Home Blog Page 2412

A Baker’s Dozen of Districts for Democrats

13

( – promoted by lowkell)

Cross posted from the newest political blog in the Commonwealth, The Real Crystal Ball.

As Democrats prepare for spring and a forecast of snow, here are thirteen districts where Democrats could win but still need a Democratic candidate.

There are six Republican-held districts that voted for President Barack Obama in 2012 and in 2008 that do not have a Democratic challenger right now. Do you live there? Run! Know someone? Tell them to run! Call your mother, your aunt, your college room mate. If you have heard rumors of potential candidates let me know. And let them know to file the damn paperwork!

13th District: Bob Marshall

2012 Obama Vote: 55%

2008 Obama Vote: 55%

Bob Marshall doesn’t just represent a district that voted Democratic in the last two presidential elections, he represents a district that gave President Barack Obama 55% of the vote. His district was made more Democratic under redistricting, but the rapidly growing population does not always turn out in off-year elections. The coordinated campaign should be covering this as part of the strategy of turning out Obama supporters in the off year. All that is needed now is a candidate!

50th District: Jackson Miller

2012 Obama Vote: 54%

2008 Obama Vote: 53%

Second verse, same as the first, a little bit louder, a little bit worse. The situation here is similar to Bob Marshall, but with a slightly less crazy Republican. Obama-district, check. Lots of new voters, check. Candidate? Not yet.

67th District: Jim LeMunyon

2012 Obama Vote: 53%

2008 Obama Vote: 53%

LeMunyon is going to get a pass this fall, and may for several elections to come, despite representing an Obama-district that will likely vote for Terry McAuliffe this fall. Democrats may regret not putting more pressure on LeMunyon in the future should he seek higher office. He’s building a strong reputation in the General Assembly, the only thing that may hold him back is the Tea Party’s tendency to shoot the GOP in the foot.

21st District: Ron Villanueva

2012 Obama Vote: 52%

2008 Obama Vote: 50%

The first three districts were all Northern Virginia districts, but Ron Villanueva represents a Virginia Beach district that also went for Obama. Villanueva defeated a well funded Adrianne Bennett in 2011, so Democrats may believe this district has been put away. It is one of the least white district represented by a Republican in the Virginia House of Delegates, along with the 86th (Rust) and the 87th (Ramadan). With a black voting age population of 24% of the district and an Asian-American population of 13%, this district is projected to continue to grow in its diversity in the next decade.

32nd District: Tag Greason

2012 Obama Vote: 52%

2008 Obama Vote: 53%

After defeating David Poisson in a landslide in the year of the GOP tsunami, Greason has avoided any further electoral challenges in this Obama district. Poisson came in riding Tim Kaine’s coattails in 2005, just like Greason did, so Democrats are foolish if they fail to even find a candidate to be on the ballot. Greason has a reputation of being very popular locally, but in the right year he could be washed out.

12th: Joseph Yost

2012 Obama Vote: 51%

2008 Obama Vote: 54%

I have heard horrible, horrible stories of the incompetency that allowed Yost to win this marginal district in 2011. Even Creigh Deeds almost managed to stumble his way to victory in this district, which is unique for its student population helping Democrats in big-turnout years, a college town population that still leans to the left even in lower-turnout years, and a rural working class constituency that still backs local Virginia Democrats. This should have been one of the top targets to take back in 2013, instead Yost may be getting a pass. This is one Southwest Virginia district that even I support investing in! Ben Tribbett has reported that local activists are pushing Victoria Cochran, who attended the Democratic National Convention.

Failing to contest these six Obama district is not a good start for the long road ahead of Virginia Democrats in the House of Delegates. But here are seven more districts that are competitive and could, with the right candidate and the right political environment, go Democratic. First they need candidates!

84th District: Open Seat (Sal Iaquinto)

2012 Kaine Vote: 50%

2012 Obama Vote: 49%

2008 Obama Vote: 49%

Parties always need to pay attention to open seats, the power of incumbency is even stronger when you have low-turnout elections in off-years like in Virginia. This seat is competitive at the national level, but retiring Delegate Sal Iaquinto had not been challenged in an election since winning the seat in 2005 when Bob McDonnell ran for Attorney General. Tim Kaine won the district that year with 51% of the vote, but McDonnell’s huge coattails down ballot helped Iaquinto win with 56% of the vote. This is a long shot, but as an open seat it may be the only shot Democrats have here for years to come.

