Here are a few Virginia (and national) news headlines, political and otherwise, for Friday, January 11.

*Hot enough for you? (“All right, now can we talk about climate change? After a year when the lower 48 states suffered the warmest temperatures, and the second-craziest weather, since record-keeping began?”)

*Thinking About the Brink (Platinum coin anyone? According to Paul Krugman, “we need a strategy to deal with the crazies if they really do prove irredeemably crazy, which seems all too possible.”)

*The Mostly Solved Deficit Problem (“So you heard it here first: while you weren’t looking, and the deficit scolds were doing their scolding, the deficit problem (such as it was) was being mostly solved. Can we now start talking about unemployment?”)

*Anti-Gay Pastor Withdraws From Inaugural Program (Bottom line: there should be no room for bigots in our national life.)

*Poll: Warner holds early re-election lead

*Poll: Clinton tops 2016 Democrat field (“U.S. Sen. Mark Virginia of Virginia is not among the top Democratic contenders to be the next president, according to a poll released today.”)

*Virginia Makes Its Case To House New FBI Headquarters

*Governor’s bills on roads, voting rights face obstacles (“…it was apparent within hours of McDonnell’s speech that both face widespread skepticism from lawmakers – including many in the Republican chief executive’s own party.”)

*Virginia Democrats push to loosen voting rules (“Filler-Corn proposed keeping polling places open longer — until 8 p.m. instead of 7 p.m. — matching the closing times in D.C. and Maryland. Another Democratic bill would allow Virginians to cast their ballots before Election Day.”)

*Sen. Tim Kaine state on gun control reform (I have no idea what that headline means, but Kaine says, “As a gun owner who worked with others to constitutionally guarantee Virginians the right to hunt, I know that you can be a strong supporter of the Second Amendment without tolerating the gun tragedies that are too often a part of our daily lives.”)

*Gas-tax plan draws reaction from transportation world (“Critics ranging from conservatives to smart-growth advocates to environmentalists said eliminating the gas tax would do the opposite…”)

*Poll: Virginians favor stricter gun control

*Va. senator wants voter bill named for late Norfolk lawmaker (“A ranking African American state legislator Thursday said proposals to automatically restore civil rights to non-violent offenders should carry the name of deceased Sen. Yvonne Miller, a Norfolk Democrat who long championed that issue.”)

*Bolling and McAuliffe meet in Richmond (Intriguing…)

*Proposed Transportation Fee Targets Eco-Friendly Drivers

*McDonnell ‘Excited’ About 12 Oscar Nominations for ‘Lincoln’ (Ahhhh…corporate welfare Republicans, aren’t they grand?)

*Editorial: Upon paying one’s debt (“Are we, as the governor says, a people who believe in second chances? Here’s lawmakers’ chance at redemption.”)

*Mr. McDonnell moves to restore voting rights (I still can’t understand why this wasn’t done under the previous two administrations, but better late than never I guess…)

*Fairfax schools announces $2.5 billion spending plan that includes teacher raises

( – promoted by lowkell)

One hears it all the time: many Republican lawmakers, in their gerrymandered districts, do not have to fear losing in a general election, but do have to worry that they’ll get primaried from the right if they don’t go along with the crazy and destructive ways of the present-day Republican Party.

OK. And where does that get them? Maybe they keep their deck chairs and maybe the Republican Party is becoming the Titanic. More important, where does that get the country — with one of its two major parties a virtual wrecking ball on every part of our political/economic/social/cultural structure it can reach?

People are saying nowadays that there’s a battle ongoing for the soul of the Republican Party. Here’s where that battle should be fought: the sane Republicans should say to the threat of a primary, “Bring it on.” And then they should go into battle for the hearts and minds of Republican primary voters.

OK. Maybe the craziness and deludedness — that the force that’s taken over the right has worked to effectively to create in the Republican base over the past 20 years – cannot be turned around overnight. But the defeat and disarray the party has suffered from is opening up an opportunity to turn that destructive force back.

The battle should be joined by all those Republican politicians whose political circumstances give them a very good chance of succeeding now (like New Jersey governor, Chris Christie) and also by all those who have the moral courage to fight the fight their country needs for them to fight.

The Republican base has been living in an alternate, phony reality sold to them by the likes of Rush Limbaugh and Fox and Republican politicians. But there is no necessary reason why the Republican voters need to stay in their present, deranged state. They are not, most of them, deranged people.

So there’s no necessary reason why the threat to reasonable and moderate Republicans to be destroyed by wacko primary opponents (as has been happening to people like Mike Castle of Delaware in 2010 and Richard Lugar in 2012) will continue indefinitely into the future.

