From the Archives: State Senate candidate TJ Aldous wants people to ‘achieve their dreams’

State Senate candidate TJ Aldous wants people to ‘achieve their dreams’
August 2, 2011 9:24 PM MST

Voters in Charlottesville will see the name of only one Republican candidate on the ballot when they go to the polls on November 8.

That will be TJ Aldous, an Albemarle County attorney who is running against incumbent state Senator Creigh Deeds (D-Hot Springs) in the 25th state Senate District, which stretches from Charlottesville in the east to Bath County, touching the West Virginia border.

The 25th district also includes 19 precincts in Albemarle County (and parts of three others) as well as Alleghany, Highland, Nelson, and Rockbridge counties, plus the cities of Buena Vista, Covington, and Lexington.

Aldous announced his candidacy on June 28 in press conferences held in both Charlottesville and Buena Vista. In an interview with the Charlottesville Libertarian Examiner on July 2 in Crozet, Aldous said that he began considering a run for office about a month prior to his official announcement.

‘More efficient and more responsive’
What motivated him to run, he said, were his concerns about the economy and “the direction that our country’s headed.”

In order to succeed in an election campaign against an incumbent who is seeking his third full term, Aldous said that “we need people to come together from all walks of life to see the changes that need to be made in our system in order to be better and to be more efficient and more responsive to the people.”

Aldous said that he has observed how people “are expressing that they’re tired of where we are and they want to see something change in how our system works.”

Asked to name the top three issues he will emphasize as he campaigns, Aldous provided a single-minded reply.

“Right now,” he said, “the thing that’s on everybody’s mind is jobs. Jobs and the economy. Say top three? Jobs and the economy, jobs and the economy, jobs and the economy.”

He added, however, that “there are other things that are important to people. There [are] social issues that are important to people. There are other things that are important such as providing an environment where people are free to be able to explore the things that they want to do in their lives, where they aren’t subject to regulation, where they aren’t subject to someone always telling them that they can or can’t do something. So I think those are the things that are most important.”

‘Liberal establishment’
To earn the votes of libertarian voters in the 25th Senate District, Aldous suggested that “we all ought to come together [and] work together to be united in moving against the liberal establishment.”

That can be accomplished, he said, “by finding common goals and common interests. There are a lot of things that I think we all agree on. You look at libertarians, you look at a lot of friends are libertarian, you look at people who are involved in the Tea Party, they have a lot of things in common with what the libertarians want, they have a lot of things in common with what some people would call RINO Republicans want.”

What is needed, he noted, is “to pull those same common things together and move forward in doing something that will be that will change the liberal thought that’s in Richmond, especially in the Senate.”

Although his campaign had just begun at the time of the interview, Aldous said that he had already traveled throughout the district.

“I’ve been over to Bath County, I’ve been over to Highland County, I’ve been over to Covington and Alleghany County,” he said. “I’ve been to Buena Vista and Lexington and Rockbridge and Nelson County. I’ve been all over.”

Aldous concluded by summarizing the central vision of his campaign.

“What we really need,” he said, is “to be focused on helping people achieve their dreams. We can do that by reducing regulation, by making government simpler, by making it more responsive to the people. That’s what I want to see.”

TJ Aldous has an undergraduate degree from Brigham Young University and law degrees from the University of Kansas and New York University. Raised in Hershey, Pennsylvania, he has also lived and worked in Richmond and Denver, as well as serving as a missionary in Argentina for two years.


Publisher's note: This article was originally published on Examiner.com on August 2, 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: At UVA debate, Creigh Deeds calls libertarians ‘Republicans with guts’

At UVA debate, Creigh Deeds calls libertarians ‘Republicans with guts’
October 27, 2011
11:28 AM MST

“Libertarians are Republicans with guts,” said incumbent state Senator R. Creigh Deeds when asked how he plans to earn the votes of libertarian-minded constituents in his bid for reelection to the 25th district seat he has held for a decade.

Deeds, a Bath County Democrat first elected to the General Assembly in 1991, spoke to the Charlottesville Libertarian Examiner moments before the start of a debate with his Republican challenger, Albemarle County tax attorney TJ Aldous. The October 25 debate, sponsored by the University of Virginia Student Council, was the only such head-to-head event scheduled during the 2011 election campaign.

No special platform

Explaining his view of libertarians as “Republicans with guts,” Deeds said that “They honestly believe in less government but also less service because lots of people want the services [but] they don’t support efforts to pay for services all the time."

As to how he’ll win the votes of this portion of the electorate, Deeds added that he does not have “any special platform for any certain group of people. I try to speak truth about what I think we ought to be doing in government.”

