From the Archives: Del. Rob Bell explains why property rights belong in the Va. Constitution

Del. Rob Bell explains why property rights belong in the Va. Constitution
February 7, 2011 10:02 AM MST

With a vote of 16 yeas to 2 nays, a proposed constitutional amendment introduced by Delegate Johnny Joannou (D-Portsmouth) passed the House Privileges and Elections Committee on Friday, February 4.

Under the proposal, statutory language passed in 2007 that protects property owners against eminent domain actions by overreaching state or local government would be inserted into the Bill of Rights of the Virginia Constitution.

Joannou’s proposed amendment was identical to another submitted by Delegate Rob Bell (R-Albemarle County), who stood by Joannou’s side at the committee meeting and offered his strong support, indicating that he will become a co-patron of the resolution, styled HJ 693.

After the committee’s vote, Delegate Bell spoke with the Charlottesville Libertarian Examiner about the importance of property rights, the process this resolution must undergo, and the value of having bipartisan support for the constitutional amendment.

‘Guardian of every other right’
Bell cited Arthur Lee, a Virginia representative to the Continental Congress and diplomat during the Revolutionary War, who said that “The Right of property is the guardian of every other Right, and to deprive the people of this, is in fact to deprive them of their Liberty.”

In other words, he said, protection of private property “undergirds all the other rights. Without it you don’t have any.”

The reason Bell and Joannou have proposed enshrining the 2007 statute into the state constitution is that a simple law passed by the General Assembly can be eroded or easily repealed.

“It’s like all constitutional protections,” said Bell. “It’s not to protect the majority, it’s to protect the minority. Specifically, it’s to protect a Susette Kelo, who was doing nothing wrong and who didn’t have a blighted house,” but the city of New London said it wanted to take her house and give it to a private entity.

Result of the Kelo decision
“That’s what the Fifth Amendment’s supposed to protect and it doesn’t any longer,” Bell explained, at least since the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2005 Kelo ruling.

Bell, a lawyer, went on to explain that “the Kelo decision leaves to the states the ability to impose protections through statute or constitution.”

Virginia passed a statute in 2007, he noted, “and our statute is good. It’s just that it’s always reversible or changeable or a statute can be nibbled at. Putting it in the constitution will stop that.”

Mainstream, not extreme
Bell said that his support of individual property rights is not, as some opponents have alleged, an extremist view. Instead, he said, “I have no doubt that this is the mainstream position.”

He pointed out that, when citizens are faced with an eminent domain claim against their property, “on the individual project level, there will always be a reason why the legislature, supervisors, [or] government will say, ‘We agree with [the principle] generally, but on this one we’ve got an especially good reason not to comply with the property rights protections of the individual.’

“Unfortunately, if you do that every time, obviously you’ve nibbled away until there’s nothing left.”

Now that the House P&E Committee has approved the resolution, it goes to the full House of Delegates for consideration. Passage by the House is expected – similar resolutions have passed in 2007 and 2009 – and then it goes to the state Senate, which Bell describes as having been “stumbling block” in past years.

If the Senate passes HJ 693, however, both chambers must pass an identical resolution next year, and then it will be presented to the voters as a referendum in the November 2012 election. Should a majority of voters approve it, the language will become part of Section 11 of the Virginia Constitution’s Bill of Rights.


Publisher's note: This article was originally published on Examiner.com on February 7, 2011. The Examiner.com publishing platform was discontinued July 1, 2016, and its web site went dark on or about July 10, 2016.  I am republishing this piece in an effort to preserve it and all my other contributions to Examiner.com since April 6, 2010. It is reposted here without most of the internal links that were in the original.

From the Archives: 3 Virginia legislators explain their votes against gay judge candidate

3 Virginia legislators explain their votes against gay judge candidate
May 20, 2012 3:52 PM MST

In separate interviews at the Fifth Congressional District Republican Convention on May 19, three members of the Virginia House of Delegates offered virtually identical explanations for their votes to reject openly-gay prosecutor Tracy Thorne-Begland’s nomination to be a General District Court judge.

The rejection of Thorne-Begland made national headlines last week after a post-midnight roll call failed to return the 51 votes needed to approve his election as a judge who presides over traffic citations, minor crimes, and small claims. (In other states, the occupant of such a bench might be known as a magistrate or justice of the peace.)

None of the three, interviewed by the Charlottesville Libertarian Examiner on the grounds of Hampden-Sydney College near Farmville, mentioned the fact that Thorne-Begland is gay or that he is married to a same-sex partner. All said their vote was about Thorne-Begland's political activities during his tenure as an officer in the U.S. Navy.


‘Contrary to the oath’

Delegate Rob Bell, who represents a district near Charlottesville, said that he voted “no” on the Thorne-Begland nomination.

Bell explained that he “thought the actions [Thorne-Begland] took while an active-duty military officer were contrary to the oath of office and the Military Code of Justice and I thought the actions he took thereby meant that I did not think he would be a good judge for Virginia.”

Delegate Danny Marshall represents the city of Danville and parts of Pittsylvania and Henry counties. He also voted to block Thorne-Begland’s election.

“I’m glad you asked why,” he said.

Noting that he is not a military veteran himself, Marshall said he listened “to the passion” of fellow legislators with military backgrounds.

‘Political agenda’
“When you go into the service,” he said the veterans explained to him, “you raise your right hand and say you will not use that uniform as a sounding board for any of your political agenda. He did that. He [wasn’t] supposed to do that. My concern was, if he’s already done something that he said he would not do, would he use that court to move his political agenda forward? That’s what I was worried about.”