The election of 2012 has put new forces into motion. It is important that the momentum of these forces be seized — by President Obama and the Democrats AND by those sane Republican office-holders who, until now, have allowed themselves to be intimidated by the sick and broken spirit that’s seized hold of their Party over the past generation.

It has long been time for good people to stand and fight. That now includes those Republicans whose preferred way of doing politics is to be sane and reasonable and constructive.

Andy Schmookler, an award-winning author, political commentator, radio talk-show host, and teacher, was the Democratic nominee for Congress from Virginia’s 6th District.  Among his books is The Parable of the Tribes:  The Problem of Power in Social Evolution.

Ken Kookinelli is busy pandering to the far right wing, of which he is a member of course. The latest example is his appearance on an Iowa-based radio show last night. The audio is here (starting at around 12:45), and it’s as crazy as always. A few highlights.

1. On gun control, Cuckoo has an unintentionally hilarious line, claiming “I don’t want to inflame things by coming up with crazy hypotheticals.” In this case, he’s talking about the potential for the Evil Gubmint to come and TAKE ALL OUR GUNS AWAY FROM US or some other “outrageous” action against liberty, freedom, motherhood, apple pie, etc. Of course, Kookinelli then proceeds to crazy slippery slope talk, about how if we had a few commonsense, reasonable measures on guns, such as restrictions on assault weapons or closing the gun show loophole, who knows what the Evil Gubmint could go after next – the First Amendment, the Fourth Amendment? I mean, there goes the whole Bill of Rights if we ban cop-killer bullets or whatever. Or, Cuckoo muses, “could we be ‘safer’ from crime if the president just decided things weren’t safe enough so he was going to start putting dents in the 4th Amendment?” Ee gads, the guy’s certifiable.

As if all that’s not amusing enough, in a dark sort of way, Cuckoo muses that there’s some sort of “PR plan” to make the raving/frothing pro-gun fanatics like this guy or this guy or this guy the public face of the any-gun/anywhere/any-time crowd. Uh Ken, something tells me it doesn’t take any “PR plan” to make raving lunatics look like raving lunatics. Just let them talk, and everyone can see what they are. But sure, if you want to believe in your wacky conspiracy theories, if those help you make sense of your world and feel better about yourself and your own warped belief system, I guess go for it.

2. They then talk about Cuckoo’s supposed “big victory” over the EPA, which they of course completely mischaracterize as somehow the EPA believing “water was bad.” Our own kindler utterly demolished that idiocy the other day, but shockingly, these folks don’t appear to read Blue Virginia. Heh. Seriously, though, the guy who actually thinks he should be the next governor of Virginia then proceeds to pander to these right-wing talk show idiots, making a big joke about how the EPA really wanted to regulate water “that falls from the sky when it rains,” how the EPA failed to sue the appropriate party (Cuckoo says that would be “God”) on this issue, and generally what imbeciles those eggheads at the EPA are. Of course, Cuckoo doesn’t mention that this “great win for Virginia” was delivered by a George W. Bush appointee (’nuff said?), and that it will simply mean that a creek in Fairfax County won’t get cleaned up for many more years to come, if ever. Congratulations, my hero! (snark)

3. Finally, on the “Hobby Lobby religious conscience case” regarding (legal) contraception, Cuckoo REALLY goes off the deep end, claiming that “here we’re going to have an example of what tyranny means when it’s played to its logical conclusion, because forcing business owners and businesses to do this is not consistent with our history of preserving religious liberty, one of the most important protections we have in this country.” Uh huh.

But wait, it gets worse: Cuckoo relates that he spoke to his “local bishop” about this, recounting that the bishop said, “Well, you know I told a group I’m ready to go to jail,” and that he (Cuckoo) responded, “Bishop, don’t take this personally: You need to go to jail.” That’s right, Ken Cuccinelli is arguing that people need to go to jail to prevent women from having access to a legal (not to mention absolutely necessary) product, contraception, in 2013 America. Basically, this is Ken Cuccinelli as fanatic, theocrat, American Taliban, whatever you want to say. Amazing.

P.S. DPVA Chair Charniele Herring responds to the lunacy of Cuckoo’s point #3, saying: “Virginia women deserve better than an Attorney General who wants employers in this Commonwealth to ‘go to jail’ rather than comply with the law of the land and offer insurance coverage for contraceptives that experts say are essential to keeping women healthy. Ken Cuccinelli’s outside-the-mainstream attacks on FDA-approved birth control should have no place in the office of Virginia’s top lawyer and certainly not in the Governor’s mansion.” You can say that again!