He believes, he said, “that government is a tool to be used to level the playing field and give everybody an opportunity to succeed, an opportunity to advance, [and] an opportunity to live the American dream -- not a promise that they’re going to live the American dream or a promise that they’re going to succeed, but an opportunity.”

Occupy Wall Street and the Tea Party

Related to that, Deeds said he thought the Occupy Wall Street movement, and its offshoot, Occupy Charlottesville, was born of its members’ frustration.

“It’s frustration with the system,” he said, “the political system and the economic system.”

Deeds pointed out that “the Tea Party is the other side of that,” having its origins in “that same sort of frustration.”

The Tea Party, he went on, “launched in one direction” while “you’ve got the Occupy group in the other direction.”

At the same time, he said, “there’s significant crossover” between the two movements.

Deeds added that, “to a large extent, the Occupy movement is looking for direction but I think it’s grown out of frustration that a lot of people feel in our political and economic systems.”

Getting to know new voters

Creigh Deeds

Since the decennial redistricting, Deeds has represented portions of Albemarle County that until earlier this year were represented by Senator Emmett Hanger (R-SD24). He said he has spent the last several months becoming acquainted with his new constituents.

“I’ve spent a lot of time knocking on doors out in Crozet and [its] environs,” he said, “getting to know people out there and getting to know the countryside and the issues that they’re talking about.”

The people there, he said, are “basically talking about the same kind of issues everybody else is talking about.”

Summing up his experience with the new parts of the district, he concluded: “I’ve really felt at home in Crozet and Free Union and that area.”

Elections to the Virginia General Assembly will take place on Tuesday, November 8.


Publisher's note: This article was originally published on Examiner.com on October 27, 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: After the census: GMU political scientist Michael McDonald forecasts Virginia's 2011 redistricting

After the census: GMU political scientist Michael McDonald forecasts Virginia's 2011 redistricting
September 4, 2010 12:47 PM MST

The 2010 census was just the first stage in a process that will lead to the redesign of legislative districts all across the United States over the next two years. Districts for the U.S. House of Representatives, state legislatures, city councils, county boards of supervisors, and school boards will all be affected.

Michael P. McDonald

In Virginia, the redistricting process is accelerated because it is one of only four states that hold their state legislative elections in odd-numbered years.

George Mason University political scientist Michael P. McDonald is an expert on reapportionment and redistricting. He has served as a consultant on redistricting issues, sometimes “helping jurisdictions produce redistricting plans that are in conformance with federal and state criteria,” sometimes serving as an expert witness in lawsuits on behalf of either the plaintiff or the defendant, “defending or challenging whether or not a redistricting plan is legal.”

After McDonald spoke to local election officials from across the Commonwealth at the State Board of Elections’ annual Election Uniformity Workshop, McDonald answered questions from the Charlottesville Libertarian Examiner about what Virginia voters can look forward to in the coming months.

Historical First
For the first time in Virginia history, redistricting in 2011 will be done by a General Assembly in which the House of Delegates is controlled by Republicans and the state Senate is controlled by Democrats. After the 1990 census, both houses were controlled by Democrats, and after the 2000 census, both houses had Republican majorities.

“How it’s played out in other states,” McDonald explained, “is that one chamber will draw its districts, the other chamber will draw its districts, and then the two will do a logroll,” in which each chamber approves the other’s proposal. In effect, McDonald said, “you will have two different partisan gerrymanders, one for each chamber.”

Virginia differs slightly from other states, however.

“The wrinkle that we have in Virginia,” McDonald pointed out, “is that the governor can amend legislation.” As a result, “there’s a little bit of concern on the Democratic side” that “even if the House passes their version of the Senate plan” the governor might not “keep his hands off of it.”

There is some discussion, McDonald said, that “the governor may form a commission or a committee of some sort to help assist him in evaluating the redistricting plans that come out of the legislature.” Such a commission, he explained, “may play a mediating role there.”

Time Constraints
Given how fast the state legislative elections are approaching (in November 2011), there is some concern about whether the General Assembly can pass a redistricting plan in time to meet the needs of the electoral calendar.

“Plenty of other states have done it,” McDonald said. “We’ve done it in the past in Virginia.”

Can the process be completed in time?

“Presumptively, yes, the answer should be yes, that we can do it in time,” McDonald noted, also pointing out that “if it is not done in time,” federal courts will intervene.

“That’s one thing that the voters of Virginia can know to be true,” he said, “that the federal courts will step in if the state government can’t produce a redistricting plan.”

The courts, he added, “will basically draw their own map or they will accept a map that was not considered during the legislative process.”


