Home Blog Page 2459

Corporate-Favored Education “Reform”, and What It May Mean in 2013

By
Paba
-
0

( – promoted by lowkell)

With the fights over high-profile, controversial bills related to reproductive rights laws in the General Assembly last year, a number of other seismic bills slipped through the media coverage cracks. On the education front, a bill allowing for tax credits to be granted to individuals giving scholarship donations to private schools passed through relatively easily and is expected to pass state constitutional muster. What this means, ultimately, is that tax dollars normally received into the general fund for public education will now be diverted to private schools that have more discriminatory leeway. It is expected that this controversial policy will survive legal challenges. 

Much has been made in the coverage of education issues nationally of the so-called “Education Reform” movement. It's taken many forms, from the carrot-stick approach of the Obama/Arne Duncan-favored “Race to the Top,” to a straight-up, market-based voucher program, such as the one passed in the state of Louisiana last year where the per pupil funding follows the pupil to any public or private school. All of these plans claim to have the student at the center of any reforms. Neither really gives much say to the teachers, or parents who want their students to have the best teachers rather than the smartest sounding business plan. In both cases, the less power the teacher has, the better. While vouchers place teachers at the whim of market forces while also allowing for taxpayer-funded vouchers to be spent on religious education (as the Virginia bill is expected to do and the Louisiana bill did to wacky extremes), “Race to the Top” has quietly imposed upon school systems a number of controversial classroom “innovations,” including more high-stakes testing (despite the President's own admonishment of “teaching to the test”), the expansion of privately-run charter schools (who are in turn given low oversight of their activities, and have proven to be no better, if not worse than public schools), online schools (many of which, while attractive to technophiles and pitched as good options for students who have an attention deficit, are ineffective at best), and merit pay programs that demand job instability for teachers in exchange for school funding.

The lack of a true teacher's union to front a campaign against the introduction of policies that undercut public schools and divert taxpayer dollars to private corporations in the name of “reform” has meant that this issue hasn't gotten the attention it has seen in large states like California and New York, or even in neighboring DC a few years back during the Michelle Rhee era. Rhee's own organization, StudentsFirst, has continued to garner much of the coverage of school reform coverage. Perhaps no other event has best called into question the methodology and motives of these so-called “reformers” as this week's release of her organization's education rankings. Missing from her metrics were one seemingly obvious one: student success. Instead, she focused on issues like charter prevalence, elimination of tenure privileges for teachers, making it easier to fire teachers, allowance for student “choice” (read: availability of vouchers), and controversial “trigger laws.” The “trigger laws” are a perfect example of the deceptiveness of these sorts of reformers. As portrayed in the recent movie Won't Back Down, these laws allow for parents to vote to overhaul failing public schools. What their proponents hope parents don't realize (and what is never addressed in the film) is that this typically would involve shutting down the school, firing the entire staff, or selling off the school to a corporation interested in seeing what they can squeeze out of a public asset (h/t to my friend Liza Featherstone, whose takedown of that film and what it promotes can be read here).

We know that what ultimately mattes is student outcomes. The assumption is that by introducing market reforms, schools will compete to educate the best and parents will choose the best school for their children the way they may choose the best car for their family. Results thus far have been mixed. No one denies that a child at a failing school would be better off at a more robustly funded school, public or private. What isn't clear is that privately run schools using taxpayer funds (the charters) are any better than the traditional public schools. Why give away taxpayer funds to private firms if they're not creating a better return that our current firms? One may argue that it's strictly a cost issue, but that argument is flimsy as well. Many charters, including online charters, have turned into money pits.

So why bring this up right now in Virginia if what's done is done on these tax credits for private school scholarships? Aren't we just resigned to the fact that tax dollars are going to get diverted to schools that might be teaching religious doctrine that we find repugnant? As mentioned before, it's unlikely that legal challenges will put a dent in this. But there's still a long ways down the road to a corporate-run education system, and lawmakers on both sides are pushing for us to move further down it. Where does Terry McAuliffe stand on this? Does he agree with some of the more controversial parts of “Race to the Top”? Would he have stood with the entire Democratic Senate Caucus in voting against the voucher-like plan passed last year?

Speaking of the Senate, we do know where two candidates for statewide office stand on this issue. Both Senators Ralph Northam and Mark Herring voted with the rest of the Senate Democratic Caucus against diverting tax dollars to private schools, only to watch the bill pass thanks to Lt. Governor Bill Bolling.

And speaking of the Lt. Governor position, there's another high-profile candidate in the Democratic race for that position, one who deserves a good questioning with regards to our public education system and its funding. Aneesh Chopra seems progressive enough on most issues. It's no secret he loves talking tech policy. Any Virginia Democrat who has seen him speak knows this. Voucher proponents and reform advocates (such as high profile educational tech advocate Jeb Bush) often point to new educational tech frontiers such as online schools as a major part of their strategy. But why mention this in the context of an ostensibly progressive Democrat? Perhaps because he is the only candidate for statewide office who has donated money to a high-profile Republican who has championed and passed one of the most far-reaching and controversial school voucher programs in America. According to the Washington Post, Chopra donated to Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal in 2004, as he was beginning his ascent towards becoming one of the highest-profile right wing advocates of a very different sort of education system.

