Home Blog Page 2525

Virginia News Headlines: Sunday Morning

6

Here are a few Virginia (and national) news headlines, political and otherwise, for Sunday, April 7. Also check out the video of Cory Booker speaking at last night’s sold-out Equality Virginia dinner in Richmond (video courtesy of the apparently omnipresent Catherine S. Read).

*Democrats seek an infusion of fresh faces in the House (“The best way to retake the House next year may be to field non-ideological candidates who are less focused on divisive issues, Democrats say.”)

*Star Scientific had to return Va. money from economic development project (“Star Scientific, whose chief executive paid for the food at the wedding of Gov. Robert F. McDonnell’s daughter, failed to create enough jobs to meet its part of an economic development deal with Virginia and was forced to repay hundreds of thousands of dollars.”)

*Schapiro: Virginia’s election is Louisiana’s all over again

*Building campaigns, McAuliffe cleans house while Cuccinelli keeps old hands

*Will the second time be the charm for Terry McAuliffe?

*Cuccinelli should step down as AG

*Virginia, Maryland take very different paths on gun control (Maryland nails it, Virginia #FAILS it.)

*McAuliffe, Warner underscore support for gay marriage (“McAuliffe, Warner underscore support for gay marriage”)

*Mark Herring Releases ”Equality Agenda” for Virginia (“State senator running for attorney general issues LGBT policy positions, knocks outgoing AG Cuccinelli”)

*Virginia Attorney General Candidate Mark Herring Supports Marriage Equality and LGBT Rights

*Herring Wins Hunter Mill Dems Straw Poll As Momentum Continues to Build (“Herring was honored to win his third consecutive straw poll.”)

*Editorial: Compromise has its costs (“Virginia finally has a transportation bill, but there were sacrifices”)

*Today’s Top Opinion: Veto Session – Consequential (The RTD actually spelled it “Sessioni.” Italian, a lack of copy editors, or sloppiness?)

*McDonnell to attend trade forum in China

*Longtime Virginia GOP Delegate Harry Purkey won’t seek re-election in November (That’s a solid red district, unfortunately…)

*How will Silver Line shake up Northern Virginia’s commute?

*USS Arlington Commissioned in Front of Thousands (“Ship honors 9/11 victims and first responders.”)

*Metrorail turned Arlington around. Streetcars will keep it moving forward.

*WUSA apologizes after leaving Washington Nationals viewers in the lurch (I was watching that game on WUSA, though that was TOTALLY lame, especially since it was a tense, close, nail biter of a game – one the Nationals ended up winning in extra inning.)

Video: Del. Bob Marshall Rips Fellow VA Republicans for Being More “Avaricious” than Obama

0



Del. “Sideshow Bob” Marshall (R-Manassas) rips his fellow Virginia House of Delegates Republicans for, among other things: “setting up future tax increases for which nobody has to go on record;” for being more “avaricious and grasping of the taxpayers’ money” than President Obama (gotta love that one, given that Obama’s CUT taxes repeatedly, also has CUT spending repeatedly); for delegating authority over the public purse to “authorities which are virtually invisible to the public at large”; and for “increasing unaccountable government;” for putting an “unfair burden on Northern Virginia taxpayers.” And the reaction from Marshall’s fellow Republicans is? Mostly silence, as far as I can tell, as they betray their anti-government principles, as mindless and destructive as those principles might be.

Mark Herring May Have Redefined the Governor’s Race

6

by Paul Goldman

Yesterday, one of the candidates for the Democratic nomination for Attorney General – Senator Mark Herring – made the most important political strategy decision of the 2013 to date. It not only fundamentally altered the 2013 race for the state’s top legal job, but possibly the race for governor, the state’s top political position.

But the story isn’t even an afterthought, apparently, to this generation of political journalists. It didn’t get any major coverage, even minor for that matter. So let’s clue some folks in, assuming they are covering politics due to an interest in the subject as opposed to just having a job – any job: Herring’s announcement is big political news.

AS IN REALLY BIG.

