Benefit of the doubt: The Virginian-Pilot reluctantly endorses Terry McAuliffe for governor

While The Virginian-Pilot isn’t the biggest power broker in Virginia politics, its recent endorsement of Democratic Party candidate for governor, Terry McAuliffe, represents an important stepping stone for the one-time Democratic Party fundraising wizard. Although McAuliffe continues to hold a comfortable lead in the public opinion polls over his Republican Party challenger, Ken Cuccinelli, political commentators and mainstream news media outlets have been shy about throwing their support behind one of these men (or Robert Sarvis).

The difficulty McAuliffe has had getting traction among Virginia’s ‘elite’ political commentators was directly reflected in the Pilot’s unflattering endorsement of McAuliffe for Virginia governor.  The following unabridged quote comes from Sunday’s endorsement of McAuliffe: “Like his opponents, he supports drilling for oil and gas off Virginia's coast, a position that needlessly risks two of this region's biggest economic engines: the military and tourism. He is saddled with baggage after decades as a fundraiser in national party politics, as a businessman whose political and financial interests frequently intertwine and as someone whose connections to powerful figures have proven as much a liability as an asset.” This kind of endorsement probably wasn’t what McAuliffe had in mind.

The endorsement also demonstrates the wholly undesirable prospect of a Cuccinelli tenure as governor of Virginia. Among the many oddities of Cuccinelli and his campaign for governor is the tension between his libertarian rhetoric and his deeply conservative social views. On the one hand, Cuccinelli claims that less government is good government, while holding firm to the idea of government as a tool to implement what the attorney general sees as desirable social goals. Clearly, then, Cuccinelli is no libertarian who favors a less active government, at least in social policy.

While Mr. McAuliffe may not be the perfect candidate for Virginia governor, he is the best candidate that Virginian’s have to choose from, and no one can say for sure whether or not McAuliffe will be a boon or a bane in Virginia’s Executive Mansion. After the McDonnell/Cuccinelli era, however, I’m more than willing to give McAuliffe the benefit of the doubt. So too, it seems, is The Virginian-Pilot. 

Bob McDonnell’s legal fees approaching absurd as Virginia’s taxpayers continue to foot the bill

As Gov. Bob McDonnell’s tax-payer funded legal fees continue to add up, the reasons why McDonnell should resign from office grow in parallel fashion. Over the month of June alone, McDonnell’s team of private attorneys racked up a $90,068 bill, bringing the total McDonnell welfare costs to $143,500.

The private attorneys were hired by Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli in April to “assist” the governor in the embezzlement case McDonnell has been embroiled in with his former chef. While Cuccinelli wisely decided that defending McDonnell would present a conflict of interest, he certainly spared no expense finding McDonnell some of the highest priced lawyers in the state. The so-called conservatives Cuccinelli and McDonnell apparently have no trouble throwing away the taxpayers’ money.

For McDonnell’s former chef, Todd Schneider, vindication may be soon at hand as his claims that McDonnell and family received gifts from Star Scientific’s CEO, Jonnie R. Williams Sr., appear to be a smoking gun at this point.

For Virginia’s taxpayers and voters, more generally, vindication may not be so readily at hand. It isn’t likely that the ‘McDonnell tab’ will be stopped anytime soon and what is spent on McDonnell and his all-star team of lawyers won’t be reimbursed unless McDonnell finds a few more wealthy friends and a giving spirit.

Ultimately, it is the trust that McDonnell stole which is the biggest disappointment. In our age of cynicism, it’s difficult for a lot of Virginians to believe in the honesty and integrity of their elected representatives, and McDonnell is a perfect example of why.

I recall vividly the image that McDonnell attempted to paint of himself as a practical conservative with a strong emphasis on integrity and family values, and so forth. Wouldn't you know it, McDonnell appears to be the exact opposite of the image he attempted to project of himself.

In the end, I really have one question for McDonnell: was it really worth it?  

Rep. Eric Cantor’s idea of tightening the budgetary purse is entering another conflict in Syria

As America prepares for yet another conflict in the Middle East, U.S. Representative Eric Cantor (VA-7^th) has cast a crucial “aye” nod of support for the use of our military’s mighty war machine in Syria. After President Obama announced on Saturday that he would be putting the power of war squarely back into the court of the U.S. Congress, it was widely seen as a huge gamble that has turned out to be a huge victory so far for the president.

