Patrick Wales and Virginia Uranium Inc. start their public relations campaign over the weekend

On Sunday, Virginia Uranium Inc. (VUI) unleashed what may be the beginning of a protracted public campaign to win the hearts and the minds of undecided Virginians or even those opposed to uranium mining in the commonwealth. In an editorial piece, VUI’s project manager, Patrick Wales, defended the idea and practical application of mining uranium and called on “mining foes” to be “accountable.” Can you sense my incredulity?

So, the public relations dye has been cast for Round One of the VUI public relations blitz and it is interesting to note the tone of Mr. Wale’s editorial and the facts that he (naturally) leaves out of his critique of individuals who oppose the risks involved with digging up uranium ore from Virginia’s soil.

For instance, here’s a real knee-slapper from Wales: “it has been uranium mining opponents’ claims that have been discounted time and again by independent sources, from the left-leaning Washington Post and Brookings Institution to the more conservative Richmond Times-Dispatch and Heritage Foundation.” If the Washington Post and Brookings Institution are left-leaning then Dennis Rodman’s hair color remained consistent throughout his professional basketball career. That is, Mr. Wales is stretching reality and setting the ideological goal-posts where he’ll receive the greatest rhetorical cookie points.

Noticeably lacking from this and other claims made by Mr. Wales is what we have come to call evidence in 21^st Century America. Unless Mr. Wales believes that Virginians are going to inherently trust him and his company of Canadian-backed financial wolves, then it would behoove him to include evidence to support his claims, unless of course the evidence actually contradicts his assertions!

Mr. Wales go on to point out that the movement opposing uranium mining in Virginia called “Keep the Ban” knows “full well Virginia never banned uranium mining.” Right, and you, sir, know full well that the only thing Virginian about “Virginia Uranium Inc.” is the name and the location where the mining will take place. I ask you to consider how Virginian is a company owned entirely by a Canadian company? So, is one side alone guilty for playing semantic tricks on Virginians? No.

VUI and its allies have talked down to the people of Virginia from the beginning and thought that their efforts to lift the “moratorium” (there you go Mr. Wales) would be as easy as a few legislators in their pockets. Well, it will take a whole lot more legislators in your pockets!

Even though America is the most advanced capitalist country in the world, we still value something that money simply cannot buy: our health and our homes, those places from which we were born and/or have known for most of our lives. VUI can tout their honestly and their compassion until they are blue in the face. Ultimately, however, we know that the primary interest VUI and its shareholders have in mind is the almighty dollar, not the interests of Virginians as a whole.

Whether Virginia’s Republican Party likes it or not, VA is tied hip-to-hip with the federal government

For all of its howling and absurd denouncements, the Virginia Republican Party, like many Virginians, are economically linked at the hip, for better or for worse, to the federal government. The close relationship between the federal government and Virginia was further revealed when Moody’s Investors Service improved Virginia’s credit outlook to “stable” and affirmed the commonwealth’s triple-A bond rating one day after the credit rating company improved the U.S. government’s rating from “negative” to “stable”.

In December 2011 Moody’s downgraded Virginia’s credit outlook to “negative” due in great part to Virginia’s reliance on federal spending. That is, Virginia Democratic and Republican Party reliance on federal spending, not just Democratic Party reliance.

According to Moody’s, federal budget deficits have decreased faster than originally forecast and the U.S. economy has “demonstrated a degree of resilience to major reductions in the growth of government spending.”

Virginia has also taken its own steps to rein in spending by reforming the Virginia Retirement System and reducing “unfunded liabilities” in local and state employee pension plans. What is continuing to hurt Virginia’s economy the most, however, is the ill-conceived and even more contemptible decision to allow the federal ‘sequestration’ to indiscriminately buzz-saw through the federal budget.

Sen. Mark Warner noted during a hearing last week regarding the impacts of the sequestration that the indiscriminate cuts in federal spending are negatively effecting small businesses “from Northern Virginia to Norfolk.” That is, the sequestration’s harmful effects to Virginia’s economy are not isolated to Northern Virginia. On a more abstract level, the nature of our globally integrated economic network means that negative effects to one of Virginia’s economic sectors could potentially have a negative effect on a seemingly peripheral part of Virginia’s economy.  What this means is that Virginians should be concerned with what goes on in other parts of Virginia’s economy if only for purely selfish reasons.

Sooner or later, Virginia’s Republican Party will have to begin discussing how the state is going to create jobs, not just cut spending in more and more insignificant corners of Virginia’s economy. While this would mean actually using their imaginative intelligence, I believe some within Virginia’s Republican Party have this capability. While the Virginia Democratic Party is not blameless for any of the economic woes the state has experienced over the last few years, the absurd ideas and policy decisions of the Republican Party clearly take the cake in terms of adding little to Virginia’s economic recovery. 

The art of falsehood: More Cantor banter about the Affordable Care Act in Chesterfield County on Friday

On Friday, House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-7^th) did what he and many within the Republican Party have made an art out of: speaking half-truths and downright falsehoods. In other words, Cantor made claims about the Affordable Care Act without the least bit of evidence during his visit to Chesterfield County, south of the city of Richmond.

According to Cantor, “This health care law [the Affordable Care Act] provides one of the biggest threats to economic growth out there today.” Cantor then added that both political parties want to increase the access and quality of health care, but the way to do so is to lower the cost so more businesses and working-class Americans can afford it.

Rep. Cantor failed to mention, however, that it is his own party that appears willing to shut down the federal government in order to derail “Obamacare.” This prescription for stopping the Affordable Care Act doesn’t sound to me like a political position that has the interests of the American people in mind.

Unlike many of my liberal friends, I’m no fan of the Affordable Care Act. I’m not a fan of bankrolling health insurance companies, requiring healthy individuals like myself to buy health insurance when I might not otherwise do so, and not easily explaining to the American people how this new health care system will work and how it will affect the lives of Americans.

But there are good ways and then there are really bad ways of going about derailing unpopular legislation, and the foremost plan in the minds of many House Republicans is NOT one of the good ways (i.e., forcing a government shutdown).

In addition to the irrational and immoral way some Republicans have proposed to stop the Affordable Care Act, many of the claims and implications made by individuals like Cantor are just wrong. As Rep. Robert C. Scott (D-3^rd) notes, businesses with fewer than 50 employees are legally exempt from provisions of the health care law. According to Rep. Scott, “Small businesses at worst are just exempt and don’t do anything. If they provide the insurance they get a tax credit.”

To demagogues like Cantor, the truth is little more than an impermanent statue to be molded and remolded according to the political winds. Gone are the days, for now, when Republicans could give reasoned arguments for why this or that policy is undesirable. Cantor and many of his colleagues, in other words, care as much about the truth surrounding an issue as they do the American people. Their political careers and their egos will always come before the interests of the country as a whole.

So to respond to one ad asking if we can trust the people in Washington? With folks like Cantor, Paul Ryan, and their likeminded comrades in our nation’s capital, the answer is a resounding “no.” 

Sen. Tim Kaine visits Guantanamo Bay Detention Facility, and it wasn’t for the interior decorating

Call it justice, call it warranted in times of war, or call it one of the U.S.’s biggest embarrassments during the 21^st Century. No, I’m not referring to former president George W. Bush, I’m referring to the Guantanamo Bay Detention Facility in Cuba. It was here that Sen. Tim Kaine ‘toured’ on Friday, even though it remains unclear why anyone would need to take a tour of ‘Gitmo’.

That said, Kaine’s tour probably came in large part as a reaction to the hunger strikes that have been occurring at the facility over the past few weeks. According to one report, the number of detainees still carrying out their hunger strike is at 75 as of July 18, down from its peak of over 100 detainees. As part of the Senate Armed Services and Foreign Relations Committee, Sen. Kaine no doubt felt obliged to see one of the U.S.’s most negative international symbols with his own eyes.