We do 200-proof strategy here. So let’s define what Herring has done in the language of political strategy. He has pledged to put the full power of the Office of Attorney General behind what those opposed to his views will call the “full lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender agenda.”

Remember: In this game, you get to hit the ball over the net where you want, the other side gets to hit it back where they want. Then you fight over whose shot was in or out of bounds. 200-proof doesn’t comment on the merits of stuff here, we don’t play line judge or man the replay booth. We do strategy without passion or prejudice. We call it like it is: And Mark Herring has just made the most important 200-proof strategy play of any candidate so far this year.  

Terry went bold on taxes to be sure: And Cuccinelli went bold in opposing his own governor on transportation. But these were not surprising moves, nor definitive ones for 2013, standing alone. Taxes and transportation are staple guv race issues, and in the end, I don’t think either guy’s position is going to be unexpected to most swing voters given how they seem inclined to explain themselves.

BUT THIS IS NOT THE CASE WITH THE HERRING BOMBSHELL. His “Equality Agenda” is a clean break with the 200-proof strategy historically accepted as necessary to win the job as the state’s top legal eagle. The Office of Attorney General has never been seen as an advocacy position in the arena of individual rights even when held by Democrats. While AG candidate Ken Cuccinelli hinted at being a far more activist AG in many areas, it was not a big part of his campaign image. 2009 set in early as a GOP sweep, and the story line never changed much in that regard.

As Attorney General, it is clear Cuccinelli has been the most activist AG in the state’s history. But while Democrats like Herring condemn Cuccinelli for being activist for the wrong things, the polls show the public has a positive view of the AG’s job performance. This may change with time: or it may not, there is no way to know. But the 200-proof strategy does know the following: Senator Herring’s “Equality Agenda” is the boldest activist statement of any Democratic who has ever run for the party’s nomination, in the very area the party believes Mr. Cuccinelli has operated the office from the standpoint of legal bigotry.

Herring is thus not making a mere policy statement about his own views. He has simultaneously laid down an historic marker as to what he believes the AG’s office is morally required to do, not only in terms of legal activism, but to undo the damage to the office done by Cuccinelli. This is as a 200-proof strategy move unlike any other so far this year, indeed unlike any other that has been played ever in the history of AG contests.

Democratic Attorneys General Andrew Miller, Gerry Baliles and Mary Sue Terry were not lead dogs in the fight for equal rights in Virginia. Nor did they run for the reason of undoing damage to the office by previous AGs, championing anti-black, or anti-women positions. It was not a crusade of any sorts.

Miller, for example, fought against the Voting Rights Act. Mr. Baliles ran as the union-busting candidate for the Dem nomination, accusing his opponent of being in the pocket of Big Labor. As for Ms. Terry, she became the candidate of the party’s conservative wing by opposing the Equal Rights Amendment. At the time, even Virgil Goode supported it, both from the same area of rural Virginia!

These were political moves for sure. All three of them were making their 200-proof calculations on how to get to be Virginia’s governor in the future, the AG’s office a stepping stone. Left to their own beliefs, none of them would have taken these positions as a matter of substance. But 200-proof strategy prevailed. This is not a shocker here.

Bad luck and timing stopped Miller and Terry, good luck saved Baliles, in their runs for governor. The point being: There has never been a Democratic Attorney General candidate who has ever, or would have ever, positioned him or herself as Mr. Herring has so positioned himself in the race for the state’s top legal post. There has never been a Dem AG who ran his or her office that way. NEVER.

Herring is breaking new ground here. Even if his opponent for the nomination and his potential running mates all “me too” him, Mr. Herring will always be depicted by the GOP as the lead dog on the sled. This is why others with the same views stay back, try not to get the “point position” on certain political matters. Thus Herring, should he got the nomination will be defined by his opponents in the GOP as being leader of those who want to seize control of the state’s second most powerful job and use it to promote the “full lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender agenda.”

In 2009, there isn’t a political strategy person in Virginia who would have thought such an image could help a candidate get elected AG. Indeed, they would have said it guaranteed a big loss, short of some unexpected revelation of fatal proportion as regards your opponent. Were they right? That’s not for us to say. But strategy wise, they all would have believed “equality” to be the wrong political play.

