Senator Tim Kaine continues his focus on War Powers Resolution and spelling out responsibilities

U.S. Senator Tim Kaine (Virginia) intends on making a speech on Tuesday regarding the War Powers Resolution at the University of Virginia’s Frank Batten School of Leadership and Public Policy. By Tuesday, however, the U.S. could already be conducting offensive military actions in the civil-war torn country of Syria without the approval of the U.S. Congress.

On this point, the American people have clearly spoken, according to a recent NBC poll. Close to 80 percent of Americans believe that President Barack Obama should seek and receive approval from the U.S. Congress before military actions are taken in Syria.

The fact that a poll was carried out on whether or not the president should seek congressional approval for military actions abroad is the main impetus behind Sen. Kaine’s focus on the War Powers Resolution. In July of this year, Sen. Kaine publicly stated his intentions to reform the 1973 Resolution that includes a clear articulation of the consultative procedures that the U.S. Congress and the president shall take regarding the details of military action.

More recently, Sen. Kaine has called on President Obama to consult with the U.S. Congress before taking military action in Syria. So far, President Obama’s willingness to do so has appeared reluctant, at best.

Regardless of whether or not you agree with U.S. military action in Syria, it is clear that the 1973 War Powers Resolution has become as ineffective at checking the war fighting powers of the president as federal law prohibiting the use of marijuana. And in light of the recent developments in Syria and the Obama administration’s response to these developments, the War Powers Resolution is due for a much needed makeover.  

The argument against President Obama’s continued disregard of congressional approval for military actions abroad is simple and straight-forward: in our country, no single individual or office should have the ability to send thousands of troops into combat or spend upwards of billions of dollars on a war effort that has not been authorized by the congress.

While the Obama administration may have the best of intentions in pursuing military action in Syria, it is beside the basic point that military action is not under the control of one branch of government in non-emergency situations such as the conflict in Syria (the bombing at Pearl Harbor in 1941 or the September 11 terrorist attacks could be considered examples of emergency situations).

I hope Sen. Kaine will continue to press this president, and presidents to come, to abide by the War Powers Resolution in every way that is practical. It is my hope that the president will reaffirm his respect for the balance of powers and congressional authority in wartime actions by seeking the approval of the U.S. Congress before pursuing military action in Syria.

Bob McDonnell’s attorneys argue that his wife kept the governor in the dark about Star’s gifts

In the latest news coming out of the Bob McDonnell camp, attorneys for Virginia’s governor met with federal prosecutors to plead their case for not pressing charges in connection with ‘gift gate’ between Star Scientifics’ CEO and Bob McDonnell. In particular, federal officials have been looking into whether or not Gov. McDonnell took official actions as governor to help Star Scientific while its CEO gave over a hundred-thousand dollars worth of money and gifts.

The meeting between federal prosecutors and Gov. McDonnell’s attorneys has been called a “critical phase in the investigation” because the discussions that take place could be the difference between files being charged or dropped against the governor.  

According to the Washington Post, the governor’s attorneys argued that the governor’s wife, Maureen McDonnell, accepted Star Scientifics’ gifts without the upfront knowledge of Bob McDonnell. If so, his attorneys argue, Bob McDonnell couldn’t have been influenced by enormous gifts that he didn’t immediately know about.

Unfortunately for the governor, Jonnie Williams, the CEO of Star Scientific who forked over the gifts and money, has contradicted the argument that Bob McDonnell was in the dark about Mr. Williams’ largesse. In fact, Williams has argued that he and the governor discussed ways that McDonnell and the state of Virginia could “gain prestige and scientific endorsements for its [Star Scientific] new anti-inflammatory supplement.” In other words, ‘gift gate’ won’t be going away anytime soon.

While Bob McDonnell’s “gifts” case continues to be front and center in the public’s mind, there is no better time to reform Virginia’s lax laws for political gift giving; clearly, there is a gap between preserving public confidence and serving the people of Virginia and the ability of wealthy individuals, groups, or companies to disproportionately influence politics in the commonwealth.