Publisher's note: This article was originally published on Examiner.com on September 4, 2010. 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: Delegate Steve Landes is 'keeping an open mind' on Governor McDonnell's ABC privatization plan

Delegate Steve Landes is 'keeping an open mind' on Governor McDonnell's ABC privatization plan
August 29, 2010 12:08 PM MST

Governor Bob McDonnell’s proposal to privatize Virginia’s state-owned liquor stores “has some possibilities,” said Delegate Steve Landes (R-25) after a town-hall meeting on government reform in Harrisonburg on August 26.

Landes, whose district includes parts of Albemarle, Augusta, and Rockingham counties, as well as the city of Waynesboro, added that “at this point” he is “keeping an open mind.” He wants to talk to his constituents to find out what they like and don’t like about the plan.

Delegate Landes spoke to the Charlottesville Libertarian Examiner on the campus of James Madison University as the crowd dispersed from the governor's town hall. State Senator Mark Obenshain and Delegate Dickie Bell were also interviewed that night.

‘Public safety concerns’
The governor, he said, had “addressed a lot of the public safety concerns” but as a member of the House Appropriations Committee, one of his main concerns is “how is the revenue going to work, where would that go, how are we going to offset what could be a reduction” in the money the state takes in from liquor sales. Landes also expressed concern about what would happen to the portion of ABC profits that goes to local governments.

Asked if he has a sense of what his colleagues in the legislature are thinking about ABC privatization, Landes replied:

“Most of the people I’ve talked to are just like I am, trying to get information, trying to find out what the proposals are, [and] what the governor may be proposing.”

Once the government releases “his formal proposal,” Landes said, “we’ll all be looking at that.”

‘Devil’s in the details’
As a member of the General Assembly for the last 16 years, Landes explained, he has “found that the devil’s always in the details, so you need to see the bill, you need to see what it says, and where the dollars are going to go, how the franchise sales would be, who would be eligible, whether you’re talking about small business people or just larger corporations, chain stores, and the like. All those details would have to be looked at before I could say whether I’m in favor or against it.”

Regarding the question of whether privatization of the ABC system is a “matter of principle,” Landes pointed to his support of the private sector and free enterprise over the years, adding that “there is a good argument from the standpoint of, ‘we don’t control beer and wine [so] why is the state in the business of’” selling distilled spirits?

Noting the current economic climate, Landes went on, “If the economy was really good, it would be an easier decision for me, because we’re not looking at what the revenue picture is, where the dollars are coming from, where they’re going to go.”

The issue would be easier for him to decide, he said, because as a member of the Appropriations Committee, “I think you have to look at making sure that the dollars are going to match up and that projections would be there to offset what the state might lose from the standpoint of sales and what we might obtain from the standpoint of tax revenue.”

Publisher's note: This article was originally published on Examiner.com on August 29, 2010. 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: Delegate Dickie Bell is 'on the fence' with regard to ABC privatization

Delegate Dickie Bell is 'on the fence' with regard to ABC privatization
August 28, 2010 7:42 PM MST

When Virginia Governor Bob McDonnell hosted a town hall meeting on the topic of government reform in Harrisonburg last Thursday, several state legislators from the area were in the audience.

One was Delegate Dickie Bell (R-20), who represents a district that includes Highland County, parts of Augusta and Rockingham counties, and the city of Staunton. He spoke to the Charlottesville Libertarian Examiner about Governor McDonnell’s proposals to privatize ABC stores and the state government’s monopoly on liquor sales.

‘Not as committed’
“The governor is very committed to privatizing ABC stores,” Bell said. “At this point, I have to say, I’m not as committed.”

Bell explained, however, that he is “a big believer in private enterprise and in using our private enterprise structure when we can.

“In most cases,” he said, “it’s a better way to go than having government do some of the things that we can do commercially.”

With regard to ABC privatization, however, Bell said “there are some questions that I need to have answered before I can get on board and fully support it.” He noted that he had spoken to Governor McDonnell before the town hall meeting and “he understands my concerns, I think.”

Bell also pointed out that his “concerns are not unique. They’re the same concerns that a lot of people have at this point.”

‘Social impact’
He is primarily concerned “about the social impact” but also worries “that a lot of the smaller retailers in the [Shenandoah] Valley seem to think that this will squeeze them out and, instead of helping their business, will actually put a squeeze on them.

“If only the bigger, larger, the major retailers have this opportunity,” Bell suggested, “it’ll never trickle down to smaller guys.”

The motivation for this particular concern, he said, is because “I’m a strong advocate for small business. We have to level the playing field. If we’re going to privatize, we’ve got to make sure that every size business out there has the same opportunity.”