It's worth making this a must-discuss issue for all candidates in 2013. Does Virginia want a well-funded, non-corporatized, non-discriminatory public school system staffed by quality teachers? Or do we want change of the Bobby Jindal sort? Let the 2013 education policy test begin.

Jennifer Boysko Launches Campaign for HoD 86

By
KathyinBlacksburg
-
5

In 2004 then Governor Howard Dean told Americans that we “had the power,” if only we would use it. Governor Dean did not win the presidential nomination that year. But he did have the prescription for what ails our country. And he knew the most important thing Democrats could do was run a fifty-state campaign, leaving no county or voter behind.

President Barack Obama is president today, at least in part, because he heeded that prescription. And he also prescribed something else: That the talented leaders among us step forward to bring progressive change to our statehouses, increasingly taken over by radical conservatives. If enough had heeded the challenge, redistricting would look very different today. But the time to rebuild begins now. Every single talented, honest, hardworking progressive legislator we send to our statehouses is a step toward the day when we really change America. If the rest of Virginia and the rest of the nation were so lucky as to have a Jennifer Boysko to run, our future would be bright indeed.

Last month I wrote of her intent to enter the race. I wish I could have been in NOVA yesterday because Jennifer Boysko launched her HoD District 86  campaign. I urge you to take the time to watch the video of the event here. She did so against a visually stunning backdrop with compelling endorsements and a ringing speech outlining what motivated her to run and the main issues she’ll address. Among others, as she told us in December, they include:

• That our daughters deserve to have control over their own bodies;

• That we need to solve the transportation gridlock that is damaging our quality of life and economy;

• That NOVA should receive its fair share of education, transportation and human service funding from Richmond; and

• That affordable housing and adequate human services are crucial to the economy and well-being of our Commonwealth.

As she said previously:


I believe that a strong system of human services, public education and access to physical and mental health are crucial to building a vibrant economy and community. I believe that diversity and inclusivity are hallmarks of a healthy community. Whether racial, socioeconomic, sexual orientation or cultural, a diverse community has the capacity make us all richer as we learn from one another. Every person should have the fundamental right to clean air, water, and to the right to make decisions for ourselves about our most personal and private family issues.

There to endorse Jennifer were Virginia State Senator Mark Herring and Fairfax County Supervisor John Foust, both of whom gave strong endorsements.  

Jennifer will breathe fresh air into the House of Delegates. She’s a wonderful person, as evidenced by near endless community service. If someone is hurting, Jennifer is there. After Katrina, Jennifer was there to help collect donations. I have lost count of all the philanthropic efforts and kindnesses Jennifer models for the rest of us. Whether it is in efforts for schools, seniors, or the poor, she’s an inspiration.

But Jennifer’s selflessness also makes her especially suited to serving in the HoD. She will keep her focus outward – on her responsibilities to the voters, not toward herself and her prospects for re-election. Virginia needs representatives who are not part of the wholly owned corporate subsidiary that is the Virginia GOP. At the same time, it needs a candidate with strong people-oriented, Democratic principles to contrast with the dysfunctional obstructionist wrecking crew currently dominating both houses, despite an equal D-R split in the Senate.

All of us owe a debt to Jennifer, who has shown how to help turn Virginia blue. In large measure, efforts like hers helping to found a large and effective Democratic presence in the Dulles area, made a difference. Many a time her home and front porch were turned into “election central.”

Most of all, Jennifer has never and will not forget why she serves the public. That’s something long missing from Richmond where one side of the aisle seems to have forgotten why it is there. Every two years (for delegates) and every four (for senators) voters send representatives to Richmond. And time after time, radical conservative ideology swamps common sense, good judgment and doing the right thing for the commonwealth.

As just one example, instead of solving the transportation crisis, and it is a crisis, given that the governor is hell bent on wiping out the primary funding source at the expense of everyday Virginians, the GA gives us a steady diet of getting into women’s underclothes. It  is  demeaning. It is distracting. And it is devastating to the Commonwealth which needs legislators who give a damn about it.

Jennifer is the kind of optimistic, positive person you just want to be around. She’s got good, strong progressive ideals and ideas, but she knows how to work with  others to accomplish them. She’s sweet in the best sense of the term, but tough and seasoned in numerous political “battles.”  She is also an accomplished and capable public servant, in her work as legislative aid to John Foust. She gets things done, the right things, for the residents of Herndon, Fairfax County and Northern Virginia.

Virginia, let’s elect Jennifer Boysko to the 86th House of Delegates district seat.  Whether or not you are from the 86th, please pay attention to this race. Disclosure: I have donated to Jennifer’s campaign (I encourage you to as well). If you can canvass or make phone calls for Jennifer (even if you do not live in NOVA), you can contact her campaign here. May Emily’s List and The Farm Team also be listening! And may Democrats throughout Virginia nurture worthy candidates so they can join Jennifer in Richmond and turn the state house around.