Bob McDonnell may be the most prominent example of political corruption (even though we’ll assume his innocence for now!), but he is far from the only one. Witness Ken Cuccinelli, who may not have been given as much by Jonnie Williams, but who nonetheless may have transgressed the law he is supposed to uphold and protect.  

It simply can’t be argued that large ‘gifts’ don’t and can’t buy political favors. If they didn’t, then political gifts wouldn’t be given, at least not in the thousands of dollars. It’s clear that if Virginia doesn’t reform its political gift laws, it’s only a matter of time before another ‘gift gate’ erupts and further undermines the confidence of Virginian’s in their elected representatives. 

Cuccinelli gets ruffled in Roanoke over question related to his campaign donations from Big Energy

In today’s spend-heavy era of American politics, it’s admittedly difficult for political candidates to fund their campaigns and their hopes for elected office without reaching far and wide for political handouts. Perhaps now more than ever the question becomes, is it appropriate for a political candidate to take money from groups or individuals that have diametrically opposed interests to at least a segment of the potential or actual constituency of the said candidate?

For Virginia’s attorney general, and Republican Party candidate for Virginia governor, Ken Cuccinelli, the answer has unequivocally been, “Yes, I’ll take campaign donations just about anyone who offers it.” And so the plot thickens.

When asked by an attendee of Cuccinelli’s campaign stop at the Hotel Roanoke on Friday whether or not he felt it was acceptable to take campaign donations from Consol, Virginia’s attorney general responded, “Well I need a lot more donations. My opponent is outspending me like 2:1.” In other words, Cuccinelli’s argument is that he’s in this ‘contest’ to win, not to necessarily worry about the ethical implications of his behaviors.

Never one to shy away from pointing the finger or casting blame, Cuccinelli went on to lament the intense focus voters have had over Cuccinelli’s ruling in the mineral rights royalties case that sent a bill passed without opposition in the General Assembly into the dustbin of legislative history, a bill that would have sped up mineral royalty payments to Virginia landowners.

According to The Roanoke Times, “Cuccinelli’s office later intervened to support energy companies in court when landowners, frustrated by the failure of the bill to free up royalties, started suing for their royalties.” Indeed, it’s a complete mystery as to why this issue has received so much attention!

What Cuccinelli essentially did was repudiate the will of the people (i.e., the Virginia General Assembly) to the clear advantage of energy companies seeking to extract more energy from Virginia’s landowners without royalty payments. And this, too, from a candidate who has attempted to brand himself as a ‘man of the people’.

The problem with Cuccinelli is not so much that he is an extremist (although this is certainly an issue). The problem with Cuccinelli is that he can’t be trusted to properly represent the interests of Virginians. As Cuccinelli hinted at in the quote above, the end is the most important outcome of his campaign, not the means. But it is the means which define a political candidate while they are in office, whether they will be beholden to parochial and adverse special interests, or whether they will be true representatives of the people who elected them into office.

The Cuccinelli’s of the political world will never understand this: what you do to get into office is just as important as what you do while in office. This, among many reasons, is why Cuccinelli doesn’t deserve to be Virginia’s next governor. 

Virginia Energy Resources misleads about Coles Hill Project Value on its Website

While Virginia Uranium Inc.’s (VUI) Project Manager, Patrick Wales, has talked about VUI’s dedication to uranium mining safety, its parent company, Virginia Energy Resources Inc. can’t even differentiate between “indicated resources” and “mineral reserves” in technical disclosures released on its website. This is especially odd given the significance of its ‘mistakes’.