From Sen. Ralph Northam’s office:

Senator Northam Sponsors Legislation to Protect the Reproductive Rights of Women

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

January 10, 2013  

Richmond-Surrounded by fellow Democratic General Assembly members yesterday, Senator Ralph Northam (D-6th District) announced that he is carrying legislation to repeal a mandate requiring women to have an ultrasound before an abortion.  The legislation is in response to a bill that was passed by Republicans last year and heavily touted by Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli.  

“Last year, a group of legislators, most of whom were men, passed legislation requiring women to have this unnecessary and expensive ultrasound prior to an elective procedure.  This must take place even against the woman’s will and against the better judgement of her physician,” stated Senator Northam, who is a pediatric neurologist at the Children’s Hospital of the King’s Daughters in Norfolk.  

Senator Northam is also carrying a bill that will ensure that future legislation cannot be passed to require a woman to receive an ultrasound for non-medical reasons.  

“As a physician, I am guided by the hippocratic oath and understand that that relationship between a doctor and a patient is sacred and essential to high-quality healthcare.  The last thing we need in Richmond is legislators interfering with this relationship and undermining women by eliminating their right to make their own decisions.”  

The second measure will also ensure that a woman cannot be required to receive an ultrasound as a condition of receiving another medical procedure.  If passed, it will be the first in the nation of its kind to protect the relationship between a woman and a doctor in the healthcare decision-making process.

“If you don’t know where you are going, any road will get you there.”

The above quote is usually attributed to Lewis Carroll, although the actual lines in Alice in Wonderland may be even more relevant to the current transportation debate in Virginia.

“Would you tell me, please, which way I ought to go from here?”

“That depends a good deal on where you want to get to,” said the Cat.

“I don’t much care where–” said Alice.

“Then it doesn’t matter which way you go,” said the Cat.

“–so long as I get SOMEWHERE,” Alice added as an explanation.

“Oh, you’re sure to do that,” said the Cat, “if you only walk long enough.”

That, in a nutshell, is how I’m feeling about the current debate over Gov. McDonnell’s recently-unveiled transportation proposal, including elimination of the gas tax, an increase in the sales tax, increase, a $15 increase in vehicle registration fees, a $100 alternative fuel vehicle fee, and moneys from supposedly forthcoming federal legislation on marketplace equity.

Why do I feel this way? Very simple: Because in all this debate to and fro, I defy anyone to identify an actual concept, clue, foggy notion, vague idea, let alone a serious VISION of where we want Virginia to be with regards to transportation and land use in 10, 20, 30, 50 years. For instance, do we want to raise money for transportation in order to: a) continue the same pattern of cheap-fossil-fuel-dependent, sprawl development we’ve been doing for decades now (the Sprawl Forever! approach); b) in order to accomplish “a,” spend most of any new transportation revenues on new and existing road infrastructure for moving motor vehicles; c) completely change direction to a “smart growth,” “high-density development” approach (see the Coalition for Smarter Growth), wherein transportation moneys are allocated overwhelmingly towards things like bicycle and pedestrian upgrades, Metro (bus and rail), other light rail systems (e.g, streetcars), high-speed rail, and other urban/inner-suburban-friendly modes; d) go in some sort of hybrid direction of all this; e) other? Right now, can anyone tell me which direction Bob McDonnell wants to go? How about any other top Virginia politician? In 2005, when Tim Kaine was running for governor, he talked about more closely linking  land use and transportation planning, and that was good as far as it went, but how much of it has been incorporated into Virginia’s long-term transportation funding and overall thinking? I’m not seeing it, are you?

The problem: In lieu of having any clue where we’re going, the tendency will be towards inertia, as the laws of physics (and humanity, for that matter) tell us. In the Virginia transportation context, I suppose if you’re thrilled where we find ourselves now (crumbling roads and bridges, sprawling development patterns, wildly inefficient  – and environmentally damaging – use of energy resources and land, etc.) then you should be thrilled with inertia. If, on the other hand, you are NOT happy with where we’re at right now, then presumably you should want a significant change in direction.  

No matter what, you’d think that we should be having the debate over where we want to go first, BEFORE we start arguing over how much money we need to raise and how to do so. Again, to paraphrase Lewis Carroll, if we don’t know where the heck we’re going, then any road (or streetcar, bike trail, Metro line, etc.) will get us there. But why would anyone in their right mind want to make policy this totally bass-ackwards way (come up with some money, then figure out what the heck we want to do with it, but NEVER really decide what our long-term transportation vision is). It almost makes me feel like Alice in Wonderland myself, in the sense of the following classic lines of dialogue. Enjoy. 🙂

“But I don’t want to go among mad people,” Alice remarked.