As LG Candidate, Corey Stewart Descends Into Self Contradiction, Incoherence

By
lowkell
-
0

To put it mildly, I’m not a big fan of Prince William County board Chair Corey Stewart. Why not? I refer you to Exhibit A, also know as the series of “9500 Liberty” videos, in which Stewart does his best imitation of a raging, rabid, xenophobic demagogue. Now, Stewart is taking his bashing of “illegals,” as he so charmingly calls hard-working immigrants here to make a better life for their families, statewide. Or is he? You certainly wouldn’t guess it from his interview on WAMU’s The Politics Hour this past Friday, in which he pretends to be a “moderate,” but in the end descends into self contradiction and, ultimately, utter, laughably absurd incoherence. Here are few “highlights” from his debacle of an interview.

*Stewart claims his priorities are “transportation, transportation, transportation,” that Virginia has “kicked this can down the road far too long,” and that it’s a “dire situation” we are facing. So, having diagnosed the problem, what’s Stewart going to do about it? Got me. For starters, he proceeds to dismiss Bob McDonnell’s transportation plan as “not going to go anywhere.” Huh? So what better idea(s) does Stewart have? Well, let’s see, he opposes raising taxes – gas tax, sales tax, etc. – so forget any new revenues. And without any new revenues, aren’t we just continuing to kick that proverbial can down the metaphorical (certainly not physical) road? Sure seems like it to me. In sum, this is a total, nonsensical, incoherent #FAIL by Corey Stewart.

*Perhaps recognizing his utter #FAIL on transportation, Stewart then reaches for some potential revenues by possibly eliminating some of the many tax loopholes (aka, billions of dollars per year in corporate welfare we absurdly dole out) in the Virginia tax code. Except, one problem: Stewart refuses to name any, claiming it might “get myself in trouble.” Well, now, ain’t THAT a profile in courage and leadership? LOL

*Stewart ties himself in knots trying to explain why Virginia “will vote Republican this November.”  Stewart’s main “argument,” using the word VERY loosely, is the so-called “rule” that Virginia always votes opposite for governor as the party in the White House. Of course, as I explained the other day, this “rule” has absolutely no basis, statistical or any other way, in fact. It’s just as moronic as the pundits who claimed that President Obama couldn’t win reelection because “no president since FDR had ever been reelected with higher than 8% unemployment.” Whatever. Anyway, it’s not a serious argument in any way, shape, or form.

Lost more incoherence and illogic on the “flip”

*Stewart then tries to argue that Virginians are by nature moderates who like a “balance of power.” Again, there’s no evidence Virginians have voted this way historically, but even if this WERE true, it totally contradicts Stewart’s assertion that Republicans will win all branches of government this November. Given Stewart’s assertion that Virginians like a “balance of power,” wouldn’t they vote Democratic for governor, or LG, or AG, or for House of Delegates, or something, to counteract otherwise total Teapublican control of the state? Uhhhhh.

*Yet another self contradiction is Stewart’s claim that Virginians are by nature non-ideological, pragmatic moderates, yet in practically the same breath we’re going to vote for one of the most extreme, ideological, non-pragmatic candidates for governor…ever? Alrighty! Makes perfect sense! If you have no brain! LOL

*On a related note, you’ve gotta love how Stewart claims his focus is all on pragmatic issues, not on divisive “social issues,” yet he made his name focusing on the major, divisive “social issue” of “illegal immigration” (Stewart’s role was to be a xenophobic demagogue). Then, the “pragmatic” Stewart proceeds to strongly (“absolutely!”) endorse social issues extremist/nutjob Ken Kookinelli (“he’s done a great job as AG”), while claiming this election won’t be about said social issues, while also bashing the more “moderate” (in tone, if not in substance) Bill Bolling as “shameful…sour grapes” for considering an independent run for governor. Got that?!?

*You’ve also got to love Stewart patting himself for not ignoring the “minority population” of Prince William County. Of course, we need to define “not ignoring” as “xenophobic bashing.” So how did Stewart win reelection? Very simple: differential voter turnout rates (odd-year/off-year elections skew heavily whiter, older, more Republican); nothing to do with Latinos suddenly falling in love with their tormentor. Whatever.

In sum, Corey Stewart is a lot of things, but coherent is apparently not one of them. Of course, when you’ve got a horrible record like his, and are now trying to sell that stinking pile of (fill in the blank) statewide, it’s not surprising that self contradiction, incoherence and illogic are the inevitable results.

The Art of Giving Back: a Tribute to Aaron Swartz

By
Progressive86
-
0

There are few greater tragedies than a young person taking their life. In the untimely death of Aaron Swartz, the tragedy comes atop his controversial efforts to “steal” millions of journal articles from an electronic archive”” to make them available to the public, for free. Swartz was facing trial for his efforts and if convicted, faced a long prison sentence with the potential for huge fines.