73rd District: John O’Bannon

2012 Kaine Vote: 50%

2012 Obama Vote: 46%

2008 Obama Vote: 46%

Tim Kaine is popular in the Richmond suburbs, but Obama’s 46% demonstrates the moderate nature of this suburban district. In 2009, both Jody Wagner and Steve Shannon outperformed the rural lawyer from Craig County. That year Tom Shields ran a spirited campaign for delegate that managed to run ahead of the disaster that was the Deeds campaign, even though he still lost with only 38% of the vote. There is a small swing-vote in this district, moderate upscale suburbanites where the Far West End goes out to Henrico, that voted Romney-Kaine in 2012, McDonnell-Shields in 2009, and also opposed the gay marriage ban in 2006 despite their GOP leanings. They could be crucial to this district in the fall … if the Democrats can find the right candidate.

83rd District: Chris Stolle

2012 Kaine Vote: 49%

2012 Obama Vote: 46%

2008 Obama Vote: 46%

There’s no doubt that this is a Republican leaning-district, but moderate Democrats like Tim Kaine have shown strength here. Tim Kaine won the pre-redistricted district in 2005, narrowly, when he won traditionally Republican Virginia Beach. Joseph Bouchard narrowly beat Stolle in an open seat contest in 2007 before Stolle returned in 2009. Democrats shouldn’t just write this one off though.

62rd District: Riley Ingram

2012 Kaine Vote: 47%

2012 Obama Vote: 46%

2008 Obama Vote: 45%

This is a tough district, but take a look at the list of challenges Ingram has had over the years.

2011: Unopposed

2009: Unopposed

2007: Unopposed

2005: Unopposed

2003: Unopposed

2001: Unopposed

1999: Unopposed

1997: Unopposed

1995: Had a challenger!

This district has changed a lot since 1995 and has seen its Democratic vote slowly improve, John Kerry’s 36% became Obama’s 43% before the district was made more Democratic in redistricting. The district has a sizable African-American population and changing demographics should increase Democratic performance a bit in the decade yet. Democrats would have a better shot in an open seat, but they need to invest in building infrastructure here in the short term.

54th District: Bobby Orrock

2012 Kaine Vote: 47%

2012 Obama Vote: 46%

2008 Obama Vote: 48%

The good news is that Bobby Orrock had a close election in the past and his support of this year’s transportation bill could create an environment similar to his prior near defeat. The bad news is that Orrock’s close election was the Republican Primary, where Shaun Kenny almost knocked him off after Orrock’s support for Governor Mark Warner’s tax increase. Conservative Tea Partiers are invited to challenge Orrock, but Democrats would be wise to think of ways to help the party in this Spotsylvania District, which overlaps with the 17th Senate Seat they need to take back in 2015. Orrock hasn’t faced off against a Democratic challenger since 1993.

27th District: Roxann Robinson

2012 Kaine Vote: 48%

2012 Obama Vote: 45%

2008 Obama Vote: 46%

Robinson won a 2010 special election to this Chesterfield County seat, but previous Delegate Sam Nixon had held the seat since winning his own special election in 1994. Nixon was never contested after winning his special election, and so far Robinson looks like she’s going to repeat that trend. This district voted for Obama in 2008 with 51.5% of the vote before Republicans trimmed the district to help Robinson out. Here’s Ben Tribbett analysis of the Virginia House Caucus’s decision to ignore this district during the special election and instead contest a Harrisonburg area district that was less Democratic. The DPVA spent over $60,000 backing the Democrat in Harrisonburg who lost and nothing here in a competitive Chesterfield County district.

Those are six more districts where Obama received over 45% of the vote both. I promised you 13, a baker’s dozen, of competitive districts that didn’t have a Democratic candidate. What’s the 13th? Could it be West End’s 68th, an exciting district that elected an Independent, former Republican last decade? 45% Obama in 2008, 44% in 2012, but Tim Kaine’s Richmond appeal propelled him to 49%. It has a large number of socially moderate Republican voters, one reason that Katherine Waddell had a shot here in the first place in 2005. If the election is dominated by big social issues, this district could swing Democratic. Or what about the neighboring 72nd district? Very similar to the 68th, but just a hair more Republican. The chance for social issues to help Democrats is the same here and Bill Bolling’s Independent candidacy would have been strongest with these up-scale conservatives. The future of a majority for Virginia Democrats runs through the moderate suburbs of Richmond, which is why I’m a proud Tim Kaine Democrat.