While the Guantanamo Bay facility has been touted by its champions as a necessary evil to combat the ubiquitous forces of terrorism terroristing around the globe, it stands in stark contrast to the political rights that undergird the U.S. political system and U.S. identity.

The idea behind ‘Gitmo’ is that by detaining suspected terrorists outside of the contiguous boundaries of the U.S. and supposedly outside of U.S. jurisdiction, these individuals can be deprived of the normal legal protections offered by the U.S. justice system. Unfortunately, the U.S. has also been telling the world, and its own citizens, that it’s the beacon of hope, freedom, and due process of the law, even for so-called enemies of the state. Thus, the Guantanamo Bay Detention Facility has come to be seen by many throughout the 

world and the U.S. as the ultimate symbol of hypocrisy and the darker side of U.S. power.  

The justification for shutting Gitmo down is as simple as this: if America is to continue to lead in the international community for years to come, it must practice the principles that make this country so great, in the good times as well as the bad. For those who would argue that heighted risk begs for more extreme security measures like Gitmo, my response is that these measures will only increase the risk(s) originally posed. America is still the ‘good guy’, for now. But if and when this changes, no amount of military might will be able to sustain the façade of what was once perhaps humankinds greatest hope of freedom from political oppression. 

U-mining is to VA’s elected officials what sexting is to former congressman Weiner: an unhealthy obsession!

If former New York Representative, Anthony Weiner has a problem with ‘sexting’ (pardon the slang!), then Virginia Uranium Inc. and a number of Virginia’s elected officials have a problem accepting numerous studies which demonstrate the various risks posed by uranium mining in Southside Virginia.

Unlike Weiner’s problem, however, Virginia’s inability to heed multiple warnings to slow its role on attempting to lift the three-decades old moratorium on uranium mining has the potential to directly affect thousands of Virginians for generations.

While proponents of uranium mining in Southside Virginia have brushed away concerns regarding the risks involved with uranium mining in Southside Virginia, their inability to compare apples to apples or to control for pertinent variables in their cited research lends to the conclusion that the moratorium on uranium mining should remain in place until greater consensus has been reached about its safety.

Advocates of uranium mining have also failed to convincingly argue that the Virginia Department of Mines, Mineral, and Energy (DMME) can adequately regulate uranium mining if it were to become a reality in Virginia. As has been noted before, the Roanoke River Basin Association’s final report on DMME’s ability to adequately regulate uranium mining in Virginia further crystallized one of the biggest objections to lifting Virginia’s moratorium on u-mining. If such a risky venture can’t be adequately regulated, how is it moral or rational to lift the moratorium?

Then, of course, there is the economic side to the issue of uranium mining. If the mining of uranium were conducted in Virginia, what guarantees would there be that Virginia would reap the financial and energy benefits of this energy resource? As one astute observer pointed out, yellowcake is sold on an open market, meaning that the highest bidder for this resource will be the one taking it home.

And if you need another reason to be suspicious about any claims that Virginia will reap the rewards of uranium mining in our state, consider the fact that Virginia Energy Resources, a Canadian-based company, owns 100 percent of the Coles Hill deposit.  Why, it almost sounds as if Virginia will be getting the short end of the uranium mining stick, in more ways than one!

Maybe in some distant future there will be a safe way to mine uranium in such wet climates as Virginia’s (or any climate for that matter). But that future has not yet come to pass, and until it does we should follow the recommendations of numerous reports: don’t lift the moratorium on uranium mining in Virginia. 

Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington request IRS investigate McDonnell & Cuccinelli

The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) is being queued by a nonprofit based out of Washington, D.C., Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW), to review the political gifts that Star Scientific CEO Jonnie Williams Sr. gave to Gov. Bob McDonnell and Virginia’s Attorney General, Ken Cuccinelli.  

According to CREW, Bob McDonnell and his immediate family received $166,150 while his attorney general, Ken Cuccinelli, raked in close to $19,000. CREW also added that some of these political “gifts” may not be exempt from taxes. As CREW noted in its request to the IRS  for further investigation, “As a general matter, public officials do not normally receive tens of thousands of dollars’ worth of gifts from recent acquaintances out of unadulterated generosity.”

And here, my fellow Virginians, is a point I haven’t seen discussed in much depth. In the case of Bob McDonnell, at least, the idea that $166,150 in political gifts is not an outright attempt to ‘buy’ McDonnell’s favor is preposterous. Virginia’s political donation laws are in place to support a candidates political campaign, not purchase it outright.

As I’ve argued before, ask yourself this: if you were an elected official and someone offered to buy you a Rolex and numerous other expensive gifts on top of generous political donations, wouldn’t you be a little weary about ethical problems or even the possibility of legal malfeasance? I know I would.

Now McDonnell appears to almost be reveling in his obstinacy to step down as Virginia’s tarnished governor. He loves his job, he says, but that not’s the point. The point is that McDonnell betrayed the trust that is essential to his job and he can no longer be any more than a REALLY lame duck governor. If McDonnell really did care about his office and the people of Virginia, he would take a bow out of office.

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again, were this a Democratic governor, I’d be saying the same thing I am now: resign. In matters of honor and integrity, there are no party colors, only human imperatives. 

How can you show that you’re insincere about apologizing, issue your apologize via Twitter

A bank robber wouldn’t expect to be pardoned if he or she returned the stolen money to its original owner, but Virginia’s Gov. Bob McDonnell hopes that the people of Virginia will forgive him for accepting what is clearly an unethical amount of political ‘gifts’ in terms of the cumulative monetary value of all of the gifts and donations combined.

McDonnell announced (via Twitter!) on Tuesday that he and his wife, Maureen McDonnell, have repaid over $120,000 to Star Scientific CEO Jonnie Williams Sr. and also gave an apology for the entire controversy surrounding Williams and his prolific gift giving.

McDonnell said this: “I am deeply sorry for the embarrassment certain members of my family and I brought upon my beloved Virginia and her citizens. I want you to know that I broke no laws and that I am committed to regaining your sacred trust and confidence. I hope today’s action is another step toward that end.” Now on to the next controversy, objectivizing Virginia as a woman!

Setting aside the question of how and where McDonnell managed to scrape together $120,000 out of thin air, and also putting aside the insincerity of a Twitter apology for the time being, it isn’t enough as a career politician to put the hens back in the coop once they’ve already been kidnapped and whisked away without the farmer’s knowledge. There has to be some reckoning, right?

The vast majority of us know right from wrong and we also have enough good judgment to know that taking over $100,000 from a political donor who is the CEO of a business vying for political brownie-points could possibly be seen as an ethical conflict, or even an act spiraling into a legal infraction. If I gave you over $100,00 in political gifts, wouldn’t you be a little suspicious about my motives or concerned that others might perceive this excessive spending in the wrong way?

It could be that Gov. McDonnell was so high on cloud nine and so used to being showered with political gifts that Mr. Williams’ gift-giving was just another day at the office. I can’t think of how else to explain this amount in political gifts and McDonnell’s other questionable actions.

I’d say this regardless of the individual’s political affiliation: I can forgive you, but it’s time to turn in the badge, sheriff, the town don’t trust ya’ to keep the peace anymore!

RRBA report provides more evidence that Virginia regulators won’t effectively regulate u-mining

Research Director for Southwest Research and Information Center, Paul Robinson, helped confirm what many advocates for a uranium-mining free Virginia have long argued: the Virginia Department of Mines, Minerals and Energy (DMME) won’t adequately be able to “develop, promulgate, and satisfactorily enforce regulations regarding uranium mining in Virginia.”