“Oh, you can’t help that,” said the Cat: “we’re all mad here. I’m mad. You’re mad.”

“How do you know I’m mad?” said Alice.

“You must be,” said the Cat, or you wouldn’t have come here.”

(Also see Sen. Chap Petersen on this topic at his blog, OxRoadSouth. – promoted by lowkell)

by Paul Goldman

Since Governor McDonnell and Attorney General Cuccinelli are strict constructionists when it comes to constitutional law, they should agree with me: There is no current VA Constitutional bar to implementing the automatic rights restoration process Mr. McDonnell discussed last night. True, the discussion on this issue has always assumed a new Constitutional provision would be required.

But an analysis of the relevant Clemency Power section suggests otherwise.

Last night, the Governor said “it’s time for Virginia to join most of the other states in the country and make the restoration of civil rights an automatic process for nonviolent offenders in our state.” The issue of automatic restoration of such rights – a second chance as it were – for those having, as the saying goes, having”paid their debt” to society has long been a controversial issue in Virginia. Perhaps the “Nixon Goes To China Rule” explains why Republican McDonnell is the first Governor to truly put the full prestige of the office into the fray for what has basically been a major issue for a key caucus of top Democratic leaders in the General Assembly. McDonnell has made concerted effort to approve more restoration of rights petitions than roughly all the other chief executives in the modern history of the commonwealth COMBINED.

So it is not my intention in any way to suggest the Governor has been anything less than sincere in his commitment here, rooted to some considerable measure in his strong religious beliefs. Such conviction is to be admired.

But a good commentator likewise has to be true to his beliefs: and in that regard, you call it like you see it based on the key metric, in this case legal, of the matter at hand.

That being the case, the situation is thus: There is nothing in the Constitution of Virginia which prevents Governor McDonnell from de facto creating the very automatic process he and others – such as Richmond area Delegates Peter Farrell and Jen McClellan along with my Senator Don McEachin – want to make de jure part of the Virginia Constitution.

 

While the distinction between de facto and de jure is fundamental as a legal matter in this area, that is for another discussion.

But since there is little reason right now to expect such a Constitutional Amendment to pass anytime soon  – in theory, it could become law as of January 1, 2015 if the General Assembly acted with all haste and the voters gave it their approval in a referendum – the question of whether Governor McDonnell, or the next Governor could institute the process by executive action is ripe for analysis today.

The power of the Governor to restore civil rights – the right to vote for example – derives from the state Constitution, specifically Article V, Section 12 entitled Executive clemency:

“The Governor shall have power to remit fines and penalties under such rules and regulations as may be prescribed by law; to grant reprieves and pardons after conviction except when the prosecution has been carried on by the House of Delegates; to remove political disabilities consequent upon conviction for offenses committed prior or subsequent to the adoption of this Constitution; and to commute capital punishment. He shall communicate to the General Assembly, at each regular session, particulars of every case of fine or penalty remitted, of reprieve or pardon granted, and of punishment commuted, with his reasons for remitting, granting, or commuting the same.”

As a general matter, the clemency power is beyond the authority of the legislative branch to restrict and the judicial  branch to review.  There are limited exceptions. But to the best of my knowledge, there is no court case, state or federal, which definitely would deny the Governor of Virginia the power to create a de facto automatic process for the restoration of the civil rights – or say only the right to vote if he or she wanted – of someone who met the nonviolent example contemplated by McDonnell in his speech last night.

Here’s why.  As we can see from the Constitutional provision above, the Section 12 power is given without any reference whatsoever to the General Assembly. This was purposeful as the courts have discussed.

In the constitutional language, the operative part as to voting rights for example would be the language says the Governor could “remove political disabilities consequent upon conviction for offenses.”  This is not in dispute. But what is interesting, as a matter of strict constitutional construction favored by McDonnell, Attorney General Cuccinelli and conservatives generally is how the second paragraph of Section 12 when compared to the first paragraph. The first paragraph has four categories: (1) fines and penalties, (2) reprieves and pardons, (3) political disabilities, and (4) capital punishment.

However, then look at the second paragraph. It addresses what the Governor “shall communicate” to the General Assembly has regards his actions on the 4 categories above. This part of Section 12 says he must tell report to the General Assembly the “particulars of every case of” of (1) fine or penalty remitted, (2) reprieve or pardon granted, and (4) “punishment commuted”, providing the Governor’s “reasons for remitting, granting, or commuting the same.”