Bell said he is also concerned about the effects on Virginia’s “very clean system” of selling distilled spirits.

“There’s no way we can privatize and not increase sales and not increase alcohol consumptions,” he said.

‘Based on my feeling’
When asked, “Is that based on empirical data that you have?,” Bell paused briefly before replying:

“No, it’s based on my feeling” that competition and more stores and expanded distribution will result in “increased sales.”

Summarizing his thoughts on privatization, Bell said, “Mostly, I’m just concerned that we have a system now that’s not corrupt, it’s very clean, it’s very efficient, one of the most efficient things that the state of Virginia does. I’d hate for us to lose that.”

He concluded: “I would say that I’m on the fence right now,” and acknowledged that he needs to be convinced that privatization is the right thing to do.



Publisher's note: This article was originally published on Examiner.com on August 28, 2010. 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: State Senator Mark Obenshain on Virginia liquor privatization: 'I was for it before it was cool'

State Senator Mark Obenshain on Virginia liquor privatization: 'I was for it before it was cool'
August 27, 2010 10:37 AM MST

A member of Governor Bob McDonnell’s Commission on Government Reform and Restructuring, state Senator Mark Obenshain of Harrisonburg says “I was for it before it was cool” when asked what he thinks about the governor’s proposals to privatize the Commonwealth’s monopoly on the sale of distilled spirits.

ABC privatization was a central topic of discussion when Governor McDonnell held a town hall meeting on the campus of James Madison University on August 26, and Senator Obenshain took a few minutes with the Charlottesville Libertarian Examiner to explain his support for the proposals.

“I’ve been pushing ABC privatization for several years,” said Obenshain, “and I was delighted last year when the Governor announced that he was going to include that as part of his transportation agenda. I’ve been working very closely with the administration, I’m fully on board as a member of the team, and I look forward to seeing it pushed through to fruition.”

‘Government’s essential mission’
Obenshain became involved in this issue, he said, because “I’ve always been a free-market guy. I believe in reform. I believe in prioritizing and figuring out what government’s essential mission is, and what it’s not.”

Speaking “frankly,” Obenshain added, “running a monopoly [and] running a statewide retail operation is something that state government really has no business being in. They’ve got to get out. We’re now 76 years post-Prohibition. Notwithstanding the fact that Virginia is a tradition-bound state -- which I love about Virginia -- it is about time for us to enter the post-Prohibition era.”

Asked what his colleagues in the state Senate are thinking about ABC privatization, Obenshain replied:

“I think a lot of them are keeping their powder dry,” because they have two major concerns.

“Number one, can it be done in an economically responsible way, and number two, can it be done in a socially responsible way?”

‘Crafting his proposal’
Obenshain explained that “the governor is crafting his proposal in a way that both of those questions can be answered in the affirmative. We can do it without losing the revenue stream that’s generated through our public ABC store operation and we can do it in a way that doesn’t endanger the public health [or] public safety.”

Addressing the worries of many who question the ABC privatization idea, Obenshain offered these assurances:

“It doesn’t put a liquor store on every corner. It preserves the right of localities and local governments and community organizations to express their support or opposition to proposed locations for licensees.”

He added that privatization “can be done in a way that satisfies the concerns of those who are on the fence.”

Obenshain conceded that there will be “people who are going to stake out a position in opposition to it,” including some “motivated by social reasons.”

‘Good idea for Virginia’
Identifying another set of opponents, the Harrisonburg senator suggested that some “are going to be opposed to it because it represents an infusion of capital into the transportation system. Their vision for solving the transportation problem is to raise taxes. As a consequence, anything that gets in the way of their effort to raise taxes is going to be something that they’re going to oppose.”

Obenshain summed up his views on ABC privatization by saying the governor’s proposals will “make good sense for Virginians.

“I would not support it if it was going to result in increased incidence of alcohol abuse,” he said, “or liquor stores on every corner or [become] a drain on the resources of the Commonwealth. I believe it can be done without any of that and I believe it’s a good idea for Virginia.”


Publisher's note: This article was originally published on Examiner.com on August 27, 2010. 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.

From the Archives: Openly gay Navy veteran rejected for judgeship by Virginia legislature

Openly gay Navy veteran rejected for judgeship by Virginia legislature
May 16, 2012 1:40 AM MST

How often does a state legislature’s vote on the appointment of a local traffic-court judge win the attention of the New York Times, MSNBC, Washington Post, and other national news outlets?

Not often (if ever), except when, as in the case of Virginia judicial nominee Tracy Thorne-Begland, the proposed judge is openly gay and the only one of dozens of similar prospective judges rejected by the state House of Delegates.