Now comes 2013: and Mr. Herring is betting big on a sea change in Virginia politics on this strategy play. This is a big political story. Yes, Herring is just a candidate for a party nomination. And yes, it is close race, he might not win, he might even lose big, a low vote primary can produce some high drama.

BUT HERRING IS NOW LIKE DAVY CROCKETT AT THE ALAMO. Okay, it was Colonel Travis in the movie, but hey, nobody really knows if the famous “line in the sand” scene actually took place. The Mexican Army killed everyone, while the latest evidence says Crockett actually got captured alive, and then executed by Santa Ana. But whether real or not in 1836, it is now real 177 years later: Mark Herring has drawn a line in the sand, and now every Democrat running in 2013 for statewide office has to “man up,” as they will say tonight in the NCAA semi-finals.

Not just his opponent Mr. Fairfax, but T-Mac too, and the boys running for LG. Whether Herring wins the primary or not, his move has defined the AG’s election for 2013, and possibly even the governor’s race.

Was it a smart strategy play? In 2001, Don McEachin upset establishment backed candidates for the Attorney General’s nomination. In 2005, Leslie Byrne and Creigh Deeds won nominations for LG and AG, respectively, while not the favorites of the party establishment. Until now, Herring had basically run a campaign based on endorsements, positioning himself as the establishment candidate, a sitting Senator being challenged by someone making his first run for political office, unknown in party circles for the most part. Historically, this has not been the winning strategy.

Perhaps wrongly, but 200-proof takes the Herring “Equality Agenda” move as proving our strategy view: front runners seldom go bold, it is counter-intuitive. Herring realized Fairfax posed an increasing threat – as well he should. Meaning: This is NOT a mere policy play. Herring has also made a 200-proof strategy play. The biggest, boldest one yet in 2013.

But to repeat: It is also a 200-proof strategy play, based on the demographic and other dynamics of what is a far closer and more competitive face for AG than the political reporters have yet perceived. Did Herring’s play change this situation? The ball is now in Justin Fairfax’s court. Image wise, Herring has never been seen as a bold player, the big play guy. In that regard, he might have caught Justin Fairfax by surprise.

At 200 proof, we like Herring’s play as a matter of strategy for winning the Democratic nomination. If you understand a Herring vs. Fairfax race, the play makes all the strategy sense in the world. In terms of the general election, we reserve strategy judgment until taking some time to study the chess board. The right strategy isn’t merely about the substance of a position, or even necessarily mostly about said merits: politics is 24/7 image, if you miss the “spin”, then you might not win no matter the substance.

The “spin doctors” employed by 200 proof are still looking at the political x-rays. All they know for sure so far is this: Herring, a low-profile candidate, has just made the highest-profile strategy move of 2013 despite it getting no real press. We presume his “Equality Agenda” is going to be what he uses to define the Herring AG campaign for primary voters. It is a first for Virginia. In a state still fond of tradition, this is no small play.

Video: Eric Cantor Laughs When Told, “No one’s asking you to marry another man”

0



Hahahaha, hilarious. Seriously, though, notice how uncomfortable Can’tor is with this question?

Video: Arlington Streetcar Forum Makes Strong Case FOR this Important Project

3

I strongly recommend that anyone concerned about the Arlington County streetcar project watch this video. Why? Because, as a strong supporter, I believe it makes an overwhelming case FOR the streetcar (and against the arguments of the streetcar opponents). Don’t believe me? Again, watch the video for yourself. As you do, listen to the Arlington County professional staff thoroughly, methodically lay make the case for why a streetcar makes sense; why there’s no possibility of “bus rapid transit” along the Columbia Pike corridor (no dedicated lane, no chance of “rapid” – end of story); why the money for this project is NOT “fungible” with other needs in the county; why this will add tremendous value to the Columbia Pike corridor, even as it protects low-income housing stock; why this is a crucial part of Arlington’s vision for a sustainable, prosperous future; etc, etc.  As the Arlington Patch reported:

Several residents stayed afterward to thank the board members for their leadership on what’s turning out to be an increasingly difficult issue. “I came in skeptical but now I think the streetcar is a no-brainer,” one woman told Tejada after shaking his hand.