Maybe you want to look outside of the Richmond suburbs. What about the fightin’ 99th! Al Pollard won the open seat in 1999 before leaving it in 2005, opening it up for Rob Wittman. Wittman of course went on to win the special election for the 1st Congressional District, so Pollard switched back to the seat in the special election after his failed bid for the Virginia State Senate in 2007. Pollard fought off a hard challenge from Tea Partier Catherine Crabill before retiring in 2011. The district did not change significantly in redistricting and would still be competitive for the right sort of Democrat. The problem is that right sort of Democrat is Al Pollard and seems to be only Al Pollard. How about Southside’s 61st District? Obama received 46% in 2008, 44% in 2012. That could be right on the cusp of being competitive? But Southside voting is very racially polarized and there’s little crossover, Tim Kaine was also stuck with 44% in 2012. Instead, I’m going to suggest this wild card.

76th District: Chris Jones

2012 Kaine Vote: 47%

2012 Obama Vote: 44%

2008 Obama Vote: 43%

As the thirteenth district on this list, this is supposed to be a long shot, Hail Mary race. First, Obama did marginally better here in 2012 than four years earlier, which isn’t much but is noticeable when both the national environment and the environment in Virginia saw Obama drop in support. Second, Tim Kaine’s 47% in the district shows that moderate Virginia Democrats have some crossover appeal. Chris Jones is a hack and some Tea Partiers are angry over his support for the transportation plan, which Ken Cuccinelli, the GOP’s candidate for Governor, is now calling unconstitutional. Jones already has a third-party conservative on the ballot that could drain some votes away from him. Jones hasn’t been challenged since 2001, it would be good to put some pressure on him. The 76th District has one of the highest black populations for a Republican held district, only Southside Republicans like Danny Marshall in Danville and James Edmunds in Halifax have larger black populations in the district. Jones is seen as very popular locally, but it’s hard to judge that without an election. Maybe in 2013 he’ll finally get one?

Vote in the poll below on which district you’d most want to see a Democratic candidate in! I’m not going to include Bob Marshall because I think that would win in an obvious landslide. 🙂

[poll id=”

114

“]

Video: Karl Rove Called Out for “Orwellian” “Paranoia,” “Black Helicopters” Talk on Guns

1



Thank you Terry Moran for calling out Orwellian Big Liar Karl Rove for his paranoid, “black helicopters” fearmongering on guns. It’s time that politicians and the media not let the Roves of the world get away with this garbage, on guns or on any other issue (e.g., this).

UPDATE: In related news, Salon’s Alex Pareene skewers the “wretched,” brain-dead, bigot-and-extremist-filled Sunday talk shows.  

Virginia News Headlines: Sunday Morning

1

Here are a few Virginia (and national) news headlines, political and otherwise, for Sunday, March 24. Also, here’s one of the ads by Mayors Against Illegal Guns, “featuring a gun owner who understands that support for background checks goes hand in hand with support for the Second Amendment and defending their families.”

*White House hails Senate budget

*Bloomberg drops $12 million on ad buy in effort to push senators on gun laws

*The GOP primaries itself (“The GOP cannot become a more inclusive party when it excludes all but extreme candidates.”)

*Obama in Israel: 5 takeaways

*Conditions for expanding Virginia’s Medicaid program

*Wrong on rights (“State Sen. Mark Obenshain and Gov. Bob McDonnell have it backward” on “a bill the lawmaker sponsored to exempt concealed-carry permit information from the Freedom of Information Act.”)

*Cuccinelli says he’ll detail tax plan during campaign

*Schapiro: Lt. governor campaign could be main event” (“No one in either party can say at this time who’s ahead. The convention is an insider’s game, with delegates selected largely out of view. The primary is likely to be a low-, low-, low-turnout affair – maybe 3 percent of the electorate. That means anything could happen.”)

*Bolling ‘came very, very close’ to run

*A duck on uranium (“Cuccinelli is echoing uranium mine advocates’ talking points when he calls for regulations.”

*Virginia’s economic foundation (“Building a better Virginia will require a concentrated effort by our political leaders at all levels – local, state and federal – to commit to long-term planning and sustainability, and assure our state’s economic foundation is strong for future generations.”)

*Reject offer for Virginia’s port

*Cuccinelli highlights experience in Yorktown stop (The problem is, Cuccinelli’s experience is all bad!)

*Were Fairfax voting delays part of a political plot? Report does not say.

*Northern Virginia officials worry secret CIA facility could scuttle hopes for landing FBI HQ

*Beware: Possible heavy snow Sunday

MCBQ Shooting is a Wakeup Call: Let’s Truly Get To Know Our Country’s Military Personnel

0

It’s the story that hits the media’s radar like a tidal wave and then ebbs quickly thereafter, never to be seen from or heard again. But the recent shooting at Marine Corps Base, Quantico  (MCBQ) reveals a deeper story that has rarely been told, at least in the past few years: the real stories of active duty (and reserve) military personnel coping with life on the battlefield and life off the battlefield.