Pointing out that he is not a lawyer, Marshall continued, “judges call balls and strikes. We as the General Assembly -- we set the laws. They don’t set the laws; they don’t set the agenda. We set the agenda and let them call balls and strikes. That’s my worry -- that he would do more than call balls and strikes.”

Asked about the election of two former members of the General Assembly, Clay Athey and Bud Phillips, as judges the same day that Thorne-Begland was rejected, Marshall argued there was a difference in the kinds of political activism in the three cases.

“We vote on 3,000 or so bills each year in the General Assembly,” he said, but the two former legislators did not have one issue that motivated them.

“Clay Athey or Bud Phillips did not have one issue they were worried [about]. Again, it’s 3,000 bills or so each year, so they didn’t have that animal rights issue or whatever issue, they did not have a single issue. This gentleman had a single issue” in his background, Marshall said.


‘Certainly qualified’
Delegate Marshall conceded that, “if you looked at his résumé, he was certainly qualified to do the job. I listened to the other lawyers in Richmond [and] he’s done a heck of a job in prosecuting people” in the city of Richmond.

“I was torn with this. From that side, he’s got the skills to do the job. My worry is,” he asked, “would he use being a judge to be an activist judge?”

Delegate Charles Poindexter, now in his third term, represents parts of Franklin and Henry counties and all of Patrick County. He also voted no on the Thorne-Begland nomination.


‘Pure, poor judgment’

He explained that “the gentleman took an oath when he entered the United States military to uphold the constitution and all the regulations and rules of the United States military. He did not do that. He broke that oath openly, willingly, and publicly several times – not just once but several times, even on television. Anyone would have got kicked out of service for that.”

That, Poindexter said, showed “pure, poor judgment. That’s not something you do. We were there to elect him to exercise good judgment on laws and people and events and circumstances.”

The vote against Thorne-Begland, he said, “had nothing to do with what the charge is about,” that is, the nominee’s being openly gay.

Instead, Poindexter argued, “he just used pure, bad judgment, did not demonstrate the integrity and character to be a judge, and I voted no.”

Publisher's note: This article was originally published on Examiner.com on May 20, 2012. The Examiner.com publishing platform was discontinued July 1, 2016, and its web site went dark on or about July 10, 2016.  I am republishing this piece in an effort to preserve it and all my other contributions to Examiner.com since April 6, 2010. It is reposted here without most of the internal links that were in the original.

2013 Ronald Reagan Dinner Has Exciting Silent Auction Items Ready for Bid

Only a few days remain until the 2013 Ronald Reagan Dinner sponsored by the Charlottesville Republican Committee. The dinner will take place the evening of Sunday, April 7, at the Omni Hotel in downtown Charlottesville. (Last-minute tickets are still available for purchase at www.CharlottesvilleGOP.com -- just follow the links to the secure payment page.)

In addition to speeches by former U.S. Secretary of Transportation James Burnley and former White House advisor Karl Rove, this year's dinner offers a range of interesting and intriguing personalized items donated by conservative celebrities and Republican VIPs.

For instance, Kansas Governor Sam Brownback is offering a Kansas state flag, flown over the capitol building in Topeka, with the winning bidder choosing the date for the flag to fly.

Similarly, Nevada Governor Brian Sandoval has contributed a commemorative state coin and Iowa Governor Terry Branstad has sent a coffee-table book about his state, with his autograph attached, called Iowa: Simply Beautiful II.

Former President George H.W. Bush has sent us a limited-edition lithograph portraying his presidential library in Texas, signed and numbered by the artist and autographed by the President himself.

Here are some of the other items that will be available for bidding during the cocktail reception at the Omni, beginning at 6:00 p.m. Be sure to bring a checkbook to pay for your purchase, or you'll risk losing it to the second-place bidder! (All of these items have been autographed or otherwise personalized by the donor.)

From former Georgia Congressman Bob Barr

The Meaning of Is: The Squandered Impeachment and Wasted Legacy of William Jefferson Clinton

From former UN Ambassador John Bolton

Surrender is Not an Option: Defending America at the United Nations an Abroad

From former Florida Governor Jeb Bush and coauthor Clint Bolick

Immigration Wars: Forging an American Solution

From House Majority Leader Eric Cantor

The Congressional Club Cookbook (inscribed)

From Lynne V. Cheney

Blue Skies, No Fences: A Memoir of Childhood and Family

From former New York Mayor Rudolph Giuliani

Leadership

From Fox News host Sean Hannity

Conservative Victory: Defeating Obama’s Radical Agenda, plus an autographed photo

From 1994 U.S. Senate candidate Oliver North

Heroes Proved

From Karl Rove

Courage and Consequence: My Life as a Conservative in the Fight

From House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan

An autographed 2012 Christmas card

From CSI:NY actor Gary Sinise

Signed photo and autographed DVD, High Flight: A Voyage to the Edge of Infinity

From Virginia Congressman Rob Wittman

The Congressional Club Cookbook (inscribed)

In addition to featured speakers Burnley and Rove, the dinner program will include remarks by Albemarle County Board of Supervisors member Ken Boyd and Fluvanna County Board of Supervisors Chairman Shaun Kenney, as well as a special presentation by the GOP candidates for Attorney General of Virginia, Delegate Rob Bell and state Senator Mark Obenshain.

There may be additional surprises in store, but people will have to wait until April 7 to find out what they are.

(Cross-posted from the Charlottesville Republicans Blog.)