Thorne-Begland, a prosecutor for the past decade in the Richmond Commonwealth’s Attorney’s office, was sponsored by Republican Delegate Manoli Loupassi and two colleagues to fill an open slot in the city’s General District Court, which has jurisdiction over traffic offenses, small claims, and petty crimes.

Bob Marshall intervenes

Thorne-Begland’s nomination was vociferously opposed by U.S. Senate candidate Bob Marshall, who represents Manassas and parts of Prince William County in the House of Delegates. Marshall said that Thorne-Begland, a Navy veteran who served as a pilot during the first Gulf War, was unsuitable for the job because of his previous activism on behalf of the civil rights of gay citizens and because he is legally married to his same-sex partner even though Virginia’s constitution forbids same-sex marriage.

Marshall argued that Thorne-Begland could not be trusted to uphold the law in a neutral, judicious manner because, like Marshall himself, he is outspoken on gay-rights issues.

Thirty-three legislators voted their approval of the nomination, which had sailed through the Republican-dominated Courts of Justice Committee without controversy. Thirty-one voted against the nomination, while ten abstained and 26 were absent for the 1:00 o'clock a.m. roll call. A majority of 51 votes was necessary for the nomination to succeed.


Social media outrage

Virginia lawmakers and voters took to social media to register their outrage at the vote.

Shortly after the vote, at 1:16 a.m., Delegate Mark Keam (D-Fairfax County) tweeted a photo of the vote display board in the House of Delegates and said, “VA House voted down Tracy Thorne-Begland as a General District Court Judge. First nominee rejected in my 3 years here.”

State senator Adam Ebbin (D-Alexandria) posted on his Facebook wall:

“I'm glad this is being noticed and criticized widely! My worst day in nine years in the General Assembly. I can't imagine how Tracy Thorne-Begland feels.”

State senator Mark Herring (D-Loudoun County) also posted on Facebook:

“The treatment that Mr. Thorne-Begland received by the General Assembly, well after midnight Tuesday morning, was disgraceful and offensive... Together with many of my fellow Virginians, I am embarrassed by what I witnessed take place early this morning.”

Elsewhere on Facebook, Richmond City Council member Charles Samuels wrote:

“It’s rare that I comment about the decisions of other elected bodies, but I have to say that the decision to vote down the judicial sponsorship of Mr. Tracy Thorne-Begland in the General District Court for the City of Richmond surprises, disappoints and frustrates me.”

Delegate Jennifer McLellan (D-Richmond) posted her floor speech on the matter on YouTube, noting that Thorne-Begland "was willing to fight and die for his country but he was not willing to lie about who he was to continue to serve."

On Twitter, the Virginia ACLU stated:

“We don't take positions on judicial [appointments], but shame on [Virginia] House for rejecting Thorne-Begland [because] he's gay.”

Lawyer Brian Schoeneman, a 2011 candidate for the House of Delegates, headlined an article on the widely-read Virginia politics web site, Bearing Drift, “Vote against openly gay judicial nominee another black eye for Virginia.”

Schoeneman wrote that “the vote last night was wrong. We let irrelevant issues cloud the real question – whether Thorne-Begland was qualified and would be competent in doing the job of a General District Court judge – with conjecture and character-assassination. Those are the only questions that matter, and we ignored them by bringing his past activism into play, especially when it would have little impact on the job.”

That article, published on a conservative web site, drew 71 comments by late Tuesday evening, a few favoring the negative vote against Thorne-Begland but most agreeing with the view that the vote was shameful.

Based on those comments and others, many Virginia political activists anticipate that this legislative vote will result in ridicule by late-night TV comedians like Jon Stewart, Stephen Colbert, and Jay Leno.


Publisher's note: This article was originally published on Examiner.com on May 16, 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.

From the Archives: Bob Marshall cites ‘rainbow spectrum’ of support for his legislation

Publisher's note: This article was originally published on Examiner.com on April 10, 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.

Bob Marshall cites ‘rainbow spectrum’ of support for his legislation
April 10, 2012 11:27 PM MST

Republican U.S. Senate candidate Bob Marshall cites three specific pieces of legislation when asked how he will earn the votes of libertarians.

Marshall is one of four candidates in a June 12 GOP primary that will select a nominee to face former Virginia Governor Tim Kaine in the fall. The winner in the November election will succeed Senator Jim Webb, who is retiring from Congress after one term.

In an interview on April 10 with the Charlottesville Libertarian Examiner, Marshall explained how he plans to attract the votes of libertarians in the primary (or, should he get that far, in the general election), he named “three things.”