Most of us know or understand that war is hell, but the times spent outside and away from the battlefield can be just as trying for our country’s men and women in the armed services. But for some reason, or reasons, America has not focused much time or energy on the lives of these individuals, how they cope with the constant stress of war and how they transition back into a world that sometimes forgets there is even a war, or wars, being fought.

The details behind the shooting at MCBQ are unclear for now and for all we know, they may remain something of a mystery for some time to come. But the shooting reminds us as Americans that those in the armed services are just as human as we are, just as desiring of connections, of understanding, of care, and the like.

Americans love to praise military personnel as a matter of reflex whenever the circumstance arises to do so. And indeed, we should be grateful to those who are willing to take a big step closer towards the ultimate sacrifice, whether it be in the name of fighting for our freedoms or not. Oftentimes, however, the praise is a social conformance that only seeks to comply with what are considered good manners instead of taking the time to really understand at least some of the tribulations that these individuals go through on a daily basis.

We have become two worlds, the civilian and the military, one largely unable to connect with the other, one largely unaware of the others very existence. But if we want to truly honor those who serve in the military, we’ll take a little time, every now and then, to truly get to know that man or woman who served in our country’s military.

It is also in this sphere where both major political parties can stand together (maybe!) and understand that we all have a common purpose, to make our country a better and safer place.  

Cuccinelli Loophole? AG Backs Goldman but Call Me Puzzled.

2

( – promoted by lowkell)

by Paul Goldman

“Call me puzzled” isn’t how Herman Melville opened Moby Dick, but it’s close enough for me at this point. Because yours truly is truly puzzled by the Attorney General’s opinion on the regional transportation taxes, even though the AG methodically comes to the same overall conclusion that Norm Leahy and I first predicted would happen in our controversial Washington Post op-ed. The brain trust at the AG’s office concluded that the discriminatory regional taxes in the transportation plan are unconstitutional. But they do it on a specific, narrowly drawn section of the Virginia constitution, one discussing local laws and sensible classifications, as opposed to a broader philosophic discussion about the basic legal building block of the constitution. This makes it Bob Marshall 2 and Bob McDonnell 0 on this constitutional stuff.

Thus, the AG’s office comes to the same specific conclusion we did, but goes small where I think it needed to go large. It relies on a cryptic footnote in the 2008 Marshall case – where the VA Supreme Court ruled Governor Kaine’s transportation rooted in local taxes unconstitutional – to smack down McDonnell’s 2013 “legacy maker.” But the 2008 taxes centered solely on NOVA. Here in 2013, it is far more complicated plan, wrapped around clearly constitutional state taxes and funding formulas. The regional taxes include one in Tidewater, thus we have more than 50% of the voters impacted.

The transportation plan doesn’t merely cross the line into prohibited local taxes by the General Assembly. Rather, it is reflective of a growing philosophy in our politics: that there are two Virginias now, only this time it isn’t about white and black. The transportation plan doesn’t merely drive a hole through a clause or two; it is a direct attack on the constitution, one that needs to be repelled with a big thrust, not with clever lawyering.

I don’t, therefore, find the AG’s legal analysis wholly satisfying. It concedes the very point at the heart of the Virginia Constitution: that as a matter of broad constitutional theory, the pact between the regions that produced the state of Virginia protected them from being subject to discriminatory taxation by a majority of non-resident legislators in Richmond. I wanted the head cut off of the snake: he instead went more for a body shot.

In that regard therefore, I wonder out loud: is this a loophole for Terry McAuliffe and others to exploit should they truly believe the AG’s opinion is nothing more than politics masquerading as law? Perhaps exploit isn’t the right word: Terry and others are sincere in their belief that the transportation plan is constitutional, and that Cuccinelli only ruled out of ideology.  

Moreover, Democrats feel – and to a greater extent this year some Republicans – that the transportation issue has a reached a point in NOVA and Tidewater that it needs to be addressed at the state level. They also feel that this regional taxes only passed because it was the will of most of the Tidewater and NOVA legislators, along with local government leaders. Thus this is not a case of legislators from outside the area voting to impose local taxes: rather, it is the situation where locally elected state legislators, answerable to the localities voters, decided to use the power of the General Assembly to address the issue. Terry and others thus see this has a power within Article X, a defendable, indeed inevitable situation given the realities of the state right now. The previous Attorney, Bob McDonnell, went along with this general view in 2008. Democrats rightly feel a Democratic AG would agree likewise. So in that regard, Terry and GA Democrats do believe Cuccinelli is playing politics.