On Monday, the Roanoke River Basin Association (RRBA) announced the release of the “Review of Records of Virginia Department of Mines, Minerals and Energy Uranium Exploration Permit 90484EX Issued to Virginia Uranium, Inc.,” and while the name might be long the information it contains is well worth the effort of reading.

As part of its press release, RRBA President Gene Addesso said the following, “Uranium mining proponents claim that DMME is capable of protecting the water resources related to mining operations.  However, this report tells us that DMME had the opportunity to protect the public interest during exploratory drilling at Coles Hill, and they failed to provide effective oversight.  This leads us to question how DMME could be expected to take on the regulatory responsibility of large scale uranium mining on thousands of acres in the headwaters of the Banister River.”

Indeed, as a first step towards even thinking about lifting the moratorium on uranium mining in the state, legislators and state officials have to demonstrate through concrete actions (e.g., hiring on additional regulators under the DMME) and long-term planning that Virginia’s government is serious about protecting the well-being of Virginians and our environment. But according to the report, the DMME has already failed a test of its ability and political will to effectively oversee uranium mining.

In response, state political figures, representatives of uranium mining companies, and state officials alike will no doubt call this outcome a fluke or swear that the problems (to the extent that any problems are acknowledged) will be fixed by the time uranium mining comes online in Virginia.

Virginia, let alone the rest of the country, has seen enough of these falsehoods and wishful forms of thought, however. We know that the government is too complacent and too buddy-buddy with their friends in Big Energy to take the political steps necessary to ensure that companies like Virginia Uranium Inc. follow the spirit and the letter of Virginia’s law.

Pro-uranium ore diggers can’t have uranium mining in Virginia because you’ve had your chance and you’ve failed time and again to assure Virginians that the law of the land and the interests of Virginians is your first and foremost priority. 

Uranium mining in Virginia still a hot issue thanks in part to the new documentary “Hot Water”

While the first debate between Democratic Party and Republican Party gubernatorial candidates, Terry McAuliffe & Ken Cuccinelli respectively, have consumed the time and discursive energy of political talking heads and interested Virginians across the state, the issue of uranium mining in Southside Virginia has been largely ignored or forgotten about entirely.

For the residents of Southside, Virginia, however, uranium mining is still very much a hot topic. The recent screening of the documentary “Hot Water” in the Halifax County High School auditorium is only one of the most recent examples of the continuing interest Virginians in this part of the commonwealth have shown towards uranium mining.

Hot Water, produced by Liz Rogers, documents the American Southwest’s problems with uranium mining, including, but not exclusive to, the contamination of this part of the country with heavy metals and toxic substances. According to Rogers, “It’s [uranium mining] is dangerous and poisonous.”

The film could not come at a better time for Virginia as its citizens and elected representatives attempt to determine whether or not the 1982 moratorium on uranium mining should be lifted or maintained.

While critics may be quick to dismiss the documentary as an emotionally driven and unscientifically substantiated account of uranium mining’s effects on America’s landscape and its inhabitants, Rogers and her partner in production, Kevin Flint, talk to a number of socially respected figures including biologist Charmaine Whiteface; Dr. Kim Kearfott, nuclear engineer and professor of nuclear engineering at University of Michigan; Dr. Hannan LaGarry, professor of geology at Oglala Lakota College; Dr. Jim Stone, professor of civil engineering at the South Dakota School of Mines; as well as former congressman and leading environmental supporter Dennis Kucinich.  Thus, the documentary takes a serious look at the effects uranium mining has had on ecosystems and communities in the American Southwest.

For Virginians who don’t live in the Southside of the state, you may be asking yourselves, why should I care what goes on in that part of Virginia? If we view the state as one big neighborhood, it stands to reason that if one part of the neighborhood catches on fire, it could engulf the entire neighborhood if neighbors don’t come squash the fire. That is, if uranium mining is allowed in Southside Virginia, what makes anyone think that it can’t or won’t happen in your part of the neighborhood?

Further, you don’t have to be Nostradamus to conclude that it’s only a matter of time before a uranium mining ‘incident’ occurs. Where there is human interaction there is inevitably human error and in the case of uranium mining, potentially devastating consequences. The consequences won’t merely affect the Southside of Virginia, however, they will reverberate throughout the state as it attempts to grapple with the negative public image of a “nuclear state.”

Like it or not, uranium mining in Virginia is not a localized issue. It is an issue that each Virginian has a stake in.

VA Attorney General sues Internet payday lender, revealing a more conservative political bent

You have to love Virginia’s Attorney General (AG) Ken Cuccinelli for his overt willingness to use the office of attorney general for political ends. For instance, what’s a good way to signal that Mr. Cuccinelli is a man of the law while also conveying a sense of looking out for the average Virginian? I know, he should sue a payday lender! You’re absolutely on the mark!

Attorney General Cuccinelli is suing Jupiter Funding Group, an Internet payday lender “for offering payday loans without a valid state license from state regulators.”

In the great state of Virginia, lenders cannot charge more than 12 percent in yearly interest on a loan without a license. However, “the attorney general’s office says that according to the company’s terms and conditions, the interest rates on its payday loans ranged anywhere from 438 percent to 1,369 percent annually.” Yes, you’re reading that last number right, one-thousand, three-hundred and sixty-nine percent! This is a criminal offense in and of itself!

The latest suit by the attorney general’s office also illustrates Cuccinelli’s conservative political bent for upholding the law of Virginia above and beyond his libertarian rhetoric opposing government intervention in areas of private life that Cuccinelli believes is too intrusive.

This libertarian sweetheart is about as pure as fake gold and just as quick to rust in the public’s mind once they expose it to water. For all of his attempts to appeal to Virginia’s libertarian voting wing, Cuccinelli has shown time and again that he is just another conservative in superficial libertarian garb. For example, even though I know a few libertarians who disagree with homosexual marriage, their libertarian beliefs don’t allow them to propose state intervention to deny a legal union between two private citizens. How does Cuccinelli feel about homosexual marriage?

Needless to say, Fred Flintstone has a more up-to-date view of society than Ken Cuccinelli. Someone should let the AG know that this is a brave new world full of terrible things like an individual’s choice to live how he or she sees fit, not the government. 

Gov. Bob McDonnell’s friends announce non-profit corporation to pay legal fees: it’s good to be king

What does a modern-day elected official do when faced with mounting legal quandaries? The same thing elected public officials have done since Socrates gave his own apology to the people of Ancient Athens, hire an all-star team of legal sophists. In Gov. Bob McDonnell’s case, however, friends in high places have announced that they are creating a nonprofit corporation titled the “Restoration Fund” to cover the costs of the ‘gov’s’ upcoming legal costs. As you might have noticed by the name of the corporation, McDonnell has already fallen from grace in the minds of his own friends.

Attorneys from Virginia Beach, Stanley Baldwin and Jason Miyares, alongside Hampton Roads entrepreneur Tom Knox stated they are seeking to create the “Restoration Fund” because they believe the legal fees that a long-time public figure like McDonnell might face “could be ruinous.” In other words, McDonnell’s ‘friends’ are once again lending him a financial hand. Does this situation sound familiar?

According to one of the lead sophists in this tragic comedy, “The Governor’s friends want to ensure that he can wage a vigorous defense and clear his good name.” Unfortunately for McDonnell’s friends, all the kings’ horses and all the kings’ men can’t put the ethical face back on this fallen Republican star again.

Whether or not McDonnell broke any federal or state laws will be weeded out in the coming months as the investigation into his “friendships” become available for public review. But regardless of whether or not McDonnell broke any laws, he most certainly betrayed the trust the people of Virginia bestow upon their elected officials.