Like the legend of Robin Hood, Swartz attempted to take from the rich and give to the not-so-rich. And like Robin Hood, Swartz had ardent detractors as well as ardent fans for attempting to raid the digital archives of elite institutions. No less noteworthy was his role in creating RSS, a godsend for individuals who want to gather updated digital information in one centralized location without lifting a finger.

Swartz’s accomplishments as a ‘pioneer’ in the digital world stood just as much as political actions that challenged the very foundations of our society as much as they did technological breakthroughs. Swartz was THE prototype for the 21st Century political activist who chaffed at the capitalist barriers that dictate most of our social relationships.

For Swartz, it seems, some things weren’t for sale. Some things, like knowledge, were just too precious to hoard for all but the most affluent in society. For Swartz, the public literally had “the right to know.”

Perhaps Swartz will be left to the void of forgotten history and remembered only among a narrow group of digital populists. Maybe he won’t be remembered at all for the things he accomplished and the things he tried to accomplish. But it is Aaron Swartz and those like him who truly provide our society with a conscious and an alternative path, should we ever choose to take it. That is, not everything in society has a price-tag. There are some things in society that are so precious that they cannot be bought and sold to the exclusion of those who do not have the means to do so.

Aaron Swartz saw this and he tried to change how the system functions. Aaron Swartz did change the way our system functions and by pursuing a similar vision his memory, and the memory of those who have strived in a similar vein, will never really be forgotten. Like him or not, Aaron Swartz did what so many people don’t have the courage to do: he sacrificed much of his life to pursue a greater good that he believed in. I can’t think of anything better to say about someone’s life.  

Videos: Washington Capitals’ First Official Practice of 2012-2013 Season

By
lowkell
-
0



There’s lots more video on the “flip,” from the Washington Capitals first official practice of the season, a bit earlier today at Kettler Capitals Iceplex at Ballston Common Mall in Arlington, VA. Also note, the guy taking photos in the first video is none other than former Virginia (Democratic) political blogger, now full-time sports blogger, Bryan Scrafford (note: see Bryan’s excellent photos here).

P.S. As you can see from the videos, Kettler was PACKED with fans this morning, hundreds of them showing up before practice even started to watch some hockey. It’s just anecdotal, of course, but there was no sign in Arlington this morning that the long work stoppage has harmed fan enthusiasm much. Personally, as a big hockey fan for many years, I’m glad that we’ll be seeing some stability in the NHL for a decade or so. Now, let’s go Caps!

With Some Tweaks: Should Dems Back McDonnell’s Transportation Plan?

By
Goldmanusa
-
5

( – promoted by lowkell)

by Paul Goldman

Yes, I have said the Governor’s Transportation plan is fatally flawed. But so was Democratic Governor Jerry Baliles’ 10-year plan in 1986, which Democrats supported despite my showing this fatal flaw: it purposely inflated the revenues but not the cost of construction in order to get the votes needed for passage. This is one key reason it didn’t work as promised, as NOVA and other places got screwed in the end. Yet NOVA officials and others still praise Baliles.

I get that. But this should not obscure the lesson here. As regards the McDonnell plant, it has the same basic virtue as the Baliles plan; the support of the sitting governor. Without such support, no plan could be passed. So transportation advocates back 27 years ago went along with the Baliles plan, hoping they could fix it.

Why? Because it was the best they could get at the time. Governing is also the art of the possible.

In 2004, Governor Warner, as the price for his plan, made the tax code more regressive (higher sales taxes) and set up the eventual elimination of the estate tax. But with the federal estate tax coming back under President Obama, and the way a state estate tax could be structured, this amounts now to a loss of substantial revenue to the state, despite it not requiring any real taxation of Virginians liable for the federal estate tax. It was, in that regard, penny wise and pound foolish. It was always a high price to pay. But one had to weigh the pros and cons.

The point being: taxing measures are by their vary nature products of compromise. Moreover, the “good or bad” nature can seem one way at the beginning but quite another 20 years hence. Harry Byrd’s Higher Gas Tax/Pay As Go transportation approach seemed very progressive at the time and was applauded as such. But a generation later, the refusal to issue public debt for needed projects became fiscally irresponsible, and is a key reason why NOVA and Tidewater face such transportation problems today.

SO, LET’S GET TO WHERE THE RUBBER MEETS THE ROAD.

All things considered, would Virginia be better off with the basic McDonnell plan for transportation, or should Democrats instead work to kill it (which I believe they can)?

 

First, the discussion starts here: The continued delusion of the state’s leading self-described progressive editorial boards and others is becoming a real obstacle to progress. They continue to advocate for a lot higher tax revenue: but that is not going to happen!! So if that is all they can bring to the discussion, then they are a net negative right now. We are dealing with the art of the possible, not the possibilities of art.

Bottom line: THERE ARE NOT GOING TO BE ANY HIGHER TAXES THAN THE MCDONNELL PLAN. Indeed, history suggests that for any plan to pass, he will have to take less.