If that is indeed the case – then it seems to me Cuccinelli has now dared McAuliffe to put up, or stand exposed. Will Terry take the bait – and get Senate Democrats to force a VA Supreme Court showdown? With both NOVA and Tidewater having a dog in the hunt, we are talking more than 50% of the state’s population. We are also talking about it being part of a big package of state taxes and revenue formulas, all constitutional.

The new transportation plan therefore presents a far more complicated case from the standpoint of the numbers of citizens affected and the money involved. In that regard, the AG’s opinion is more 2008 than 2013 in my view. So I can see McDonnell, T-Mac, the Democrats in the GA, and key road groups, along with local governments and the editorial boards joining together to challenge the AG in court. But this only begs a further question: How would Terry and the Democrats, along with some of Speaker Howell’ GOP posse, get a case before the VA Supreme Court to challenge the Cuccinelli position?

Why? Because the politics are fascinating right now. Fact: Governor McDonnell didn’t include these regional taxes in his original plan. He only accepted them as the price to get some transportation tax plan enacted. Fact: Terry McAuliffe and the Democrats never liked the idea of transferring all that general fund money historically earmarked for education to road building. They only accepted it as the price to get a transportation plan. Fact: Speaker Howell and his House Republican posse never liked the idea of keeping the gas tax, they viewed its elimination as key to protecting them with anti-tax GOP partisans. But they accepted keeping the gas tax, although at some slightly reduced level, as the price of getting a deal.

The point being: There is no reason for Governor McDonnell to risk a big loss at the Supreme Court for regional taxes he never wanted. He gains nothing from them, since he can offer amendments to the bill giving the power to enact such taxes to the local governing boards, perfectly constitutional. That’s win win for him: he gets to crow without having to eat crow. What’s not to like?

Compare the alternative: He would effectively have to call the sitting AG and gubernatorial nominee of his own party a legal idiot, and set up a high noon fight in the VA Supreme Court. If McD loses, his “legacy” is tarnished, his national stature badly hurt, and he has totally alienated his own party. Moreover, he forfeits a chance to give local government important home rule powers which they have sought for decades. If he wins, he doesn’t really help himself nationally, likely kills Cuccinelli, and thus alienates his own party.

For McD, to be seen as forcing a law suit is all downside as I see it. He should amend the bill to satisfy Cuccinelli’s constitutional objections. What is Speaker Howell going to do, buck his own governor at this point? I don’t see how that helps the GOP.

Thus, the hot potato would be squarely in Terry and the Democrat’s court. They would have the power to block the governor’s amendments. By blocking the amendments, they would force a Supreme Court case because the governor would then sign the bill AS IS; he surely can’t veto his own “historic” achievement!

If Terry and the Democrats truly believe Cuccinelli was merely playing politics, then why not block the amendments? If they are right, they win in the Supreme Court: election for governor over, indeed a big Dem sweep. It could thus be game, set and match by June!

Assume the Democrats lose. What have they actually lost? They are no worse relative to the regional taxes currently in the bill. Whether they get dropped due to Cuccinelli’s opinion or a Supreme Court ruling, the taxes are out. vThe real difference: if they reject McD’s amendments and force a losing suit, then the localities will not get the home rule authority. But the localities have told Democrats they don’t want the power!

So what is to lose? Besides, if the bill passes AS IS, there will be a challenge to the bill. The AG’s office can’t defend the law at this point. This means the governor will have to hire an outside firm. This costs money and Cuccinelli will be blamed for that. Bob Marshall or others will be the plaintiffs. If they win, it will look bad for McDonnell and the GOP firm he hires. Democrats and Terry are not in the line of fire. If the Supremes in effect overrule Cuccinelli, he loses.

My gut: Democrats will do what Terry wants here.

But let’s put the politics on hold for a second and go back to the legal stuff. As a matter of legal strategy, I think the AG’s opinion unnecessarily concedes the Article X issues without fully thinking through those constitutional provisions.

In my Washington Post op-ed, I looked at the legal issues in the broad terms required of a such a major policy change as the transportation plan. For better or worse, the constitutional thrust of the VA constitution cannot be disputed: the document, over the years, has been crafted to overcome the many regional forces pulling at a statewide government. Like it or not, the idea that the General Assembly could decide to impose a discriminatory tax on one locality due to the collective votes of  legislators not from said locality, is totally inconsistent with the basic theories of the constitution. If Virginians had thought such a thing possible, they would never have approved the constitution.