One source found the following: “The Company [VUI] filed a technical report dated September 6, 2012 titled "NI 43-101 Preliminary Economic Assessment Update, Coles Hill Uranium Property, Pittsylvania County, Virginia, United States of America" by Lyntek Inc. and BRS Engineering "in support of a listing application dated August 31, 2012. The technical report did not comply with the requirements of NI 43-101 and Form 43-101F1 because it incorrectly included wording that "the preliminary economic assessment...indicates that the portion of the [indicated] mineral resource...is economic under current conditions" (Indicated resources are simply economic mineral occurrences that have been sampled from locations such as outcrops, trenches, pits and drillholes to a point where an estimate has been made, at a reasonable level of confidence, of their contained metal, grade, tonnage, shape, densities, physical characteristics.).”

The source goes on to state, “With respect to the Company's disclosure of the Coles Hill PEA on its website and corporate presentations, the economic analysis appears unbalanced because the Company discloses upside uranium price sensitivity without providing equal downside sensitivity.”

The point is that if Virginia Energy Resources cannot be forthright with its investors and potential investors about the economic opportunities the Coles Hill uranium deposit holds, Virginians in particular should be weary of claims made by any company affiliated with Virginia Energy Resources, including VUI.

A company’s integrity is measured by the sum of its parts. If one part of a company, in this case a parent company, willfully lies to its investors, it creates the perception that the company in question has a business culture that doesn’t respect, much less care about, the truth. More often than not, if one part of a company demonstrates improper business practices, it can be found throughout its daughter, sister and/or parent companies as well.

What Virginia Energy Resources demonstrated by its informational “inaccuracies” is its willingness to put profits above facts, the truth, and not inconceivably, the safety of its business practices in order to turn a greater profit. So why should Virginians trust that its daughter company, VUI, wouldn’t do the same to protect and enhance its profits?

The reason why I oppose uranium mining in Virginia goes beyond the fact that an ‘incident’ could have irrevocable harm on Virginia’s environment and the people living in that environment; it also has to do with the motives of those who would be performing the mining. In the case of VUI, its motives and that of its parent company are clear: profits over people and profits over truth. 

A free market symbol: Tesla Motors continues to fight for its right to deal its automobiles in VA

In the supposedly free-market capitalist haven known as Virginia, free competition is supposed to be alive and well, except if you run up against powerful and embedded special interests. Such is the case with Tesla Motors, the automobile manufacturer and dealer who has quietly (or not so quietly for car enthusiasts) revolutionized electrically motorized vehicles.

In April, Tesla Motors’ request to open a dealership in Virginia was turned down by the state Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV). According to Virginia law, auto makers are prohibited from being auto dealers in the state. However, 14 exceptions have been made to the law for manufacturers of specialty trailers, trucks, and motorcycles since 1998. A Tesla automobile could certainly be categorized as a “specialty” vehicle.

The DMV’s ruling against Tesla Motors was also made despite two recommendations that Tesla be allowed to open a dealership in Virginia under a legal exception when no dealers are available to sell its product. So much for the legal argument made for keeping Telsa Motors from selling its automobiles in Virginia.

A more insidious argument has been made by the Virginia Automobile Dealers Association (VADA), a special interest group for “franchised new car and truck dealers in the Commonwealth of Virginia,” or car and truck dealers who stand to lose business if Tesla Motors gains a foothold in the state.

According to VADA’s president, Don Hall, the association doesn’t oppose Tesla’s entry into Virginia’s family of dealerships, "I just want to make sure we don't overlook protections because of the excitement of something new." In polita-speak, VADA wants to put up clever barriers to Tesla’s entry into Virginia’s automobile market.

While VADA’s president claims that it is open to the idea of allowing Tesla Motor’s sell its automobiles in Virginia, it would seem counterintuitive since some, if not all, of VADA’s members stand to lose due to Tesla’s entry. Put another way, Mr. Hall is, in all likelihood, lying through his teeth.

Tesla Motors represents more than just a dealer and manufacturer of “high performance” electric vehicles, Tesla represents the lingering spirit of revolutionizing automobile innovation that auto manufacturers in the U.S. have long since abandoned. If Virginia fails to embrace companies like Tesla, either now or in the future, the state will undermine its image as a haven of free market capitalism. Instead, Virginia may well become a special interest manhole where the concept of innovation is just another chapter in Virginia’s history books.