Second: For Republicans,the major political attraction of the McDonnell plan is the ELIMINATION OF THE GAS TAX. Is this good policy or even common sense, eliminating the biggest user fee the public is willing to pay especially in the context of road expenses? Of course not. But like it or not, indeed fair or not, the plan does have to be enacted by politicians up for reelection this year in the House of Delegates, with a huge GOP majority. Plus the Senators are already looking over their shoulder at the next election.

Third: Since the editorial boards and others don’t support putting any of it to a referendum, then THEY HAVE TO RELY ON THE POLITICIANS TO DO IT.

Fourth: The next major attraction for Republicans is the governor’s clever politics of using projections of huge increases in internet sales taxes and catalog sales revenues as part of his transportation plan. Does his plan make good policy sense here, since he effectively is using this maneuver to establish a new distribution formula for this fastest growing part of sales tax revenue, taking money away from education/localities and instead dedicating it all to transportation? Of course not.

But it is also true that there is a huge amount of future revenue here and it is a way to get that level of revenue WITHOUT HAVING TO RAISE TAXES. Why? Because, for example, and contrary to conventional wisdom, the sales tax on Internet sales is already due; the taxes are ALREADY ASSESSED. However, due to a 1992 Supreme Court decision, many of those selling stuff over the internet can not be forced to collect the taxes, unlike a store or chain with an actual physical presence in the state. Thus, Republicans can vote for it without being accused of raising taxes.

Fifth: Under the rubric of tax reform – substituting a sales tax for a gas tax – Governor McDonnell puts in place a new formulation which will raise more money over time than not only the current tax, but even a moderately higher gas tax. You might not like the way he did it here. But for those who believe the maintenance money is drying up (which it is!) this is something that helps over time.

NET, NET:  Assuming you believe that the state desperately needs more money ASAP to fix a growing transportation problem, then Governor McDonnell’s plan is the biggest, the boldest, and most comprehensive since Harry Byrd set the parameters of such a decision nearly a century ago.

SO AGAIN: WHAT SHOULD DEMOCRATS DO WHERE THE RUBBER MEETS THE ROAD?

The options are not hard to derive. They could fight for a plan reflecting their policy views. This would include higher gas and/or sales taxes and a totally different distribution formula for internet sales and catalog revenues. It would include other fees, etc. It would also be DOA, if it lived long enough to get from the printer to the General Assembly building.

Bottom line: THERE IS NO CHANCE OF A DEMOCRATIC PLAN PASSING THIS YEAR.

Even with a Democratic governor next year, there is no reason to believe right now such a Democratic plan would pass in 2014 or any year thereafter. This leaves Democrats two choices as a practical political matter.

One: Provide as many votes as possible for McD,and hope he can get enough GOP votes to pass it. This is the least attractive option for sure.

Two: Negotiate for some sensible improvements, and hope McD can get enough GOP votes to pass a McDonnell-lite plan.

SO WE HAVE TO ASK: What tweaks would McD and his Republican allies accept? In order of the politics involved, my hunches:

1) Right now, 1/2 a cent of the current sales tax sales tax is dedicated to transportation (the Baliles Tax from 1986). The McD plan wants to up that to 3/4 of a cent (from non-internet sales tax revenue). Democrats can’t accept this…AND MCDONNELL KNOWS IT! In my view, he included this provision KNOWING HE WOULD GIVE IT UP as a “concession.” Very smart politics, do Dems can get this. GOP House of Delegate candidates gain nothing by refusing to change this.

2) The car registration fees and fees on alternative fuel vehicles can be changed. There are any number of permutations. The actual money raised here is not a major part of the plan. My gut says you might be able to raise a little more money here, but as a political matter, it might not be worth pushing. Dems SHOULD BE ABLE TO GET THIS.

3) The distribution formula on internet sales tax revenue is problematic since it puts a way higher priority on transportation than education. That’s not my politics. But this is likely the nut in the coconut for the governor, for he has finally – after trying to find magic money with ABC privatizing, off-shore oil royalties, a chain of toll booths along the North Carolina border and borrowing against future revenues – found a legitimate stream of new cash. Since Congress has to eventually allow states to collect this money, even Amazon and the other Internet folks concede as much. Thus, the politics is tricky here, since too much of a tweak could kill everything.

My gut: talk it over with the governor. If he doesn’t want to budget, cut some deals on other legislation but get him to agree to sunset the distribution formula at 10 years so it has to be redone. Why? First of all, based on all the studies I have seen, there is no way to know with any real certainty how much new revenue is going to be generated by the expected federal allowing the collection of these Sales Tax revenue. The governor’s number is good faith I presume. But in Indiana for example, their non-partisan experts said the new revenue would be between $33 million and $398 million — I kid you not! There are many reasons for the uncertainty. So a sunset provision is good policy and gives us time to see what is happening. So: DEMS CAN GET A LITTLE SOMETHING HERE.

4) Give localities the legal power to pass, if they want, a local gas tax. We need to keep the user fee concept alive. Localities would still have the right to ask the GA for permission to hold a regional referendum for a sales tax as some are doing right now. But they might find a local gas tax fits individual or regional needs better and like I say, it keeps the user concept going.