Getting the libertarian vote

He noted that “Robert Dean, who heads the Libertarian Party of Tidewater, is 110 percent behind my preventive detention bill,” which was the General Assembly’s response to the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) and will likely be signed, with amendments, by Governor Bob McDonnell later this month.

He mentioned HB 10, a 2010 law he called “the anti-Obamacare bill” but which is also know by its formal title, the Virginia Health Care Freedom Act. That law was used by Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli in suing the federal government to overturn the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, one of the cases heard last month by the U.S. Supreme Court.

Marshall also cited “the anti-Real ID bill” he introduced in 2009, which responds to federal regulations about driver’s licenses and other identification cards.

“What I said in my bill is, If we cannot be certain that the encrypted data on those licenses is not secure, we’re telling the federal government, you’re on your own, we’re not participating.”

Summarizing, Marshall reiterated that he has “done three things that should appeal to people for whom liberty is a paramount concern and again, two of those passed into law, the third one is going to pass into law in a few days because the governor agreed to an amendment last night and I believe the House and Senate will accept that.”

Libertarians, he said, “are right to be concerned about liberty” and in these bills he “had support from John Birch and the ACLU,” two organizations that are “as far apart as you can get.”

He described that coalition as “really the rainbow spectrum” supporting legislation he introduced as a “conservative Republican.” To pass those measures, he said, “we dropped all our other differences – and they are considerable – to focus on this and we’ve succeeded.”

Oddfellows

Marshall also talked about political figures he admires.

Without hesitation, he listed “Jefferson, Madison, and Ronald Reagan” and then, in response to a question about politicians with whom he disagrees but nonetheless admires, he paused to think before naming Joe Morrissey, a Democratic member of the House of Delegates from Richmond.

“Joe Morrissey,” Marshall said, is his “exact, 180-degree opposite” but “he gets in as many fights as I do, I think for his own right reasons. We differ but we respect each other. In other words, I respect persons, not views. I think Joe’s crazy on some of his views. He thinks I’m crazy but amazingly we get along.”

Later. Marshall added that he also gets along with state Senator Adam Ebbin, the only openly gay member of the General Assembly. The two of them served together for several years in the House of Delegates before Ebbin, an Alexandria Democrat, was elected to the Senate.

In part one of this interview, Marshall discussed HB 1160, his state legislative response to the National Defense Authorization Act’s preventive detention provisions, and why he decided to run for the U.S. Senate in 2012.

Suggested Links

Bob Marshall on Virginia’s response to NDAA, why he aims for the Senate
Presidential hopeful Gary Johnson on health care, marriage, and Colbert
Congressman Scott Rigell on the challenge of reaching independent voters
Virginia Congressman Rob Wittman mulls GOP outreach to libertarians
Libertarian Party praises Virginia legislators for anti-NDAA bill

From the Archives: Bob Marshall on Virginia’s response to NDAA, why he aims for the Senate

Publisher's note: This article was originally published on Examiner.com on April 10, 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.

Bob Marshall on Virginia’s response to NDAA, why he aims for the Senate
April 10, 2012 7:16 PM MST

Delegate Bob Marshall is one of four candidates seeking the Republican nomination to succeed Senator Jim Webb in a primary election on June 12. In the 2008 U.S. Senate race, Marshall came within a few votes of defeating former Governor Jim Gilmore at a state GOP nominating convention.

Marshall is the author of HB 1160, a bill written in response to the passage last year of provisions in the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) that permit the president to detain indefinitely, without trial, American citizens suspected of ties to terrorism. HB 1160 passed both chambers of the General Assembly with large majorities.

After the legislator spoke to a group of conservative political activists in Richmond on April 10, the Charlottesville Libertarian Examiner asked Marshall about the significance of that bill, which is likely to get the General Assembly’s final approval later this month after it considers a few minor amendments from Governor Bob McDonnell.

Freedom or serfdom

“It’s the significance of being a free citizen and being a serf,” Marshall said.

“I introduced House Bill 1160, which was a response to a statute that Congress passed [NDAA] that basically said the President (or any president) can take American citizens off the streets, not charge them with anything, not give them opportunity for counsel, not go to trial, not face their accuser – this is unprecedented in American history and the ostensible reason was, ‘Well, there are people committing treason out here for al-Qaeda.’”

Rick Sincere and Bob Marshall

That reasoning, to Marshall, was insufficient justification for giving the President this new authority.

“The Constitution has a specific provision for how Congress is supposed to treat Americans charged with treason,” he explained, noting that James Madison in the Federalist Papers had “said Congress was limited in how it prosecuted treason because treason in England was a recipe for going after your political enemies.”