The AG’s opinion is written more from an intermediate court legal view than from higher up on the food chain. The opinion rests on good, technical lawyering, not broader jurisprudential scholarship. The transportation plan, given the imposition of discriminatory local taxes by Richmond in a manner never done, even contemplated before, is thus not some challenge that might have run afoul of a slight clause in the constitution: but a direct hit on the document itself.

I am one of a few people who have read most of the constitutional debates, at least among those who have not been paid to do it or needed it to graduate from college. The regional fights defined the state. We lost West Virginia, or I suppose more accurately the land and its people, for these types of differences.

These are important, constitutional considerations that the Supreme Court, not a Circuit Court, is expected to analyze. The AG’s opinion gives them surprisingly little time and no import. The opinion makes short work of Article X, finding of no moment in this constitutional debate. This is a big, and risky, concession, both as a matter of substance and legal strategy.

Bottom line: Cuccinelli conceded more legal ground than necessary on the constitutional issues. But that is how his office reads the law. As for the politics, the opinion is better for McAuliffe than for Cuccinelli. I don’t see why Terry wants to carry those four regional taxes into the General Election.

To me, McDonnell’s best play is to get Howell to back amendments to the bill giving the taxing powers to the localities. This will put the burden of going forward to the Democrats. In turn, Democrats need to avoid the bait, and give localities these new taxing rights. It is too risky to place your fate into the hands of judges. Besides, those regional taxes are lose-lose this November, and Cuccinelli has thus given Democrats a way to off-load the burden.

On a net-net basis, giving Cuccinelli a win on the law is well worth getting off the hook on the regional taxes. Home rule is good, easy to defend. If the local officials will not do it, that’s not your fault.  

The 6th District Fiasco

6

This is part 2 to my first post on the steep uphill battle facing Democrats in Southwest Virginia this year. Cross posted at the newest political blog in the Commonwealth, the Real Crystal Ball!

Back in 2005 Republican Anne Crockett-Stark knocked off incumbent Democrat Bennie Keister in the 6th District. Keister had been barely holding onto office in the first place, winning the open seat in 2001 with 51% of the vote and winning reelection in 2003 by just 49 votes. In both races Keister had a significant financial edge over his Republican challengers, so it’s no surprise that when Republicans targeted the race heavily in 2005 and outspent him they pulled off the win.

Let’s take a look at Keister’s performance.

When he won in 2001, he was running behind Mark Warner at the top of the ticket. Warner won the district with 53%, two points ahead of Keister. In 2005, Tim Kaine was winning 45% of the vote, close to the 46% that Keister lost with downticket. Keister was pulling off narrow victories in a district that was shifting from supporting local Virginia Democrats to won that was Republican up and down the line, but it was still competitive for even Tim Kaine in 2005. But even when outspending his Republican opponents almost three to one, Keister never was able to put this district away. Republicans smelled the blood and came after him with a vengeance in 2005.

Democrats contested the seat again in 2007 and lost, but kept it from being a blowout. But in 2008 Obama was blown out of the water here. His 37.5% of the vote was just a hair above Kerry’s 36.8%. This district is hostile to national, liberal Democrat. And all signs pointed to the district getting worse for Democrats.

In 2009, Virginia Democrats saw a district that was trending away from the party with a battle hardened Republican incumbent and wisely decided … to throw more money at it.

Wait, what?

Break it down.

Mark Warner in 2001 won the district with 53% of the vote. Even if Creigh Deeds rebuilt something resembling the Warner coalition from 2001, the change in the district over the years was going to make it unlikely that he would win the district. A strong Democratic challenger might be able to run ahead of the top of the ticket, but they would be going up against an entrenched Republican. That’s assuming Deeds is doing well at the top of the ticket, instead of being shellacked.

I don’t fault the party for trying to find a strong candidate and making sure that the seat was contested. But once the alarm bells were going off in Richmond about the McDonnell tsunami heading their way, they needed to prioritize districts and try to defend incumbents first, not invest in a seat that was always going to be a reach.

In late October, 2009, the Democratic House Caucus put in over $80,000 to Carole Pratt’s campaign. Pratt, a retired dentist, might not have had much going for her in terms of political connections in the district, but she was the mother of the House Caucus Director at the time, Matt Mansell. Matt is now lobbying for the Medical Society of Virginia and I can only thank him for leaving campaign politics to the professionals.