Watch the video, think about this one, and I believe you’ll agree with what that woman said to Arlington County Board Chair Walter Tejada.

P.S. The Coalition for Smarter Growth handed out a Columbia Pike Streetcar flyer that sums up the arguments FOR the streetcar very well: 1) “Economic Development” (“Streetcars outperform regular buses in spurring economic development”); 2) “Streetcars Can Carry More People;” 3) “We Need the Capacity;” 4) “Planning & Community Input Has Been Significant” (“Arlington County has completed a planning and community input process of almost 10 years.”).

P.P.S. For lots more information, please see Streetcarnow.org and Arlington County’s page on the streetcar.  

Yale/GMU Survey of Republicans Shows Strong Support for Expanding Clean Energy

0

Cross posted from Scaling Green

A brand new survey by Yale and George Mason Universities looks at the attitudes of Republicans and “Republican-leaning Independent” voters towards energy and climate change. The results are highly encouraging for those of us who support a rapid transition towards clean energy and away from carbon-based fuels. Here are a few highlights.

  • Only 22% of respondents believe that the United States should use more fossil fuel in the future, while 51% believe we should use “less” fossil fuel.
  • Support for increased renewable energy is overwhelming, with 77% of respondents saying the U.S. should use “more” renewables in the future, versus just 9% who say “less.”
  • “A majority of respondents believe that taking steps to reduce our use of fossil fuels will benefit the nation in a number of ways – for example, by helping free us from dependence on foreign oil (66%), saving resources for our children and grandchildren to use (57%), and providing a better life for our children and grandchildren (56%) – while none of the potential costs associated with taking action were seen as likely by a majority of respondents.”
  • “Respondents selected more benefits of reducing fossil fuels than costs (51% of benefits were selected vs. 33% of costs were selected, on average).”
  • “When presented with one of two conservative arguments saying America should respond to climate change, a solid majority (62%) say America absolutely should (23%) or probably should (39%) take steps to address climate change.

Those are strong numbers for both clean energy and action on climate change, although they’re muddied somewhat by other numbers which show both support for the Keystone XL tar sands pipeline, which would worsen global warming, and also an upward trend in global warming. Still, the Yale numbers are encouraging, and are consistent with numerous other surveys showing that Americans of all political persuasions prefer a clean future.

Virginia News Headlines: Saturday Morning

1

Here are a few Virginia (and national) news headlines, political and otherwise, for Saturday, April 6. Also, check out President Obama’s weekly address, in which he tells “the American people about the budget he is sending to Congress, which makes the tough choices required to grow our economy and shrink our deficits.”

*Obama: Proposed budget not his ‘ideal plan’ but lowers deficits while spending on needs

*Liberals, GOP both critical of Obama’s budget proposal

*THE GOP IS OFFICIALLY BROKEN (“Washington’s problem isn’t partisanship or a fatally flawed system. It’s that one party is massively dysfunctional”)

*Conservative Democrats Take Joint Plunge On Gay Marriage

*NRA’s tactics eroding support for gun control (Ugh.)

*McAuliffe quietly quit electric car company in December

*McDonnell, Cuccinelli on defensive over Star Scientific (And rightfully so. This reeks.)

*Cuccinelli steps away from case involving company he invests in (Way too little, way too late!)

*McAuliffe agrees to five debates in Virginia governor’s race

*No Reform Three Years After Massey Disaster

*Booker, Warner to attend Equality Virginia gala

*Virginia school to bear Norfolk senator’s name

*Nationals trounced by Reds

“Sideshow Bob” Marshall: “Anybody here can go out in front of an abortion clinic and blow it up…”

0



More of Del. “Sideshow Bob” Marshall (R-Manassas) being…well, “Sideshow Bob.” Completely insane, in other words.