The Framers, he continued, wanted to restrict the authority of Congress with regard to treason.

“There is a constitutional remedy for treason,” Marshall said.

The NDAA provisions were passed by Congress despite reported objections by the Obama administration although, Marshall said, President Obama is “on both sides of this issue,” because while “he wanted any provision in there that prevented him from detaining people taken out,” when he signed the bill he said, “‘Well, I won’t use this power you’ve just given me.’ That’s hard to fathom.”

Why run for Senate?

With regard to his decision to run for the U.S. Senate this year, Marshall said that “the fact that I ran in 2008 and came so close was an incentive for me to consider it but I really couldn’t do it until after I ran the House of Delegates race” in 2011, where he was running in a district that was at half new to him.

In that campaign, he said, “I had to introduce myself to voters. I do this at the ground level, knocking on doors, and I didn’t want them to think that I’m just doing this as a stepping stone” to higher office.

Although Marshall had been in elected office for 20 years, many of his new constituents “didn’t know that,” so he postponed a decision about the Senate race until after he had secured his re-election to the House of Delegates.

After last year’s election, he added, “I called around the state to see” whether there would “be support for a candidate like myself. When I found out there was, I decided to enter it.”

In part two of this interview, Bob Marshall explains how he intends to earn the votes of libertarians and talks about political figures he admires.

Suggested Links

Libertarian Party praises Virginia legislators for anti-NDAA bill
Environmental activist David Rothbard says 'lift up people and nature together'
Virginia 5th District candidate John Douglass calls for ‘new policies’
Senate hopeful E.W. Jackson claims libertarian backing, unique qualities
Presidential hopeful Gary Johnson on health care, marriage, and Colbert

From the Archives: Virginia General Assembly passes bipartisan bills to legalize industrial hemp

Publisher's note: This article was originally published on Examiner.com on February 12, 2015. The Examiner.com publishing platform was discontinued July 1, 2016, and its web site was scheduled to go 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.

Virginia General Assembly passes bipartisan bills to legalize industrial hemp

“The United States is the largest consumer of hemp products in the world,” says Virginia libertarian activist Nicholas Cote, “but it is the only industrialized country that prohibits farmers from growing hemp.”

Despite this, Cote is optimistic that change is on the horizon. Last week, both chambers of the Virginia General Assembly approved bills to allow the licensed cultivation of industrial hemp, following the lead of legislatures in Kentucky and North Dakota. The bill in the House of Delegates (HB 1277), sponsored by Del. Joseph Yost (R-Blacksburg), passed on a vote of 98-0. The Senate bill (SB 955)sponsored by state Senator Roz Dance (D-Petersburg), passed on a vote of 32-5.

In a recent interview, Cote -- who heads up the advocacy group, Right Way Forward Virginia -- told the Charlottesville Libertarian Examiner that the bipartisan nature of the support for these bills is heartening, but he is disappointed that Virginia's congressional delegation has not stepped up to the plate.

Currently, he explained, the federal government permits the growing of hemp only on a limited basis – largely for research purposes. Last month, Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Kentucky) introduced the “Industrial Hemp Farming Act of 2015” which would exempt industrial hemp from the definition of marijuana. The bill has 52 cosponsors but none of them are from Virginia.

During World War II, growing hemp on American farms was encouraged by the government as part of the national war effort, Cote said. “George Washington and Thomas Jefferson grew hemp, and it was one of the first crops planted by the colonists at Jamestown.”

Hemp production is prohibited as a result of the nationwide, multi-decade war on drugs. The Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) opposes widespread growing of hemp because, as part of the cannabis family, it can be mistaken for marijuana, even though it cannot be smoked or used as a narcotic.

Broad support
The Virginia legislature's action has found a broad range of support.

In a press release, Chase Milner of the Virginia Industrial Hemp Coalition, said that Yost's and Dance's bills had bridged the partisan divide in favor of “common sense cannabis policy reform.” He added that “not only will cultivating hemp greatly benefit America’s economy, it will also bring with it real, tangible environmental benefits.”

Virginia farmer and agricultural activist Joel Salatin of Polyface Farm has said that he is "a huge fan of hemp. I think we should quit calling it hemp and just call it the best plant ever."

In an editorial, the Charlottesville Daily Progress noted that advocates of the Virginia bills “have made compelling arguments that hemp is a useful plant and that its cultivation could allow Virginia to further diversify its agricultural base,” and concluded that “barring equally compelling arguments — which have yet to emerge — against the proposal, we’re inclined to let the commonwealth launch its research on the plant and prepare for the day when commercial cultivation can commence.”