In a year in which several incumbent delegates were dragged down to defeat by Deeds, four stand out for the narrow margins of their defeat: Mathieson, Valentine, Vanderhye and Nichols. Republicans probably would have targeted them for defeat through redistricting, and liberal Democrats like adulterer David Englin would defend that as fair, but I bet most Virginia Democrats would prefer to have had a chance at keeping those four around instead of supporting Pratt, who got blown out with less than 35% of the vote. Pratt was the 6th largest recipient of support from the House Caucus in 2009, behind Bouchard, Mathieson, Werkheiser, Stevens Miller and Nichols. Don’t you think that money could have been better spent?

Virginia News Headlines: Saturday Morning

4

Here are a few Virginia (and national) news headlines, political and otherwise, for Saturday, March 23. Also see the video of President Obama speaking at Israel’s Holocaust museum, Yad Vashem. Having been there, I can definitively say that it’s one of the most powerful, disturbing, experiences I’ve ever had in my life.

*Senate Passes $3.7 Trillion Budget, Its First in 4 Years (“The 50-49 vote sets up contentious – and potentially fruitless – negotiations with the Republican-dominated House in April to reconcile two vastly different plans for dealing with the nation’s economic and budgetary problems.”)

*President ends Israel visit by bringing together two estranged powers (Great job by President Obama on this one, and also on his trip to the Middle East, which has been superb.)

*The numbers prove it: The GOP is estranged from America (By Andrew Kohut, founding director and former president of the Pew Research Center.)

*Priebus slams ‘idiotic statements’ as reason for GOP losses in 2012 (How can they be “idiotic” when they’re what many/most Republicans really believe? Also, does Mr. Priebus really want us to go back and dig up his own idiotic comments on “you didn’t build that,” etc?)

*Sen. Warner’s Reasons for Staying

*Cuccinelli: Part of Virginia’s Transportation Funding Bill Is Unconstitutional

*Priebus: Huckabee a ‘Model’ for GOP (Speaking of an idiotic statement – Mike Huckabee a “model?” Yeah, for Pat Robertson and Company, perhaps. Ugh.)

*Keystone wins big in Senate (This was basically a symbolic vote, but still, thanks to Tim Kaine for voting “no” on trashing the planet. As for Mark Warner, who voted “yes,” let’s just say that history will not remember you kindly…)

*First, Fix Virginia’s Roads (“Bacon’s bottom line: The top priority of transportation policy should be to fully fund the maintenance of existing road, bridges, highways and rail before a single dime is spent upon new infrastructure.”)

*Blue: Dominion will continue reliable strategy

*Gastanaga: It’s abuse, not use, of drones that concerns us

*Governor acts on K-12 measures, will amend school takeover bill

*Governor signs 9 Norment bills (“One is texting while driving bill”)

*Retiring Del. Tata endorses Byler as replacement

*Dramatic meteor streaks through evening sky

Ryan, GOP Launch New Attack on Social Safety Net

0

As proof that they learned nothing from their party’s thrashing in 2012, House GOPers again voted for the absurd budget put forth yet again by that self-appointed “budget expert,” Paul Ryan. Every Republican congressman from Virginia voted for that budget, and they should be ashamed of that vote. It’s not only morally wrong; it’s foolish.

As Rep. Jim Moran noted in his statement on the budget vote, “According to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, 66 percent of its $5 trillion in non-defense budget cuts [in Ryan’s bill] over ten years come from programs that serve low and moderate income Americans.” Medicaid alone would be cut nearly $1.4 trillion over the 10-year period. My question is simply this: Who are the Republicans, including Virginia’s Republicans, proposing to drop from Medicaid rolls?

Ryan’s budget would get some of its Medicaid savings from repealing the Affordable Care Act, an example of the impossible smoke-and-mirrors he uses to make his “arithmetic” work. Then, he would turn Medicaid itself into a block grant to states with an annual hard cap on federal money. That means that someone at some level of government will have to make horrible decisions about who lives and who ultimately dies.

Medicaid is NOT a program that serves lazy adults who should be finding their own health insurance through work. Poverty alone does not mean a person qualifies for the program, either. All but about 15% of Medicaid goes to three groups: the elderly in nursing homes who have spent down their entire estate before becoming eligible (24%), the severely handicapped or blind who are incapable of work (44%), and very poor children (17%). In Virginia, the remaining 15% of Medicaid recipients have to be the poorest of the poor, with annual incomes below $9,000.