Terry McAuliffe lays out his refreshing support for the environment during his recent trip to Norfolk

Democratic Party candidate for Virginia governor, Terry McAuliffe, “unveiled” a number of environmental pledges during a campaign stop in Norfolk at a fresh-fish wholesaler, George’s Seafood.

According to McAuliffe, “We need to make sure we’re doing smart policies so that our watermen and fishermen can thrive and be prosperous.” But in the growing drama that is our planets increasing warming, America’s coastal cities, and their aquatic-based businesses, may not be around much longer for fishermen (and women) to “thrive” like this generation and previous generations have.

The science behind these stark conclusions are as rigorous as it gets, unlike the pseudo-science that allows 

McAuliffe’s gubernatorial opponent to stand atop the shores of ignorance while the waves build up around his dishonest rhetoric. Unfortunately, the science telling us that our coastal cities are in danger is all too real.

This is why Mr. McAuliffe visited Norfolk to deliver his “environmental platform,” because he understands what’s at stake if Virginia doesn’t get serious about treating the environment like we would one another as fellow human beings (i.e., with respect).

Among the many environmental policies McAuliffe has openly supported, here are a few:

- Continue the moratorium on uranium mining in Virginia;

- Direct the Department of Environmental Quality to work with localities and businesses to implement plans aimed at regulating the flow of pollutants into the Chesapeake Bay and its tributaries;

- Create a climate change adaptation commission – a bipartisan group of scientists, policymakers, conservationists and industry representatives – to develop a comprehensive plan to protect coastal communities from rising sea levels;

- Oppose horizontal drilling in the George Washington National Forest;

- Preserve at least 400,000 acres of open space over four years; and

- Protect the land preservation tax credit, which offers tax write-offs for preserving Virginia’s agricultural, forested, historic and scenic open spaces.

Indeed, unless you are violently opposed to environmental health (and by extension, human health), Terry McAuliffe is the candidate for governor you should be rooting for this November. Unlike his opponent, McAuliffe believes the environment is something worth preserving, and with it, the opportunity for a truly prosperous life. 

Bob McDonnell’s “Please forget about my highly unethical behavior” tour is a joke

Governor Bob McDonnell probably made Pinocchio blush after he claimed that his “This Commonwealth of Opportunity” tour was not about repairing his image. Instead, McDonnell claimed "I do this every year. It's good to get out of Richmond to tell people around the state what we are doing in Richmond, things they might not know, things that can help them locally." Not everyone agrees, however, with McDonnell’s half-baked defense, including myself.

Mark Rozell, a political analyst at George Mason University, concluded, "It's more of a redemption or rehabilitation tour I think, trying to reset his public persona in a sense to get people not to focus on the investigation and all of the scandal surrounding him but actually to think differently about him and his governorship.”

For anyone who has an idea about the calculated moves that define the world of politics, it’s apparent that McDonnell’s “Look at all of the great things I’ve done for Virginia” tour is little else besides a mirror to reflect the mountain of negative publicity McDonnell has received over the past few months.

This tour, and his response to critics, has only served to reinforce what many reasonable Virginians have long since concluded: McDonnell is as concerned about the people of Virginia as MC Hammer is worried about his bank account. That is, McDonnell’s time in public office has not been so much about serving the people of Virginia, it’s been about serving McDonnell’s expensive tastes for goods and political power.

The greatest tragedy in this ongoing drama is that Virginians have to watch as a lame-duck governor flounders into the abyss of political history without the slightest degree of sincere remorse for the unethical actions he participated in.

One positive from McDonnell’s continuing presence in Virginia’s Executive Mansion is that every day he 

remains in public office is another day Virginians are reminded of the gift triangle that occurred between Ken Cuccinelli, McDonnell, and Star Scientifics’ CEO. Looked at in this light, McDonnell’s presence is a god-send!