As the Richmond Times pointed out, however, not all of Virginia’s congressional representatives are pro-military conflict in Syria. Rep. J. Randy Forbes, (VA-4th), a member of the Armed Services Committee, stated he has “no intention of voting to authorize American intervention in Syria.”

Rep. Cantor’s “nay” show of support for military action in Syria could have spelled the death-knell for President Obama’s aspirations to severely weaken or topple President Bashar Assad’s regime in Syria. Instead, Rep. Cantor acquiesced, and I can only imagine that this means there is compelling evidence for Syria’s use of chemical weapons.

The primary argument for intervention has been, and continues to be, Syria’s alleged use of chemical weapons on its own citizens. The argument strikes me as odd because it implies that governments who kill their own people without chemical weapons are somehow off the hook in terms of U.S. military intervention. 

So if Regime A in East Asia decides to massacre a portion of its own population, does the U.S. military only intervene if and when chemical weapons are used?

The point is that the people of Syria’s suffering is a tragedy by anyone’s account. But what makes Syria any different than North Korea, the Chinese repression of Tibetan’s, or the Sudan, just to name a few repressive governments. At what point do we say enough people have been killed and/or repressed, and who is going to make that decision? Should the U.S. military intervene in all of these countries?

Lastly, who’s to say that U.S. military intervention won’t cause even more bloodshed in the short or long run? We have too often been led into military excursions by our political ‘leaders’ without a comprehensive game plan or understanding of the hornet’s nest we’re crawling into.

I am not for military intervention overseas in this context because ultimately, I don’t see many positive outcomes and the more we ‘go after bad guys’ in distant countries, the more we avert our gaze from domestic issues that we should be resolving. 

50 years after the March on Washington, its message may not be the most effective anymore

50 years after Martin Luther King headlined the “March on Washington,” America has made great strides in protecting and promoting equal rights for all of our country’s citizens. As the recent “March on Richmond” on September 2, 2013 demonstrated however, the reality of the past is still not forgotten, nor have all of the manifestations of America’s racial history been overcome.

Among the marchers on Monday was Democratic candidate for Lieutenant Governor, Senator Ralph Northam, a candidate who has consistently stood up for equal rights in Virginia. Sen. Northam’s challenger for Lieutenant Governor on the Republican side of the ticket is the controversial E.W. Jackson.

I’ve often heard that the battle for African-American equality is over, it was won long ago. I’ve seen enough with my own eyes, however, to know that this assertion isn’t true. From just about day one of America’s beginning, individuals of black skin were separated from ‘whites’ and marked as inferior peoples.  The legacy of this separation, and the policies and prejudices which informed it, linger on to our own present in a variety of subtle and not so subtle ways.

On the 50^th Anniversary of the March on Washington, the ultimate symbol of common humanity may be slipping alongside the latest Tweet of Miley Cyrus’ racey stage performance and the thousands of other marches that go on throughout the country every year for one cause or another.  The March on Washington was an historical event, but maybe it’s time for something new and historical to reignite the dream of those marchers in August 1963. 

Virginia’s Bob McDonnell touts ‘low’ gasoline prices in the commonwealth compared to the country

As Virginia’s governor, Bob McDonnell, claws his way through another day in office, he has been quick to point out some of his administrations perceived benefits for the state of Virginia, including Virginia’s comparatively low prices for gasoline.

According to a statement released from Gov. McDonnell’s office, “Gas prices are falling across the commonwealth, and that is good news for Virginians.” The implication that McDonnell is attempting to make in his statement is that his “signature” transportation funding law that passed in the 2013 General Assembly has reduced the price of gas for individuals across Virginia.

McDonnell added, “After nearly three decades of gridlock, we came together this year and passed a historic bipartisan transportation funding solution, which reduced the tax on gas, and now motorists are seeing the results at the pump.”

As with so much else related to McDonnell, outward appearances are deceiving. It is unclear if McDonnell’s proposal of transferring Virginia’s 17.5 cent-per-gallon tax to a 3.5 percent wholesale tax on gas is changing the price of this Jurassic commodity. What is clear is that while McDonnell continues to tout the supposedly low prices of gasoline in Virginia, per gallon prices for gas have quickly edged upwards over the past week.

In highlighting McDonnell’s transportation package, the ‘gov’ may be trying to accomplish a few objectives. First, putting a spotlight on McDonnell’s premier legislation may take Virginia’s mind off of (if only a little bit) the scandal collecting more steam around Gov. McDonnell.