5) A few other side understandings on other education bills for instance would seem doable in the negotiation.

SUMMARY: Ideally,there should be a statewide referendum asking the public, as was done years ago, whether they want to make a fundamental change in how we pay for transportation. But if that doesn’t seem possible,the question is thus: Is the Governor’s decision, admittedly poor policy, to substitute a sales tax for a gas tax, in of itself reason to kill his transportation plan?

NO. This is politics, not a graduate seminar on Smart Growth Policy. It has been 27 years since a governor has put something of this magnitude on the table, a Republican at that. If he doesn’t have enough Republican votes to partner up with the Democrats to pass it, then of course push the kill button.

But ASSUMING HE CAME TO PLAY, then Democrats have to make a very tough gut call.

The easy play is for Democrats to say NO, based on good and sufficient policy reasons, the explanation easy to give, and as Henry Kissinger might have said, it has the added advantage of being true. But again; tax policy, more than most if not all other such things, is rooted in the art of the possible and nothing more.

The question is therefore this way: All things considered, would passing something along the lines McD wants help or hurt the state going forward? Or put another way: What are the odds of another Republican governor doing better, or a Democratic governor doing better in the near term Answer: From what we can reasonably foresee right now, very low possibility.

To be sure, there is no way to know whether McD has the votes on his side of the aisle, or whether this is just good optics for him. I have to assume he is a serious player here.

Moreover, if you can get a local option gas tax, this does allow key areas with high out-of-state drivers, to tap into that revenue stream a lot better than the local sales tax. So this might be attractive to some of their leaders.

Bottom line: For a Republican, Governor McDonnell has likely gone as far as he can at this time. My gut is that he will have shave back the sales tax a bit to make it revenue neutral with the disappearing gas tax for the first five years.

So yes, it is more optics than optimal. He is more for political image than ideal policy making. But if it is the best that can be done right now, should Democrats take the risk of being seen as the one’s who killed it?  

It is a difficult call, but sometimes you have to take what you can get and hope to improve upon it later on.  

Monday 1/14: Fate of Thousands of Voters in the Hands of Seven Men

By
frankoanderson
-
4

( – promoted by lowkell)

House of Delegates to Consider Restoration of Rights Bills Monday, Jan. 14 at 8am

As you have probably heard, Gov. McDonnell recently announced his support for an automatic process for restoration of rights for Virginians convicted of nonviolent felonies.  

This session, Delegates Greg Habeeb and Peter Farrell have introduced bills to address this issue, and I urge you to support legislation for the automatic restoration of rights for non-violent felons.

Recently we learned that the above-mentioned bills, as well as similar Democratic bills which have been put forth repeatedly over the years, will be on the docket of the Constitutional Amendments Subcommittee for Monday, January 14th at 8am.

These seven Subcommittee members will be considering the proposed restoration of rights amendments on Monday morning.  If you have a moment, please contact them now:

Jackson Miller, Chair (R-Manassas) Phone (804) 698-1050 Email1 Email2 facebook twitter

Tim Hugo (R-Centreville) Phone (804) 698-1040 Email facebook

Johnny S. Joannou (D-Portsmouth) Phone (804) 698-1079

Algie Howell (D-Norfolk) Phone (804) 698-1090 Email

Israel O’Quinn (R-Bristol) Phone (804) 698-1005 Email facebook twitter

David Ramadan (R-Loudoun) Phone (804) 698-1087 Email facebook twitter

Mark Cole (ex-officio voting member) (R-Fredericksburg) Phone (804) 698-1088 Email

So, my question is this:  will Governor McDonnell put his money where his mouth is?  In other words, will he pressure (or has he pressured) the members of the Constitutional Amendments Subcommittee to support any of these bills on Monday morning?  Or will he allow these bills to die in subcommittee as they have so many times in the past?

Blue Virginia blogger Paul Goldman wrote that this could be Gov. McDonnell’s “Nixon Goes to China” moment.  But without his active support in the legislature, this could be McDonnell’s “Bush Goes to Mars” moment.

Constitutional Amendments Subcommittee Website

Meeting information

Date of Meeting: January 14, 2013

Time and Place: 8:00 a.m./4th Floor West, GAB (General Assembly Building)

201 North 9th Street, Richmond, Virginia 23219

Del. Scott Lingamfelter, GOP Candidate for VA Lt. Gov., on “Agenda 21” & “so-called global warming”

By
glenbesa
-
1

UN Busybodies at Work in Virginia

http://va31st.com/un-busybodie…

January 12, 2013

Dear Friends,

The United Nations idea sounds harmless enough. (They always do.)

But Agenda 21, a program of the UN and its liberal allies in the Obama Administration, is sweeping local and state governments across America, including Virginia. And we’ve got to stop it.

Code-named as Smart Growth, Resilient Cities, and Regional Visioning Projects, Agenda 21’s stated purpose is “to assert the right and opportunity of all people to benefit equally from the resources afforded by society and the environment.”

And how will the UN do that? By taking away individual freedoms from people like you and me.