The laundry list of ethical ‘mistakes’ that have been uncovered so far is already enough to bury his political career, and it seems like every week a new scenario unfolds regarding himself or his wife accepting ‘gifts’ that the average Virginian can only dream about. In case our elected representatives have forgotten, they are not supposed to be kings or queens among the masses but, as the name implies, representatives of the people’s political will.

The mistake that McDonnell made was believing that “the people” were only those willing to buy him lavish gifts and whisk him away to exotic locales. 

Senator Tim Kaine teams up with Sen. McCain to bolster the 1973 War Powers Resolution

Sen. Tim Kaine (D-VA) appears poised to pick up where former U.S. Senator from Virginia Jim Webb left off in his efforts to curtail the powers of the U.S. President to pursue military actions without the approval of the congress.

Sen. Kaine announced on Thursday that he and Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) would be teaming up to reform the 1973 War Powers Resolution that would (hopefully) open up the channels of communication between the president and the U.S. Congress specifically in regards to U.S. military actions.

In a joint statement released by Sen.’s Kaine and McCain (try saying that three times quickly), “The changing nature of armed conflict and technology are raising challenging new war powers questions that our founders never could have envisioned. We are both passionate about establishing a dialogue between the two branches of government that is clear, practical, and true to the Constitution.”

On the floor of the U.S. Senate, Kaine also laid out some interesting facts: “The United States Congress has only formally declared war five times.  In many other instances, Congress has taken steps to authorize, fund or support military action.  And in well over 100 cases, Presidents have initiated military action without prior approval from Congress.” Amen, senator, preach it!

All humor aside, though, nothing could be more serious than the gradual and largely unnoticed (at least by many Americans) shift in the powers of the president to throw thousands of American lives and untold American dollars into conflicts that the American people’s elected legislative representatives never approved. 

Whether it’s been a Republican or a Democrat in the Oval Office, presidents of varying political parties and beliefs have committed U.S. troops to military action without the consent of the U.S. Congress, a shift in political power that would have undoubtedly disturbed the wise creators of the U.S.

Our system of government has checks and balances for a reason, at least what we as Americans feel is a good reason: if political power goes unchecked, it will mushroom into a Leviathan. President Obama, to give one example, may have the best of intentions when deciding to expend military might across the globe, but as the old saying goes, the road to hell is paved with good intentions.

Ultimately,  it’s unimportant what the motives of any particular president are because even good men can make terrible decisions. That’s why we have a system in place in the U.S. to check the ambitions of any single individual. With the Kaine/McCain duo in place, that check might just get a little bit stronger than it has been in recent years. 

Ken Cuccinelli’s focus on anti-sodomy legislation an odd mix of unimportance and contradiction

If you want an issue not to campaign on for elected office, call Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli’s campaign hotline for governor to get the latest insights on criminalizing “sodomy.”  As Think Progress pointed out, Ken Cuccinelli’s new campaign website for Virginia’s top executive office highlights his efforts to role Virginia’s law-books back towards a time when “Crimes Against Nature Law” still existed.

But wait, I know what you’re thinking, wasn’t it Cuccinelli who not too long ago chided an audience in Virginia about their focus on Cuccinelli’s relationship with legally embattled Star Scientific CEO, Jonnie Williams? Didn’t Cuccinelli say how much he wanted to focus on the economy and creating jobs?

Indeed, this is the same Cuccinelli who is now reverting to the old “anti-sodomy” political card not played in Virginia in some time. Hats off to you, sir!

If Cuccinelli is truly intending on having a winning chance at becoming Virginia’s next governor, he has an odd way of going about proving it. While anti-sodomy legislation may be appealing to Generation Old (i.e., the pre-Baby Boomer generation), I can’t imagine it carries much importance with the rest of the electorate in Virginia, excepting the religious right.

What I’m more confident about is that many, if not most, Virginians are more concerned with Virginia’s economy and being able to maintain an American standard of living than with what goes on between two consenting adults on their own private property.

Not only is Cuccinelli’s focus on anti-sodomy legislation an odd campaign issue to prioritize, it also may isolate the base of libertarian backers in Virginia who have, on the whole, seen in Cuccinelli their policy champion. But any true-blooded libertarian would be hard-pressed to explain why the sexual actions of two consenting adults should be under the microscope of Virginia’s laws.  

It is the height of hubris for any individual to believe that he or she knows what is best and right for anyone but themselves. Thus, what Cuccinelli’s focus on anti-sodomy legislation demonstrates is how Leviathan Cuccinelli really is compared to the “don’t tread on me” persona that Cuccinelli has energetically cultivated. 

Virginia’s Republican candidate for lieutenant governor, E.W. Jackson, improperly disclosed donations

Until recently, fiscal conservatism meant spending money responsibly. But thanks to the latest wave of high-level Republican candidates for governor and lieutenant governor of Virginia, Ken Cuccinelli and E.W. Jackson respectively, fiscal conservatism has come to mean conserving how much in campaign donations is released for public review. Oh, and I also forgot to mention Virginia’s biggest Republican Party star of nondisclosure, Bob McDonnell.

But its E.W. Jackson who took a little bit of McDonnell’s infamous limelight this week when it was revealed that the Republican candidate for lieutenant governor failed for the second time since May to properly disclose political donations which have been made to his political campaign. Proper disclosure of political contributions is not voluntary, it’s set by Virginia law.

According to the Richmond Times Dispatch, at the peak of Jackson’s list of political donations submitted before 5 PM on Monday, 7/15, is a contribution of $48,155 attributed to Jackson’s own political action committee (PAC), Jackson for Lt. Governor. As the Times points out, the nature and amount of the contribution suggests that the donation is made up of smaller contributions of undisclosed donors.

So what’s the problem, you may be asking? According to the Virginia Public Access Project’s (VPAP) executive director, this could be the first time since the VPAP started tracking political contributions in 1997 that a committee did not itemize the donors who contributed to the candidates own PAC. Yes, Jackson has made quite a name for himself as something of an outlier.

As in the case of Ken Cuccinelli and Bob McDonnell, if Jackson cannot properly disclose his political contributions to the people of Virginia, what else would be try to disallow the people of Virginia to see? It may seem like something of a silly question, but it strikes at the heart of the people’s ability to trust the officials they elect to public office, especially the governor and lieutenant governor.

Had this been Jackson’s first disclosure mishap, maybe we could let it pass (“maybe” being the key word), but it isn’t. Furthermore, Jackson’s bundled disclosure is so odious to Virginian virtues of transparency that it’s difficult for anyone to argue that Jackson “made a mistake.”

The only mistake was electing Jackson to be the Republican Party candidate for lieutenant governor. But the minister has become a godsend for the Democratic Party of Virginia. 

Ken Cuccinelli unveils his magical “seven-points plan” that ignores his call to slash Virginia’s revenue

I know what you’re thinking, if only Virginia’s Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli would appear before the American Legion State Convention, then he might get a little more love from Virginia’s veterans. On Saturday, Cuccinelli did just that, rolling out of the details of what he calls his “Plan for Virginia’s Veterans.”

According to Cuccinelli, there are approximately 840,000 veterans living in Virginia. Of course, we’ve already seen how forgetful Cuccinelli can be with big numbers.

But Cuccinelli can count up to seven, and he did just that on Saturday when he discussed his “seven-point plan” to help Virginia’s veterans, a plan that he claims will be put into action if he is elected as Virginia’s next governor. Let’s have a look at this seven-point plan:

·         Revising the structure of the Office of Veterans Affairs, making it report directly to the office of the governor, rather than Homeland Security. 

·         Supporting veterans health care initiatives, including continuing funding of the Virginia Wounded Warriors program, and working toward the establishment of a veterans health care center in Virginia.