As a matter of statutory construction therefore, Section 12, approved by the people, clearly leaves (3) out of the equation in the second paragraph. Restoring someone’s civil rights does not amount to a fine or penalty remitted, it is not a reprieve or a pardon, and would not be a “punishment commuted” since this part of the Constitution addressed a clemency decision to “commute” a sentence of capital punishment. As a matter of strict Constitutional construction, there is no command in Section 12 requiring the Governor to report to the GA every case of his restoring a “political disability” and proving the reasons for such executive action.

So as a matter of constitutional law, Section 12 seemingly leaves open to the Governor the right to set up an automatic process, based on his or her standards, to restore say the right to vote or other civil rights without the current exhaustive, case by case analysis, substituting instead the kind of formulation Mr. McDonnell had in mind in his speech last night.

Thus, for example, there is bright line constitutional bar from Governor McDonnell to make the appropriate state or local authority automatically provide forms to be signed by any nonviolent offender upon that individual meeting the pre-set standards for petitioning the Governor to have his or her rights restored, or in fact, having said paperwork submitted to the Governor without the offender’s knowledge by the appropriate state or local official.

BOTTOM LINE: The four corners of Section 12, as written, and interpreted according to general principles of construction, would stand for the proposition that without a specific restriction, the clemency powers of the executive are to be defined conservatively, that is to say strictly against any reduction not plainly in the Constitution. The history of such powers, dating back to the King of England, has been to view said authority as an act of charity by the state, left to the conscience of the leader. There may be customs, and the like associated with exercising the power. But they are only as relevant as the current Governor believes them to be as a matter of personal decision.

The Virginia Supreme Court might ultimate find my reasoning less than persuasive if so claimed by a Governor. But as a bottom line matter of law, the plain reading of Section 12 indicates that Governor’s were to be given more leeway, in terms of the decision-making, when it came to restoring a political right than in terms of matters of financial restitution, the general matter of the particular criminal record, and the issue of commuting a death sentence demanded by a judge or jury. This dichotomy seems very reasonable given the nature of the four categories at issue.  

Here are a few Virginia (and national) news headlines, political and otherwise, for Thursday, January 10.

*Business leaders: Failure to raise debt ceiling will drive markets “haywire” (“If Republicans continue with their debt ceiling brinksmanship, you’re likely to hear powerful GOP-aligned voices from the business community calling for Congress to cut the nonsense and raise the debt ceiling without delay. Even some Republicans and conservatives, such as Newt Gingrich and the Wall Street Journal editorial board, have warned this will compound the GOP’s political problem.”)

*An opening bid on taxes that is good politics but bad policy

*It’s early, but race for Va. governor is tight, poll finds (Interesting, a significantly different finding than PPP, which has Terry McAuliffe ahead of Ken Kookinelli 46%-41%)

*Va. poll finds support for armed school officers, gun show background checks

*Voting rights, schools top McDonnell’s annual address

*Virginia Dems pledge to undo GOP abortion restrictions as General Assembly opens

*Delegate Toscano’s Response to the Governor’s State of the Commonwealth Address

*McDonnell pushes for lasting legacy

*Saslaw hammers McDonnell transportation proposal (“I have seen some screwed up bills in my life this takes the cake.”)

*Gov. McDonnell pitches transportation plan in State of the Commonwealth address

*Va. Black Caucus lays out 2013 policy agenda

*Editorial: McDonnell’s last ditch plan for highways (“Some of the governor’s transportation ideas merit debate, but his plan to take money from other core services is a nonstarter.”)

*An “F’ in Econ for Governor Bob (“The transportation problem is congestion: too many cars on the road. Are we supposed to believe that by reducing the cost of driving, fewer people will drive?”)

*Bolling buoyed by polls as he mulls independent run (“I’m confident I could get 20-25 percent of the vote. But you’ve got to have 35 percent to win” a three-way race…The difference between 25 percent and 35 percent is your ability to raise $10 or $15 million.”)

*Sen. Tim Kaine meets Afghan President Karzai

*Gov. McDonnell names school safety task force (Ken Kookinelli’s on this thing; that doesn’t bode well to put it mildly.)

*Activists set stage for new battles over abortion laws

*Plane with anti-Dragas banner flies over state Capitol

*Legislators knock, but governor’s not home

*Bill to amend Virginia’s reckless driving law shot down

*Lessons to learn from arena debate

*Robert Griffin III-Stephen Strasburg: Two stars, two teams, opposite philosophies (Thomas Boswell nails it on Stephen Strasbourg and RGIII: “No one knows the sum of either star’s career. The odds still favor them both. But one answer is in: We know which young man was treated as we would wish for a family member and which was exploited to the point of abuse.”)

*Redskins name change should be discussed, Vincent Gray says