Perhaps the GOP could set up those “death panels” Sarah Palin talked about in 2008 to decide who won’t be covered any more. Their job would be to decide which old people should be left to die at home, which severely handicapped people would be left to waste away, which children deserved no health care. What Ryan is setting up is a system where someone, either on the state or the federal level, will have to decide who is worthy of continued life and who is not.

Another way of looking at what Ryan has wrought is to see it as a way to push what had been a federal-state equal obligation to recipients down to the state level through a hard block grant and force politicians there make the hard decisions about coverage. Virginia certainly knows that budget trick well. It was used quite effectively in the recent recessionary state budgets, when the state “balanced” its budget by requiring localities to assume more of educational funding and public safety funding, even requiring them to send local money to the state.

In Virginia Gov. McDonnell has used the excuse of wanting to make Medicaid “more efficient” as a way to avoid signing on for the Obamacare expansion of Medicaid. What he doesn’t tell us is that Medicare and Medicaid spending per beneficiary has grown less rapidly than costs for private health insurance. Indeed, those programs are the most efficient in the nation in the delivery of health care. Their cost is primarily a function of their covering the oldest and sickest of Americans.

Paul Ryan prides himself on his faith as a Catholic. Perhaps he should reflect on the words of the new Pope Francis, who said he chose his name in honor of Francis of Assisi. Pope Francis said he wished for a church that was both poor and “for the poor.” In contrast, Paul Ryan wants a government of the rich, by the rich, and for the rich. His budget reflects his philosophy, and no amount of patting himself on the back for a phony “balanced budget” can hide who he really represents. It isn’t us ordinary folks.

And, if you think Ryan’s attack on the poor is bad, just check out his tax cuts that are a bonanza for the wealthiest of America’s citizens. Republicans never cease to amaze me in their venality and political tone-deafness.

BREAKING: Cuccinelli Says Transportation Bill, Medicaid Expansion Unconstitutional

5

According to our fine Attorney General (and his office), the two main accomplishments of the 2013 Virginia General Assembly are not constitutional.

1. Transportation

It is my opinion that, although the imposition of different taxes on transactions in different localities does not violate Article X, § 1, HB 2313’s imposition of taxes in the specific localities constitutes a local law related to taxation prohibited by Article IV, § 14(5) of the Virginia Constitution. It further is my opinion that, because the taxes were imposed directly by the General Assembly, the taxes cannot be saved by the provisions of Article VII, § 2, even if they had obtained the affirmative vote of two-thirds of the members elected to each house.

Interesting, I actually thought Article X was a stronger argument against this bill. Go figure.

2. Medicaid expansion

It is my opinion that the provisions of the 2013 budget act that purport to authorize Medicaid expansion only “[i]f the Medicaid Innovation and Reform Commission determines that” certain conditions set by the General Assembly have been met constitutes a delegation of the General Assembly’s legislative authority. It is further my opinion that the General Assembly may not delegate final legislative authority regarding budgetary or other matters to a committee composed of a subset of the members of the General Assembly.

Of course, these are just opinions – correct or incorrect, you decide – by Virginia’s AG, not a ruling by the Virginia Supreme Court. Still, it will be fascinating to see how this plays out now, especially given Bob McDonnell’s obvious hesitation to make a decision on whether or not to sign the transportation bill. Also, it seems to me that the AG’s ruling could have an impact on future Supreme Court deliberations. Hmmmm.

P.S. Big winner here? “Sideshow Bob” Marshall, who requested these opinions, of all people. Wonderful.

P.P.S. Did the politics of 2013 just get scrambled? All I can say is, it’s going to be very interesting to see how this plays out…

Video: DPVA Chair Charniele Herring on the Politics Hour Says VA Dems “poised for success”

0

About an hour ago, DPVA Chair Charniele Herring was on The Politics Hour on WAMU. Here are my tweets from this segment:

*Dems “poised for success in Virginia,” “ready for a change in governorship”

*Bills to restrict women’s reproductive rights “woke up voters,” Virginia “testing ground” for national level.

*Virginia needs to stop passing bills that alienate people, make them second guess whether they should live here.

*Under divisive Republicans like Ken Cuccinelli, Virginia is slipping in terms of a place to do business.

*Confident Virginia transportation bill passes constitutional muster, was fully vetted by legal counsel

*We can gain seats in Virginia House of Delegates this year, including in the 16 Obama districts held by GOP’ers

*Strong ground game is crucial for 2013 elections in Virginia, need to turn out Obama/Kaine voters.

*Virginia Democrats need to build a bench of potential candidates, will be a long-term effort.

*Charnielle Herring hopes Gov. Bob McDonnell strikes hybrid fee and replaces the revenues with something else.