Access versus Integrity: Virginia’s Voter ID Law and the myth of In-Person Voter Fraud

0

( – promoted by lowkell)

by Frank Anderson

Executive Director, Fairfax County Democratic Committee

Also published in our monthly newsletter, The Democrat

By signing the new Voter ID law, SB 1256, Governor Bob McDonnell (R-VA) has given up a lot of access in exchange for the false notion of increasing “ballot integrity.”

Access and integrity are the two competing ideas in the debate over the recent wave of voter ID laws. Democrats and progressives want to expand access to the ballot for all U.S. citizens.  The access concept is pretty straightforward: it means every citizen should have the right to vote, and the ability to exercise that right should be made as simple as possible in order to expand civic participation. Republicans and conservatives are more focused on the integrity of the ballot. They believe that supposed voter fraud threatens that integrity, diluting the power of “one man, one vote.”

Most Voter ID advocates have never had any difficulty obtaining an ID. They don’t understand that for some Virginians, this will deter them from going to the polls. It is inevitable that thousands of Virginians will believe, either correctly or incorrectly, that they are unable to obtain a current ID for voting.

We received an email from an elderly, home-bound absentee voter who was concerned that the new law would bar her from voting.  Her ID had long since expired and she was unable to travel to get a new one.  I explained that the new law only covers in-person voting, not mail-in absentee voting.  (However, first-time voters voting by mail must provide a copy of their ID.)

But this is one of the faults of the new law.  It only addresses the supposed problem of voter impersonation at the polls, which almost never happens.  Out of the extremely rare cases of voter fraud, very, very few cases of actual voter impersonation are reported – so few that, according to a recent study, they account for less than one out of 15 million voters.  

Unfortunately, facts don’t matter to the Republicans who pushed for this legislation.  A survey conducted last December revealed that almost 50% of Republicans believe ACORN stole the 2012 election. Similarly, last year conservative radio host Mark Levin told his listeners that Mitt Romney would need to compensate for an expected 3% rate of voter fraud.  (That would translate to a staggering 1.8 million fraudulent votes nationwide for President Obama.)  This utterly false and unpatriotic notion is what is fueling the actions of the Virginia Republican legislators.

The sad truth is that this law will result in fewer people voting.  When Virginians hear that a voter ID law was passed, many will assume that a current DMV ID is required – which is difficult to obtain for those who have lost their Social Security card or birth certificate, and those without a stable home address.  And even though the law would not be implemented until mid-2014 and requires clearance by the Justice Department, it will have the effect of decreasing turnout this year.  Any time you put up additional obstacles to voting, you cause confusion and discourage people from participating.  And when Republicans do it for no defensible reason whatsoever – to solve a problem that frankly does not exist – they reveal their true motivations.

Fewer people voting is exactly what Republicans want.  They know that when more citizens vote, Democrats win.  That’s why they are doing everything they can to reduce voter participation and hold on to power.  Republican strategist and Reagan advisor Paul Weyrich explained this back in 1980, saying “I don’t want everybody to vote.  Elections are not won by a majority of people… our leverage in the elections quite candidly goes up as the voting populace goes down.”

In advocating for voter ID, Republicans have either been duped into believing that voter impersonation is an actual problem, or they’re going along with it because they cynically know that this will reduce Democratic votes, or both.  No matter what you believe, the truth is that the amount of integrity gained is infinitesimally small or nonexistent compared to the number of voters this will turn off.

At the Fairfax County Democratic Committee, we will work to inform our voters of changes in the ID requirements, whatever they will be after the Justice Department reviews the law.  In the meantime, we remind voters that they still have many options for voter ID – both photo and non-photo.  Visit www.sbe.virginia.gov and click on “What ID do I need to bring?” to view the full list.

Where’s Pete Snyder’s Money Coming From?