·         Increasing Virginia veterans’ employment opportunities, including reforming their training and education and helping them find jobs.

·         Improving veterans' claims processing.

·         Providing more adequate funding for the Homeless Veteran Program, in order to help the program move forward.

·         Improving veterans education, including working with Virginia colleges and universities to make them more attractive and accessible to veterans.

·         Initiating a statewide campaign to inform veterans that they can use their G.I. Bill benefits for more than getting a degree, but also to gain specialized training and certificates for trades that are increasingly in demand.

·         Supporting military spouses and dependents, including supporting a constitutional amendment to make real property tax exemptions for those with spouses killed in action, and reducing more barriers to employment.

It reads like a socialist laundry-list for veterans…ahhh! But another problem stems from what Blue Virginia’s Lowell Feld points out as what I like to call the “revenue problem.” Unless Cuccinelli has created a new theory and application of economics, it’s hard to explain how increasing benefits for veterans can occur in the face of state revenue cuts that Cuccinelli also intends on executing. That is, it’s difficult to give away benefits when you’ve broken the bank.

While I would love nothing more than to see Virginia’s, and our country’s, veterans taken care of, Cuccinelli’s grand scheme (i.e., seven-point plan) is riddled with more revenue problems than Mike Tyson’s checking account. 

Sen. Mark Warner reminds the U.S. Senate of the deleterious effects furloughs are having

In a floor speech delivered in the hallowed space of the U.S. Senate, U.S. Senator from Virginia Mark Warner reminded his colleagues about the “disproportionate” impact that the so-called furloughs are having on federal government employees.

For Sen. Warner, who represents a state with a large number of federal government employees, the furloughs and their impacts on his constituency could have a direct effect on his bid for re-election. Thus, Warner has a vested interest in bringing the furloughs to a definite end.

During his speech, Warner reiterated that “Across the federal workforce today, many employees now are required to take one day off without pay every week until the end of the fiscal year. If you think a net 20-percent reduction in salary has no impact, you would be mistaken. I hear from federal workers and their families every day – real people, facing real consequences.”

For the families of furloughed federal government employees, and the federal government employees themselves, the furloughs have come not only as economic shocks, but shocks to their morale as well. The potential consequences could be not just losses in spending power, losses of faith in the government they work for, but reduced productivity.

While some individuals, mainly on the conservative side of the political spectrum, have argued and still argue that public sector benefits are too high relative to their private sector counterparts, anyone who has worked in both sectors would probably agree that you need the extra incentive to work in a government office! I don’t make this statement with an explicit judgment attached; it is the nature of government bureaucracies to operate according to established procedures(s) and not necessarily individual initiative and creativity. Thus, for those in the workforce who wish and want to “think outside the box” (i.e., a lot of what we know as human beings) a public sector job may not be particularly alluring and therefore extra benefits may be the decisive factor in pursuing a job in the public sector.

But all these arguments and considerations aside, real people are facing real consequences, as Sen. Warner pointed out during his floor speech. As Americans, do we no longer care about the well-being of our neighbors and fellow-citizens? Have we become so caught up in our microcosms (i.e., our own lives) that we’ve forgotten what it means to be part of a greater whole?

Tell congress to do the right thing and put an end to these callous furloughs. 

City of Norfolk finally comes around to curbside recycling beginning in August

The city of Norfolk has decided to join the 21^st Century and its efforts to halt and reverse the disastrous American trend of monumental trash accumulation by moving towards recycling. Yes, recycling, that simple and well-meaning idea that has seemingly perplexed numbers of Americans and in particular, Virginians.

Recycling rates in Virginia have improved over the years, however, and Norfolk’s announcement that it will begin providing curbside recycling to downtown residents in August along with recycling cans on streets downtown will hopefully only add to this promising upward trend in recycling across the state.

While the city of Norfolk’s move towards providing its downtown residents recycling services is worthy of adulation, this is something that should have happened years ago, saving untold amounts of resources that are now largely unrecoverable. That is, the city did the right thing, but it shouldn’t have taken so long to get on-board.

According to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the U.S. as a whole recycled 34.7 percent of its trash in 2011. That’s 87 million out of 250 million tons of trash. We can do better.

For whatever reason or set of reasons, recycling hasn’t quite caught on as much as it needs to in a world that uses immense amounts of the planet’s resources with a global population set to grow considerably over this century.

Cities like Norfolk need to understand that a little economic pain now to set up their recycling programs will undoubtedly pay off in the long-run when resources aren’t as abundant as they are at present. The economic argument also leaves out what is to me an even more persuasive consideration: recycling will help preserve the planet for future generations to enjoy (that is, the moral argument of intergenerational justice).

Recycling, and its continued success, must be championed by not just individual states and the federal government, but more importantly by the people themselves. It is up to each of us as individuals to mindfully recycle items that can be reused to not only save a few bucks and preserve the integrity of our individual ecosystems, but to ensure that generations down the line have the same opportunities to enjoy the fullness of what our planet has to offer. 

Cantor & Goodlatte crafting immigration reform bill with no hope of passing the do-nothing House

It’s not often these days that I get a chance to praise any Republicans in the U.S. Congress, let alone Majority Leader Eric Cantor (VA) and his Republican Party colleague from Virginia, House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte, and today I find no exception.

According to Politico, Rep.s Cantor and Goodlatte are putting together legislation presently titled, the Kids Act, which would carve a legal path for young immigrants who were brought into the United States unlawfully as children. As Politico pointed out, the intent of the tentatively titled Kids Act is similar to the DREAM Act, a piece of legislation that would allow young eligible undocumented immigrants to obtain U.S. citizenship.

According to a statement released by Rep. Goodlatte, “These children came here through no fault of their own and many of them know no other home than the United States.” This can’t be a congressional Republican speaking, it makes too much sense…

Goodlatte later stated, “This is one component of immigration reform — any successful reform plan must improve our legal immigration programs, strengthen border security and the interior enforcement of our immigration laws, and find a way to fairly deal with those who are currently in the country unlawfully.” This can’t be, two statements that sound half-way reasonable!

The only problem is neither of these two newly minted champions of sensible immigration reform were enthused enough to vote for the DREAM Act in late 2010. More importantly, any such legislation is dead-on-arrival in the current U.S. House of Representatives where the only good bill that’s passed is no bill at all.

Of course, both Cantor and Goodlatte are no doubt fully aware that immigration reform stands about as much chance passing the House of Representatives as President Obama has in winning over the hearts and minds of America’s conservative constituency.

The point is that instead of Goodlatte and Cantor taking on a true leadership position and doing the right thing by cajoling their party into line to pass significant legislation for the greater good of the country, each man has chosen to play the game of cynical politics by crafting a piece of legislation that has little chance of passing, but that makes them look relatively good in the minds of their constituents and Americans as a whole.

America’s star shines a little less bright because of today’s congress. 

VA Sen. Barbara Favola calls on Gov. Bob McDonnell to resign amid new undisclosed political gifts

It took some time, but Gov. Bob McDonnell has finally hit the “resignation flood zone,” or at least its initial stage as state Sen. Barbara Favola (D-Arlington) became the first elected representative to directly demand Gov. McDonnell’s resignation.

Sen. Favola commented that “I don’t see the purpose of the governor continuing in office when the trust between his office and Virginians has been so eroded.” According to The Washington Post, Sen. Favola’s comments were a result of the latest “gift giving” story regarding Star Scientific’s CEO, Jonnie Williams, and Gov. Bob McDonnell.