Second, McDonnell may be using his remaining time in office to shape his own image as a successful bipartisan governor. While posterity should look upon McDonnell’s administration as an unequivocal failure in light of ‘gift-gate’, McDonnell is doing his utmost to ensure that he gets some of his own words and views put into the historical record.

Lastly, there is of course the possibility that McDonnell still thinks he has a political future and is operating with his next political office in mind. This is the year of political comebacks, right? For the sake of the governor’s remaining shred of integrity, I hope this isn’t the case.

The next few months will tell if McDonnell is a man desperately clutching for political straws or attempting to put back the pieces he can of his fractured ‘legacy’ before the final trumpet sounds on his time as governor of Virginia. 

Bob McDonnell must resign his post as governor of Virginia amid new evidence of his guilt

Virginia’s blue-eyed, unmanned aerial drone loving governor, Bob McDonnell, lost any justification for remaining in office after the most recent revelation that he knew about financial assistance and gifts provided by Jonnie R. Williams Sr., Star Scientifics’ CEO. Prior to this ‘discovery’, McDonnell’s defense lawyers argued to federal prosecutors that Virginia’s staggering governor had been “kept in the dark” about the gifts given to his family by Williams.

Now, however, Bob McDonnell has no room to defend himself on the grounds of ignorance regarding the gifts his family received from Star Scientifics’ CEO. The Washington Post gives one example: “McDonnell (R) was present at a charity auction in 2011 when the chief executive of Star Scientific, which makes a dietary supplement, successfully bid on a fashion tour of New York for the governor’s wife in front of a crowd of onlookers, witnesses said.”

With McDonnell’s most clever defense now in the gutter, it’s difficult to imagine how the governor can reason his way into staying on as Virginia’s chief executive. Not only would McDonnell’s resignation spare the people of Virginia any further embarrassment, it may also spare Bob McDonnell from some of the public scrutiny that will surely befall him if he remains Virginia’s governor. In other words, if McDonnell steps down as governor, he may take some of the spotlight away from the embarrassing details of his relationship with Jonnie Williams Sr.

Up till this point, the majority of both major political parties in Virginia have been cautious about calling for McDonnell’s resignation. There is, however, no further justification for not calling on McDonnell to resign. It is as clear now as it has ever been that Bob McDonnell took financial contributions and gifts in return for political favors (i.e., McDonnell broke the law and the integrity of his office).

So much for the positive legacy of Bob McDonnell. 

Virginia Uranium Inc. far outspends its peers on lobbying efforts over the past year

Virginia Uranium Inc. (VUI), like its pal in the Executive Mansion (i.e., Bob McDonnell), can’t seem to get much love from Virginia’s government given the huge amount of money the company spent on lobbying members of the General Assembly in 2013.

According to the Virginia Public Access Project, an independent compiler of political spending in Virginia, VUI not only spent more on lobbying than anyone else in Virginia, it did so without achieving its goal: lifting the moratorium on uranium mining.

Over the past year, VUI spent over $572,000 on lobbying efforts, nearly double the amount spent by Dominion Virginia Power, who spent $300,000. Altria came in at a respectable third place in total spending with $274,000.

VUI’s attempts to lift the moratorium are far from over, however. Virginian’s caught a glimpse of one arm of VUI’s continuing strategy to ‘win over’ Virginian’s and their elected representatives a few months ago.

It appears for now, VUI’s public relations campaign will aggressively attempt to polish its image and that of uranium mining to undermine arguments made by concerned Virginians regarding the acute and long-term consequences that uranium mining poses to Southside Virginians and Virginia as a whole.

The burden of proof is in VUI’s court, though. VUI has to convincingly show the people of Virginia that uranium mining can be safely performed in our wet climate over the short and long term, that Virginia will reap the majority of the energy resources stemming from the mining of uranium, and that the benefits of uranium mining outweigh the stigma of this radioactive process and material.

To date, VUI has contented itself with pointing to incomparable case studies, speculative assumptions, and analyses carried out by subsidized or friendly third-party groups and individuals to back its case for mining uranium in Virginia. Fortunately, a number of concerned Virginians have refused to settle for these unsatisfactory pieces of evidence.

For anyone who has ever doubted the ability of a David to overcome the political spending power of a Goliath, the people of Virginia once again defeated VUI in a contest that the latter thought it had won before the political struggle began. While the ‘struggle’ is far from over, Virginians should take heart from this newly released information.