0

A story posted back in February on JH Politics about one of the leading Republican candidates for Virginia’s next Lt. Governor should have received a lot more attention than it did. The gist of it is that a “huge chunk” of Pete Snyder’s funding has come from one source – “the Ending Spending Fund, an independent Super PAC,” which has “invested $235,000 in Snyder, and this is before he’s even the Republican standard bearer.” As JH Politics points out, “It’s a dazzling sum at this stage in the race.” It also makes “Ending Spending” by far and away Snyder’s top donor, with the runner trailing by $225,000.

To put it in perspective, JH Politics compares the ginormous amount of money “Ending Spending” has poured into Snyder’s 2013 campaign with how much they spent against Tim Kaine in 2012, and finds that it’s a great deal more for Snyder. Which raises the question, “Is Pete Snyder’s election to Lieutenant Governor, a part-time position that five other viable Republicans are running for, worth $100,000 more than a United States Senate seat?” Apparently, “Ending Spending” sees having Snyder breaking ties in our State Senate as highly valuable, the only real question is “what’s in it for them, exactly?”

Who is behind “Ending Spending?” According to Open Secrets:

Ending Spending is a conservative 501(c)4 group that focuses on federal spending and the national debt. The group originally targeted earmarks, but broadened its message to include balancing the federal budget and paying down the national debt. The group was founded by Joe Ricketts, the former CEO of TD Ameritrade and a known conservative backer. Brian Baker, the current president of Ending Spending, was an adviser to former Sens. Robert Dole and Richard Shelby. The group does not disclose its donors, and its money goes towards electioneering expenses.

Also, according to Open Secrets, in the 2011-2012 cycle, “Ending Spending” had $13,250,766 in independent expenditures ($6,452,125 for Republican candidates and $6,674,460 against Democratic candidates). It all kind of gives you a warm, fuzzy feeling, doesn’t it? No, I didn’t think so.

Just to give you a flavor for how slimy this group is, check this out:

On May 17, 2012, The New York Times published a story by Jeff Zeleny and Jim Rutenberg reporting that The Ending Spending Action fund had been presented with a 54-page proposal entitled, “The Defeat of Barack Hussein Obama: the Ricketts Plan to End His Spending for Good.” According to the Times, the proposal, written by a vendor seeking to be hired by Ending Spending, suggested a $10-million ad campaign to “attack President Obama in ways that Republicans have so far shied away” and called for “running commercials linking Mr. Obama to incendiary comments by his former spiritual adviser, the Reverend Jeremiah A. Wright.”

As if all that’s not bad enough, there’s this issue as well:

Virginia Republicans deserve to know whether Snyder was involved in discussions with Ending Spending PAC (which would be a violation of campaign finance law due to his position as Victory Chairman) [in 2012]. If he was involved in illegal conversations, did he ask Ending Spending to withhold money for his inevitable run? Inquiring minds want to know.

Hmmmm.

Speaking of 2012, on February 18 of that year, “Ending Spending” staff posted this endorsement of Snyder on their blog. Then, on December 26, 2012, Snyder got $235k from “Ending Spending.” Interestingly, it is unclear whether the contribution came from the “Ending Spending PAC” (a federal political action committee) or the “Ending Spending Fund” (a 501(c)4 Super PAC). But either way, my understanding is that under Virginia campaign finance law, “Ending Spending” should have to register in Virginia if they are involved in expressly advocating for a Virginia candidate. In fact, I’ve been told by a knowledgeable source that under a certain Virginia designation, they could even be forced to disclose their donors. According to this same source, Snyder is also supposed to confirm that the PAC is registered upon receipt of a contribution. From what I can tell, they have not done so. So could there be a potential technical violation of Virginia law, or an attempt – for whatever reason(s) – to cover up the real source of the money? It’s hard to say.

In sum, what we have here is a shady out-of-state group, funded by a single, reclusive, far-right-wing, anti-Obama billionaire, trying to single-handedly select our next lieutenant governor. Oh, and that potential lieutenant governor appears to be skirting Virginia campaign finance laws, if not outright violating them. I don’t know about you, but none of that makes me particularly comfortable.

P.S. Here’s some interesting reading on “Ending Spending”/Joe Ricketts’ (failed) foray into Harry Reid’s reelection.