In this latest round of Jonnie Williams’ generous (unreported) “gifts” to the McDonnell clan, $70,000 was given to a corporation owned by Bob McDonnell and his sister, $10,000 was given to Bob McDonnell’s daughter, and a $50,000 check was given to Gov. McDonnell’s wife, Maureen. These gifts are in addition to the $15,000 that Williams spent on the wedding of Gov. McDonnell’s daughter, Cailin, in June 2011.

Not surprisingly, the McDonnell administration has stayed quiet about the ever-growing scandal and implicitly sticking by a statement made by McDonnell in the past that he has done no wrongdoing.

While Republicans in the General Assembly like House Speaker William J. Howell (Stafford) have come to McDonnell’s defense, it’s going to be difficult for Virginian’s of diverse political persuasions to swallow the “partisan political potshots” line being floated by Howell. To charge Democratic Party calls for further explanations about McDonnell’s gifts from Williams “partisan political potshots” is akin to calling the Democratic Party’s request for President Richard Nixon’s impeachment a partisan ruse without merit. 

Obviously, there is a strong need for McDonnell to “come clean.”

Even if we were to suspend our disbelief and assume that McDonnell returned no political favors for the substantial political gifts he received from Mr. Williams, the sheer size of Williams’ political gifts is a major cause for concern, in and of itself.

If one individual, or a small group of individuals, can contribute so much to an elected official, then political favors and favoritism is as inevitable as breathing the air. And as a result, faith in Virginia’s political institutions could easily be undermined.

Regardless of whether or not McDonnell returned the sizable gifts of Williams’ with political quid pro quo’s, McDonnell has no doubt lost the trust of a great many Virginians and can no longer govern effectively until November. If McDonnell has any integrity, he will resign his office and let Virginia and Virginians move beyond this unfortunate period in our state’s 21^st Century history.  

Virginia AG Ken Cuccinelli shuns questions related to the Bob McDonnell/Jonnie Williams affair

Some call it chutzpah. Some call it cahoones. I like to call it arrogance on a massive judicial scale. I’m referring of course to Virginia’s Attorney General, Ken Cuccinelli, and the manner in which he has continuously brushed aside real concerns expressed by Virginians about his ties to troubled Star Scientific CEO, Jonnie Williams.

Cuccinelli has stuck to a strategy of what I’ll call the “distracted voter conclusion” in the face of questions regarding his knowledge of Gov. Bob McDonnell’s extensive gift receipts from Jonnie Williams as well as his own gift receipts from Mr. Williams.

In one response, Cuccinelli decried, "More than anything it's a distraction. I'm trying to run a race and we're talking about jobs and the middle class here." Who doesn’t agree that jobs and protecting Virginia’s middle class are among the highest policy issues in this campaign for Virginia’s governorship? But political corruption is also a big deal, as well.

The bottom-line is that Cuccinelli is making one of the biggest political mistakes any politician can make: ignoring a nuclear political issue that is mushrooming around involved politicians instead of addressing it head-on and putting it in the past. And with the election for Virginia governor scheduled in November, the sooner Cuccinelli can put the Star Scientific debacle behind him, the better it will be for his chances at victory.

With that said, I want Cuccinelli to win Virginia’s governorship about as much as I’d like to see Godzilla trample through the streets of Richmond. In fact, both events may cause equal damage to the city of Richmond and beyond!

Cuccinelli is the type of politician that lends his ear, his time, and his energy to well-established (and generous campaign donors) sector monopolists like Alpha Natural Resources who hand-craft ideas that Virginia’s attorney general can sell to the people of Virginia as his own. That is, Cuccinelli is a corporate tool, par excellence, who has fewer bright ideas than the Three Stooges.

Thus, not only is Cuccinelli insincere, arrogant, and a corporate tool, he’s not even shy about any of these personal attributes. I ask again, why would Virginia want an individual like this at the top of the executive food chain?  

VA Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli declines AARP/League of Women Voters public debate

How does a savvy, yet unsavory, elected official avoid public debates against his or her political opponent in an upcoming political ‘contest’? Make the forum/group that is hosting the public debate out to be on the side of your political opponent or simply write them off as outside of mainstream politics.

If any of these were your answers to the question above, then you must have read the playbook of Virginia’s Attorney General, Ken Cuccinelli, who missed the deadline to publicly speak at a scheduled League of Women Voters and AARP Virginia forum. Not only did Cuccinelli miss the deadline to RSVP for the forum, he also felt the need to label the speaking engagement as a “left wing, stacked debate” on Monday (when did the AARP fall into the “left wing” camp…). Cuccinelli said, "Oh, the left wing, stacked debate. Well, you've got MSNBC as the proposed folks running it."

That is, the forum would not be an ideal setting for Cuccinelli to go on verbal rampages against wide swaths of Virginian’s who don’t see the world through Cuccinelli’s lenses.

Assuming for the moment that Cuccinelli is correct in his conclusion that the forum is a “left wing, stacked debate,” wouldn’t his presence alleviate some of the far-right stigma that screams every time Cuccinelli opens his mouth? This image, however, appears to be exactly what Cuccinelli is attempting to further cultivate and maintain.

Terry McAuliffe, the Democratic Party candidate for governor, did agree to speak at the event.

So far, both candidates have only agreed to two public debates together, one in late July at The Homestead Resort and another this fall in Northern Virginia. What this likely means in terms of campaign content is a whole lot of public tongue-lashing and back-and-forths via the TV cameras, radio, and Internet.

Exhibit A: "And for my opponent to try and cherry-pick who's running the debate as opposed to simply getting around and getting in front of Virginians all over the commonwealth and to address their local concerns, I think is just very inappropriate," Cuccinelli stated.

I have a brilliant idea for our stellar attorney general: how about actually laying out your policy proposals and vision for Virginia rather than stating how “inappropriate” Terry McAuliffe’s actions are? I’m not in the mood to see a slugfest for the Executive Mansion  that sacrifices policy substance and real debate. 

Chesapeake Bay conservation groups release analysis of eight milestones Virginia set for itself

A network of conservation groups across the multiple states that the Chesapeake Bay Watershed traverses, the Choose Clean Water Coalition, and the Chesapeake Bay Foundation, one of the oldest and most respected Chesapeake Bay conservation groups, released  an analysis on Monday which pointed to successes and failures in the continuing effort to clean the bay.

The analysis reviewed eight goals and concluded that Virginia is meeting five of these goals including: improving sewage treatment plants, restoring urban streams, planting trees along streams, fencing cattle out of streams, and building traditional stormwater ponds.

However, the analysis also concluded that Virginia is lagging in the following goals: establishing buffers of grass along streams adjacent to farms (the buffers act as a barrier to runoff); using environmentally friendly agricultural practices like no-till farming (which limits fertilizer and soil runoff); and investing in modern stormwater practices like pavement and small wetlands that rain can seep through.

Rather than acknowledging that Virginia MAY be lagging in some of the interim goals (also called “milestones”) that it agreed to in 2009 as part of a short-term assessment of bay restoration efforts, the deputy Virginia secretary of natural resources for bay restoration, Anthony Moore, sounded a defensive response to the analysis.

In response, Moore stated that the analysis “represents a midterm review of a few chosen milestones instead of a full review of the milestones for this two-year period.” Moore went on, “Virginia is committed to improving the health of the Chesapeake Bay for future generations to cherish. ... And we are seeing huge improvements.”

I’m not certain how “huge improvements” can be measured, but neither of the conservation groups argued that Virginia has not made some improvements in cleaning up the Chesapeake Bay. What the analysis did reveal is that there is still a ways to go before all of Virginia’s 42 milestones can be reached. No one expected otherwise at this early stage, but it’s important to assess just where Virginia stands in meeting its Chesapeake Bay restoration milestones.