Playing on American guilt, these UN initiatives urge local policymakers to help fight so-called global warming by promoting smaller, “greener” homes, located near “urban centers” and “public transportation hubs.”

But the only thing Agenda 21 will consolidate is liberal power over the rest of us!

What Agenda 21 really seeks is to push Americans who live in suburbs and rural areas out of our cars, out of single-family homes and back to the cities, where our taxes can subsidize failing urban schools, neighborhoods and governments.

Not in Virginia, the cradle of freedom. And not on my watch!

I served 28 years in the Army, including combat duty in Operation Desert Storm.

I’ve served 12 years in the Virginia House of Delegates.

And I will not stand by while the UN-an organization with no legal authority over you and me-and its sympathizers tear down private property ownership, single-family homes, and other basic tenets of American life.

Will you?

To protect the American way of life and the Virginia way of less government, lower taxes and more freedom-I’ve announced a House Joint Resolution, HJ654, in the House of Delegates, calling on our state to lead the resistance to Agenda 21.

And to protect our liberty, our prosperity, and our way of life in Virginia, I am seeking my party’s nomination for Lieutenant Governor.

Please stand with me.

To read this important legislation and receive email updates on the progress of HJ654 in the General Assembly, please click here.

Because no idea from the UN can ever be considered harmless.

Sincerely,

Scott Lingamfelter

Member, Virginia House of Delegates

R-31 (Prince William and Fauquier)

P.S. These “green” initiatives are simply props in a UN plan to demonize and destroy the American way of life. They want to make us just like the rest of the world, heaven help us. Please stand with me against this travesty of American rights and freedom.

Virginia News Headlines: Sunday Morning

By
lowkell
-
2

Here are a few Virginia (and national) news headlines, political and otherwise, for Sunday, January 13.

*Online activist Aaron Swartz dies at 26 (“Prodigy who helped create RSS was set to go on trial over accusations he took millions of articles from archive.”)

*A sweltering planet’s agenda (“Implementing a national carbon tax would be only one step toward addressing climate change, a problem that must ultimately be dealt with globally. But it would be a big one.”)

*This Isn’t the Petition Response You’re Looking For (“OFFICIAL WHITE HOUSE RESPONSE TO Secure resources and funding, and begin construction of a Death Star by 2016.”)

*Treasury: We won’t mint a platinum coin to sidestep the debt ceiling

*Is the WH being realistic this time, or does it still rely on the sanity of crazies? (Agreed, I’m very worried the White House keeps repeating the same mistake, assuming that House Republicans are reasonable human beings. They clearly are not.)

*Schapiro: McDonnell paves roads with gimmicks – again (“Like McDonnell’s previous initiatives, the latest includes features that may have emerged from campaign focus groups rather than the governor’s Cabinet. The doozy this time: the proposed elimination of the 17.5-cents-per-gallon tax on gasoline.”)

*Bob McDonnell’s Virginia road tax evasions (“Unfortunately, in cobbling together a package that he can defend as something other than what it is, the governor has produced an unwieldy mix of undesirable and misleading proposals.”)

*Editorial: We need a full tank (“McDonnell’s plan to fund transportation won’t get us very far down the road”)

*Finding money for Virginia’s roads (“it makes no sense to abandon the principle of making drivers pay for the roads they use…it makes no sense to argue, as the governor does, that the gas tax is a dying revenue source when lawmakers could easily revive it with an inflation index.”)

*Dance applauds McDonnell on restoring felons’ rights

*A Transportation Plan That’s Bold But Risky

*Virginia lawmakers consider more money for officers in schools

*Making voting easier in Virginia

*Editorial: This education brought to you by… (“Keep advertising off public school buses and buildings.”)

*Tysons gets some new sets of wheels

*Jones pledges more progress during second term

*Capitals release 2013 schedule (“The Capitals will open the shortened season on the road next Saturday in Tampa.”)

Bolling vs Cuccinelli: When Consultants Get MAD!

By
Goldmanusa
-
6

( – promoted by lowkell)

by Paul Goldman

Remember the Cold War philosophy of Mutually Assured Destruction, aka “MAD?” After talking in Fairfax with AG candidate Justin Fairfax (he hasn’t even been elected and yet the they already have named the state’s biggest county for him and not Mark Warner. Don’t think the state’s senior senator hasn’t noticed.) about the history of Democratic nomination contests in the modern era, I drove back to Richmond late last night going over the 2013 political dynamics. The canceled primary between LG Bill Bolling and AG Ken Cuccinelli captured most of my thinking on the drive down I-95 after rolling through some fog on Highway 123.

According to LG Bolling, the K-man has never reached out to the Bolling camp since the VA GOP made the unprecedented decision to switch back to a convention process, after having voted for a 2013 GOP gubernatorial primary. This AC/DC move happened several months ago. Thus the failure of Cuccinelli’s camp to reach out to the Bolling camp is intentional,  a “your momma” move.