Cote said that there may be minor adjustments necessary before one of the industrial hemp bills reaches Governor Terry McAuliffe's desk, but he is confident that Virginia's governor will sign it and make it law.

SUGGESTED LINKS

Ken Cuccinelli clarifies remarks on marijuana legalization as federalism issue
GOP lieutenant governor candidate E. W. Jackson 'certainly used marijuana'
Virginia Congressman Morgan Griffith clarifies aim of his medical marijuana bill
Virginia Attorney General Mark Herring highlights opposition to drug-law reform
Drug-law reformer Lennice Werth reacts to Charlottesville marijuana vote

Original URL: http://www.examiner.com/article/virginia-general-assembly-passes-bipartisan-bills-to-legalize-industrial-hemp

From the Archives: Charlottesville write-in voters honor former candidates, South Park characters

Publisher's note: This article was originally published on Examiner.com on November 4, 2015, following Virginia's general election.  The Examiner.com publishing platform was discontinued July 1, 2016, and its web site is scheduled to go 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.

Charlottesville write-in voters honor former candidates, South Park characters

Local radio hosts Rob Schilling and Joe Thomas proved they have followers by winning dozens of write-in votes on Election Day in Charlottesville. The two talkers got write-ins in all five contests that were on the ballot.

The November 3 election featured uncontested races for state Senate and the Virginia House of Delegates, five candidates competing for three seats the Charlottesville City Council, four candidates for four seats on the city's School Board, and three candidates for two open positions on the Thomas Jefferson Soil and Water Conservation District.

According to unofficial write-in totals released by the Charlottesville Electoral Board, WINA-AM's Schilling, a former City Council member who was elected as a Republican in 2002, got seven votes in that contest while WCHV-AM & FM's Thomas got nine. Schilling also got four votes for state Senate in the 25th District (which was won by incumbent R. Creigh Deeds with 90.5 percent of the vote) while Thomas got six. In the House of Delegates race won by House Minority Leader David Toscano (with 89.95 percent), Schilling had six votes and Thomas had three.

Thomas outpaced Schilling in the write-in votes for School Board by six votes to one. Schilling had two votes for Soil and Water District Director to Thomas' one vote.

Thomas Jefferson remembered
It is often said that in the Charlottesville area, founding father Thomas Jefferson is often spoken of “as if he just left the room,” and the Sage of Monticello was written in by voters in every contest on Tuesday: four votes for state Senate, four votes for his former seat in the House of Delegates, and one vote each for City Council, School Board, and -- in the district named for him -- Soil and Water District Director.

City Council member Dede Smith, who failed to win renomination by the local Democratic party in the June primary, received 121 votes from supporters who wanted to see her retain her seat. She also received three votes each for School Board and Soil and Water District Director.

Previous City Council candidates Brandon Collins, Mike Farruggio, and Charles “Buddy” Weber received four, three, and four votes, respectively, in that contest.

Weber and Farruggio both received one vote in the race for state Senate, as did T. J. Aldous, who was the Republican nominee for that office in 2011. Former Charlottesville City Council candidate Jon Bright got nine votes in that contest as well as two in the 57th District House of Delegates race. Tom McCrystal, who was the Republican nominee for that delegate seat in 2005, received two votes.

Sabato, Lark, and Parker
Local celebrities who received votes for state Senate included political scientist Larry J. Sabato , former national chairman of the Libertarian Party James W. Lark, former U.S. Senator and presidential candidate James Webb, 2016 Fifth District congressional candidate Jane Dittmar, and 2015 Republican City Council candidate Anson Parker. So did Charlottesville Libertarian Examiner Rick Sincere.

Former independent candidate for the House of Delegates Robert Brandon Smith III and local GOP activist James Neale both received votes in the 57th District delegate race.

Lena Seville, who ran for the Democratic City Council nomination in the June primary, received two votes in that contest, while Peter Kleeman, who ran for that office as an independent in 2007.

Willa Neale, who chose not to run for another term on the School Board, received two write-in votes.

South Park fans may be pleased to learn that Kyle Brofloski, Eric Cartman, Stan Marsh, and Kenny McCormick all received votes for School Board, as did PC Principal and “Mr. Garrison.”

Suggested Links

Charlottesville write-ins reflect voters' loyalty to Perriello, Hurt
Few though colorful write-in votes cast in Charlottesville in Election 2012
Charlottesville write-ins reveal voters’ allegiance, impishness
UVA political scientist analyzes 2012 election, looks toward 2016 GOP nominee
Georgetown philosophy professor Jason Brennan explores ethics of voting

Original URL: http://www.examiner.com/article/charlottesville-write-voters-honor-former-candidates-south-park-characters