Virginia’s political leaders, in other words, must stop fretting over the political victories that can be claimed by reaching the commonwealth’s milestones and worry first and foremost about taking the steps necessary to meet every milestone the state set for itself. 

Reports of Gov. Bob McDonnell’s resignation denied by spokesman and Virginia’s Larry Sabato

In response to a report posted by Virginia’s most respected conservative blog (did you catch the sarcasm?), Bearing Drift, Gov. Bob McDonnell’s director of communications, Tucker Martin, denied that the ‘gov’ is resigning. Also chiming in to deny McDonnell’s resignation was Virginia’s omnipresent political force, Larry Sabato, who “Tweeted” on Sunday morning, : “Gov. Bob McDonnell is NOT resigning. I have checked. That is official. Irresponsible rumors are wrong.” When phrases like “irresponsible rumors” start getting thrown around, you know the discussion has entered the sphere of “kinda serious.”

Sabato again Tweeted, “I normally ignore a rumor. But it's so widespread tonite I sought and received official permission to post this.”

Who will eventually triumph as the ultimate victor in this on-going political saga and rumor-mill involving Gov. Bob McDonnell? Stay tuned, we’ll find out soon enough.

Although McDonnell SHOULD resign, it seems at this point that Virginia’s governor would like to ride out the remainder of his term in the Executive Mansion, barring any federal indictment or further revelations of unethical or illegal spending or political ‘gift’ receiving allegations or habits. McDonnell is largely following the Public Relations 101 response to accusations of unethical behavior: deny, deny, deny, and act as if nothing out of the ordinary is occurring (like a federal investigation).

Why should the governor, resign, you might be asking? For one, whether or not Gov. McDonnell’s actions were illegal, ask yourself whether you would be comfortable accepting a Rolex timepiece from a political contributor who also has  business interests that would clearly benefit from your largesse? For me, I would have to lean on the side of caution due to the easily perceived unethical behavior this act could demonstrate to the people of Virginia!

Secondly, McDonnell’s resignation is simply the right thing to do amid the crescendo of allegations, revelations, and investigations into McDonnell’s conduct as governor. For all intents and purposes, in other words, McDonnell is a REALLY lame-duck governor because he now lacks the moral and leadership authority to be effective in the role of governor. Of course, maybe I’m biased against McDonnell, anyways (just a little).

Whether or not McDonnell resigns today or rides out the remaining months of his term, his legacy won’t be the comprehensive transportation package, as he seemed to have wanted. It will be that of a promising politician in the Republican Party who lost his way amid the free watches, vacation home stays, sports car rides, and who knows what else. Thanks, Bob, for the important lesson you have taught all Virginians!

Gov. Bob McDonnell continues cronyism with business selections to public university boards

What could be a silent coup of sorts, and an incredibly hushed over addendum to Gov. Bob McDonnell’s intimate ties with business leaders in the state, Virginia’s governor appointed several business leaders from Northern Virginia (NOVA) to public university school boards from which some of them did not graduate.

Here’s a quick rundown of some of the NOVA business leaders that were named to various public university boards in the commonwealth. CEO of Lead LLC, Byron Cherry, was appointed to the Norfolk State University board. Loudoun County’s commissioner of revenue, Robert S. Wertz Jr., will be joined by Thompson Reuters Corp. program manager, Stephen L. Mobley, on Longwood University’s school board. Microsoft Corp.’s Washington, D.C.-based vice president of U.S. government affairs, Frederick S. Humpries Jr., will join the board of Virginia State University.

In the minds of conservatives like Bob McDonnell, public-funded institutions like public universities need a good shot of the private-sector ‘innovative spirit’ and cost-benefit analyses which place profit-making goals and objectives above all other considerations. What better way to infuse public universities with these guiding philosophies than placing successful private-sector leaders on their boards?

The attempt to turn public universities into self-sustaining, profit-generating, institutions is not a wholly undesirable objective, but it’s also not without its pitfalls. While public institutions have become more aware of, and sensitive to, the need to turn as many academic programs as possible into revenue-generators, some academic programs like English, History, and other Humanities and Liberal Arts disciplines are at an inherent disadvantage in a period in history when engineering and technological breakthroughs are largely valued higher than knowledge of The Canterbury Tales. Would you rather pay a million dollars for scholarly research into the cultural context surrounding The Canterbury Tales or a new, and potentially paradigm-shifting, engineering wing at your preferred university?

As someone who has straddled the ‘hard’ and ‘soft’ sciences, I tend to sympathize with both sides of this argument. Ultimately, however, the need to preserve and protect the Humanities and Liberal Arts is more important than hindering them with the constant need to turn a profit. 

Dominion Virginia Power would like you to pay for another power plant that Virginia doesn’t need

Dominion Virginia Power would like to build another power plant in Brunswick County that will allegedly save Virginians money over its “expected life” while reducing the quality of living over the course of the “expected lives” of several generations who have been forced to live with more dirty fossil fuel sources of energy (this last half is my own assessment!).

In its unshaking thoughtfulness for its ‘customers’, Dominion Virginia Power has proposed building a $1.3 billion, 1,358-megawatt, gas-fired power plant close to a town called Lawrenceville in Brunswick County, Virginia. In making a case for its construction, Dominion is arguing that the new gas-fired power plant will save customers almost $1 billion over the projected life of the power plant relative to the “next best alternative.”

The alleged demand for more generating capacity would be met with this new plant, according to Dominion. But an State Corporation Commission (SCC) Hearing Examiner, A. Ann Berkebile, didn’t agree with Dominion’s assessment, and coming from anyone inside a historically Dominion-friendly agency like the SCC, the Hearing Examiner’s conclusion was all the more powerful.

“The company’s decision not to affirmatively explore actual, third-party alternatives to the Brunswick Plant — sufficient to meet its expected capacity deficiency — calls into question the necessity and prudence of the Brunswick Plant,” explained A. Ann Berkebile.

According to the Richmond Times Dispatch, Berkebile suggested that the SCC reject Dominions’ application for a new plant “without prejudice” and direct the company to refile its application if Dominion Virginia Power evaluates “actual third-party market alternatives” and finds that the Brunswick plant is the best option for ratepayers. That would mean Dominion would have to actually try to look at other options beyond building more power plants inside of the commonwealth.

While that portion of the SCC’s ruling was a victory for Virginians unwilling to see an unnecessary power plant built in our state, the Virginia chapter of the Sierra Club was critical of another segment of the SCC’s ruling.

According to the Virginia director of the Sierra Club, Glen Besa, “The hearing examiner still accepted Dominion’s inflated electricity demand projections and rejects energy efficiency as a means of reducing the need for a new gas plant. Unfortunately, the SCC still holds efficiency to a higher standard than investments in polluting fossil fuels.” In other words, the SCC has sipped the kool-aid mixed by companies like Dominion Virginia Power that overwhelmingly looks for short-term profits over long-term economic, environmental, and human-health gains.

I’m glad that Virginia has agencies looking out for our future (my tongue is squarely in my cheek).

Del. Bob Marshall proposes new legislation that would curb potential for undisclosed political gifts

According to Virginia’s own ‘Uncle’ Bob Marshall, you know the uncle that everyone wishes wouldn’t show up to the family reunion, he will introduce a bill during the next session of the General Assembly requiring adult family members of elected officials and “certain state employees” to report any gift $100 or above from anyone who conducts business with the Commonwealth of Virginia.

The Virginian-Pilot also reports that this bill’s language would apply to legal dependants, spouses, and/or other relatives sharing a home with the respective elected official. Pile on to this the added requirement that gifts made by anyone who conducts business with the state within 12 months of the giving must be disclosed and you have what sounds like a pretty good idea for legislation that will help minimize the potential for purchased political influence and corruption.