But this MAD situation is far more mutual than Bolling lets on. This is as much a battle of consultants as it is a battle between Bolling and Cuccinelli. The LG’s main honcho is his long-time advisor, Boyd Marcus. The AG’s lead guru is Chris LaCivita, a new generation political guy on the GOP side of things. Two very skillful players, and mostly “take no prisoner” kinds of guys.

Bolling has been a loyal GOP henchman, what they use to call an apparatchik in the days of the old Soviet Communist party. He is anything but the anti-establishment guy who supposedly can’t back the GOP candidate this time due to matters of high principle.

Bolling as Mr. Principled Independent? Puhleeeeeeze, gag me with a spoon as the Valley Girl in Frank Zappa’s day said. Boyd surely has to laugh whenever the media plays the “principled independent” line. But it is good for Bolling right now, and Boyd knows that.  

 

Thus, the “Bolling goes three-way” play started out as a way for Boyd to put a gun to Cuccinelli’s head. As the Fram oil filter ad proclaimed, you can either pay us now or pay us later. Boyd tried the same thing in 1996 with John Warner, running Jim Miller against him in the GOP Senate primary. It didn’t work. But this type of hard ball has been going on since the days of Hamilton and Burr.  

Cuccinelli and Chris know Bolling is no principled independent called by the political gods to offer a third choice in the governor’s race because he doesn’t think the other two contenders are up for the job. They surely get really mad whenever the press uses it as a way to push Cuccinelli to the right, although to be honest, he really doesn’t need much help on that front.

But that’s not really the point, is it? Cuccinelli wants to get elected, and Chris wants to win. Bolling doesn’t want to spend his days a persona non grata in his own party, the same for Boyd. They have said as much publicly.

Thus for Cuccinelli’s side not to reach out to Bolling – to use the Governor as a bridge if need be – can only mean: Chris either can’t control his candidate (really bad), or he agrees with his candidate’s refusal to reach out to Bolling (even worse), or they think a non-endorsement from Bolling is no big deal (this is probably true but it will hurt on the margins for sure), or they believe an independent Bolling candidacy will not hurt them in the final analysis so let the LG run (this defies all logical deduction).  

MY GUT: This MAD scenario stems from 2009. If you remember, there was a lot of McDonnell-Bolling joint stuff in 2009, without a lot of Cuccinelli. This didn’t go unnoticed on the Cuccinelli side.

In my view, Cuccinelli believes – with justification – that Bolling would have preferred Cuccinelli to lose the nomination (did Boyd Marcus work against him?), or lose the general election in 2009. Why? The LG suspected Cuccinelli would not “wait his turn” in 2013.

So when it comes to putting the words Cuccinelli and Governor in the same sentence, it is clear Bolling becomes irrational, through his own delusions of grandeur, or feelings of revenge. Boyd Marcus can’t reason with his client on this subject. So instead of talking him off the ledge, Boyd decided this way: let me use the leverage of a threatened three-way race to get a good quid pro quo from Chris and the Cuccinelli side.

But given the emotions and the players, the toxic political brew has gotten worse, not better. Bolling is now like Buzz in the famed drag scene with James Dean in “Rebel Without A Cause.” They were racing toward a cliff overlooking the Pacific Ocean, the one to to jump out of the car first the “chicken.” Buzz went over the cliff to prove he wasn’t a chicken.

I believe Boyd has miscalculated here: he thought for sure Chris would make them the Godfather offer by now, one they couldn’t refuse. This made practical sense. A marriage of convenience true. And Bolling and Boyd would want their quid up front: they would not want to be holding any IOU’s hoping to collect after Cuccinelli won.

But Chris figured that in the end, Boyd would talk Bolling off the ledge. Chris had to figure he could call the B-boys bluff and arrive at some mutually beneficial agreement. He had to figure the three-way talk was a bluff.

Unfortunately, both consultants have misread either what the other wants to do, or can do. This is the reason the MAD philosophy had Eisenhower so concerned; even Reagan wanted to pull back in Iceland at his Summit with Gorbachev.  

Bolling is getting fairly close to the “Fail Safe” point in the famed novel, that point where the US Air Force Bombers headed for Moscow in response to an apparent Soviet First Strike can’t be called back. The Mission is HOT and all hell breaks loose. Right now, they are at DEFCON 4 in the Virginia GOP. DEFCON 5 is War.

Would Boyd break with the GOP, with his partner Ray Allen and with Eric Cantor, to help Bolling run for governor as an independent? It is looking more and more like a YES. This is quite a development for those who have followed Virginia politics over the years. It is Hamilton and Burr all over again.

If this happens, then the move to a convention – despite Cuccinelli having a huge lead in the primary polls – might turn out to be one of the dumbest political decisions in state history. Under Virginia law, if Bolling ran in a primary and lost, he is banned from appearing as an independent on the general election ballot.

Pay me now, or pay me later: Boyd and Bolling wanted their chance at the voters, and it seems they are determined to get it one way or another.

1...2,4582,4592,460...3,277Page 2,459 of 3,277












EVEN MORE NEWS

POPULAR CATEGORY

©