the press is merely doing its job, the reason the British put John Peter Zenger in jail back in the early 1700’s, the American journalist whose trial first got the first Masons and Madisons and Jeffersons thinking about a Bill of Rights with the First Amendment first.

A democracy like ours needs to hold its public officials accountable not for loose standards, but for the best tightest standards of ethical behavior. And when people are nominated for such offices, then the press needs to hold them to the same tightest standards, they can’t play favorites.  Conservatives have long claimed the “liberal” mainstream media has a double standard: and the talk show left says the “conservative” media has an equal double standard. In our experience, the media is no one’s friend:; they will turn on a supposed “friend” for a good story at a drop of a hat.

Thus for today: Cigarette company Star Scientific, now allegedly reborn as some kind of supplement company with a product that seems all blue smoke and mirrors, carries a big WARNING LABEL for Republicans. This may be totally unfair, since the Post story has no “smoking gun” to use a bad pun. A lot of businesses get investigated, they get sued, they owe money, they go through rough patches, they are owned by someone who has a lot of successes but this particular entity doesn’t make it in the real world. As a lawyer, I believe we all are entitled to the benefit of the doubt at this stage. This is why we had our Revolution.

But that being said: Campaigns are conducted in the court of public opinion where the rules of evidence, the standards of proof, the decisions on guilt or innocence are not the same as a legal courtroom. In politics, we accept different rules of engagement because we value not only a free press, but we want our leaders to pass certain litmus tests on ethical behavior.

Bottom line: The Post deserves credit for giving the Star Scientific story a big ride. Having been there, I can tell aides to the Governor and AG the following: You either clean up the mess or you mess up your boss even more. It reminds me of the great scene from the movie “Moneyball,” where Brad Pitt is talking to Scott Hatteberg about playing first base for the Oakland A’s. Hatteberg has only played catcher before, so he starts to explain the situation to Pitt. But as Pitt points out, due to Hatteberg’s bad throwing arm, he will never play catcher again. So Pitt tells him the truth: those days are gone; if you want to stay in baseball, then you had best learn how to play a new position.

Whatever relationship the Guv and AG had as of Saturday night with Star Scientific, it changed Sunday morning. It ain’t in the same position no more. At 200-proof, we don’t judge the merits of the lawsuits or federal investigations or the products being hawked by Star. We are strategy groupies, hanging five with the surfer girls or Jersey babes depending on the season, and not worrying about morality or amorality. We are even okay with situational ethics if need be. As the saying goes, “it ain’t my wife, it ain’t my life.” We play it as lies, straight up, no ice, no need for a redo. The next shot is all that matters.

For the Governor and AG, Star Scientific comes with a huge GOP warning label this morning. Yet, in a way, the Post did McD and K-Man a favor yesterday. The mess is still fixable, as this is only April – the baseball season has just barely started.  If the Guv and the AG can’t handle this hanging curve ball, then Spring Training is just the beginning of their problems.