It’s rare that Del. Marshall speaks reasonably, so allow me to quote him at length regarding his proposal to make political gifts more transparent: "We need a starting point for serious and prudent discussion that allows the legislature and other state officials to discharge their duties without causing any public concern that decisions or policies adopted by the legislature or actions taken by the Executive are made for any reason other than securing the common good.”

Aside from his stated objective, Marshall’s legislative proposal may also serve as an umbrella for Virginia’s embattled governor to hide under as he attempts to withstand the continuing revelations of inappropriate and unethical political gifts he’s received from one individual in particular. More broadly, Marshall’s legislative proposal could also be aimed at protecting the Republican Party brand from further allegations of elitism and corporate kowtowing. By proposing this kind of legislation, Marshall and the Republican Party can deflect some of the criticisms that are implicit in the criticisms of Gov. McDonnell and Virginia Attorney General, Ken Cuccinelli, both Republicans.

Full disclosure: I cannot hide my glee that the individual who proposed flying unmanned aerial drones through Virginia’s skies (among other incredibly bad ideas) is under the political gun for acting in a manner unbefitting his office. It appears that one of the loudest proponents of highly invasive law enforcement tactics  isn’t too quick to apply the same rule of law to himself. Oh, the irony!

Fairfax Senator Chap Petersen calls on Gov. Bob McDonnell to give back gifts or resign his office

It was only a matter of time before someone in the Virginia Democratic Party called for Virginia’s embattled governor’s resignation and Sen. Chap Petersen (D-Fairfax City and Fairfax County) did just that. Sen. Petersen sent a letter to Gov. Bob McDonnell  “urging” the governor return the numerous gifts he and his family have received or formally submit his resignation.

Sen. Petersen also asked that Gov. McDonnell “come clean” with the public regarding the extensive list of gifts McDonnell and his family have received while a public servant in the Executive Mansion.

Surprisingly, Sen. Petersen is the first actively serving member of the Virginia General Assembly to call on 

Gov. McDonnell to resign his office if he doesn’t return the gifts he’s received, at the very least. While I can only speculate, the reason may be that members of the Democratic Party do not want to avert their attention away from the Republican Party challenger for governor, Ken Cuccinelli, who has also received political gifts from the scandalous CEO of Star Scientific, Jonnie Williams Sr.

Members of the Virginia Republican Party have also called on Gov. McDonnell to throw in the towel as governor.

Part of Petersen’s letter to the governor reads, "If those gifts are retail consumer items which you have retained for personal use, then you should return them immediately to the donor or sell them and donate the money to the Literary Fund. That is the only method by which the public can regain trust in your Office. Without that trust, there is no purpose in continuing to serve."

While Virginia law only requires elected officials to report gifts valued greater than $50 (and the families of elected officials don’t have to report their gifts at all, regardless of monetary value), the appropriateness of the law should be discussed and potentially amended.

Virginia law shouldn’t completely close the door on political gifts of any kind, but Virginia’s legislators and concerned citizens should at least have a discussion about how Virginia’s law pertaining to political gifts can be restructured to minimize the potential for political influence and corruption.

Regardless of whether McDonnell returns the gifts given to him, however, the Governor of Virginia has been sullied as a democratic office in Virginia, and this time the issue of partisanship needs to take a backseat to the more important issue of maintaining the integrity of Virginia’s elected offices.

Gov. McDonnell should resign, though, because if he is not a good enough judge to resist so many gifts from a single donor, then his overall judgment must be put into doubt and subsequently, his ability to carry out the duties of governor as befits his high office. 

Virginia Sen. Mark Herring calls on Cuccinelli to take up McAuliffe’s proposal to ban political gifts

Virginia Senator and current Democratic Party candidate for Virginia Attorney General, Mark Herring, forcefully requested that Virginia’s current attorney general, Ken Cuccinelli, take up Terry McAuliffe’s modest proposal: a ban on political gifts.

In light of the continuing allegations about Governor Bob McDonnell’s political ‘gifts’ from well-funded donors and the basic sense it makes to funnel the potential for corruption out of Virginia’s political system, Terry McAuliffe’s plan to ban political gifts is so logical that it pains me to even have to promote it as a worthwhile idea.

When McAuliffe announced his plan to ban political gifts in April, he also stated that he would apply the ban to himself and his family immediately as governor in order to regain the integrity that Virginia’s top executive position has recently lost.

McAuliffe’s Republican Party challenger for governor, Ken Cuccinelli, has not however commented on his intentions (or lack thereof) to ban political gifts were he to be elected Virginia’s next governor. Unless the political heat turns up on Cuccinelli and his embattled political friend, Bob McDonnell, Virginia’s attorney general is unlikely to give his position on a political gift ban.

Were Cuccinelli to favor a ban on political gifts by the governor and his/her family, he would implicitly be throwing the current governor under the bus, so to speak, for being less than ethical in his political gift taking behaviors. Lest we forget, Cuccinelli has also “forgotten” to report political gifts made by Star Scientific. 

Who knows what else Cuccinelli and McDonnell have forgotten to disclose to the people of Virginia?

If Cuccinelli does not favor a ban on political gifts by the governor and his/her family, then the people of Virginia would see more clearly how corrupt Cuccinelli and the Republican Party political machine in Virginia truly are.

For Sen. Mark Herring, pledging to apply the ban on political gifts to himself would help "restore pragmatism and responsibility" to the Attorney General's office. Such a move would also, hopefully, help return the power of government to the middle and working class people of Virginia, not the CEO’s of Virginia and their socioeconomic equivalents. 

Virginia Commonwealth Uni. gets grant to study ADHD but deeper questions remain for society

Virginia Commonwealth University (VCU) received a $2.4 million grant from the Institute of Education Sciences (IES) to research ways of improving the academic performance of middle school students with a so-called disorder that has become ubiquitous in U.S. society, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD).

According to VCU officials, the four-year grant will be used to compare two different school-based interventions to assist students with ADHD. According to the Richmond Times Dispatch, “One helps them learn how to organize their materials, plan ahead and manage time effectively. The other helps them stay on task and focused, and to complete homework more efficiently.”

It strikes me as a serious flaw to orient studies regarding ADHD around “improving” students of any age who have already been branded with the label of ADHD. Instead, more money should be going towards understanding why the rates of ADHD have risen to 8.4 percent of children in the U.S. aged between 4-17. 

Some reports have set this figure as high as 11 percent, and some even higher. If we knew nothing else, the fact that children aged 4-17 diagnosed with ADHD has increased 16 percent since 2007 should propel us towards an emotion bordering on outrage.

It’s  not a secret that ‘Big Pharma’ has and is targeting children for their multi-billion dollar ADHD prescription medications, fanning, if not igniting, the flames that have fueled the jaw-dropping increase in ADHD prescription medications. Thus, it’s not so much that big pharmaceutical companies are making windfall profits, it’s the aggressive tactics that big pharmaceutical companies selling ADHD medications have used to build those tremendous profits, hooking millions of America’s children onto a medical train that may cause more harm than good, may never come to a stop, and may not even be necessary.

VCU may well use its newly gifted grant money to help scores of children branded with the label of ADHD. But amid the talk about helping these “disordered” children, we shouldn’t forget about some of the deeper questions like, why has the designation of ADHD mushroomed so dramatically over the course of the 21^st Century? Why do so many doctors recommend prescription medications as a first resort to symptoms of ADHD as opposed to, say, exercise?

If we wish to be a truly free society, one aspect we’ll have to deal with is the increasingly medicated country that we live in. Can we ever really be free if we are taught, from children to adults, that self-control, responsibility, and social acceptance can only be gained by ‘the pill’? I think you already know my answer.