Below is a partial list of bills filed by Democrats in the House of Delegates. There are certain reoccurring themes that tell us the Democrats’ agendas for the new session beginning on January 10th.
First the Democrats are looking to help illegal immigrants. HB19 makes some illegals in Virginia eligible for in-state tuition. HB11 also gives illegals in-state tuition. HB12 gives them driver’s licenses and other permits.
Another big issue for Democrats is to include sexual orientation, handicap, gender and whatever gender a person feels he/she is today, as hate crimes. See HB32, and HB 10. (I’ve never understood why it’s worse to kill a gay guy than a straight guy. Aren’t they both terrible crimes? If someone is killed should the killer get a lesser punishment because the victim is not gay? Now it appears if HB 10 passes into law it will be worse to kill a woman and anyone with a disability. Does that mean the penalties will be greater if someone with attention deficit disorder or dyslexia is killed? What about a gay woman with a disability? Triple whammy?)
HB21 requires all health insurance companies to cover just about everything for women’s “reproductive health”, including, in some instances, abortions.
Democrats want ‘no excuses’ absentee voting for everyone. No one needs a reason to vote early, with HB 57. A similar bill is HB 74.
The worse new bill, HB 159, is sponsored by Delegate Sam Rasoul. This bill provides for Family Life Education, K-12, but “removes from such standards and guidelines the requirement for instruction in the benefits, challenges, responsibilities, and value of marriage for men, women, children, and communities; abstinence education; the value of postponing sexual activity; and the benefits of adoption as a positive choice in the event of an unwanted pregnancy.” No students are to be told that marriage is of value to anyone, including children. Single parenting is just as good, fathers don’t matter, even though we all know that’s not best for children. Nor should we be telling students to postpone sexual activity or practice abstinence. This bill removes any mention of adoption as an option for an unwanted pregnancy. Of course, abortion is just fine with Democrats This bill is awful and yet Delegate Rasoul thinks it’s just fine for our students in public schools. One more reason for homeschooling and/or private schooling. Just when you think Democrats can’t get any worse, they outdo themselves with bills like this one.
Family Life Education (FLE) website.
UPDATES:
Delegate Kaye Kory wants Virginia to ratify the equal rights amendment, HJ 2. She also wants feminine hygiene products provided without cost to Virginia inmates in bill HB 83. Another bill, SB65, by Delegate Kory would require all Presidential candidates to release their federal and state income taxes to have access to the Virginia ballot.
Over in the Senate, Democrat Senator John Edwards has filed SB58, which “Increases the minimum wage from its current federally mandated level of $7.25 per hour to $8.00 per hour effective July 1, 2018, to $9.00 per hour effective July 1, 2019, and to $10.10 per hour effective July 1, 2020”)
SB133, filed by Mamie Locke, would abolish any waiting time to have an abortion, “(“Provides that a woman seeking an abortion may waive in writing any requirement establishing a mandatory time period or mandating that a physician provide to or review with the woman specific information or materials before an abortion may be performed.”) Senator Locke also filed SJ 9 which removes the penalty of withholding voting rights from convicted felons.
Bills introduced by Democrats in the House of Delegates for the 2018 session:
86 comments
Of course, your article won’t be featured on a google search for ‘2018 VA General Assembly” smh – but, eh what can ya do, google is run by leftists
I still cannot believe SB58.
Is Senator Edwards “in bed” with the SEIU? And why hasn’t the President of Va AFLCIO have Employee Misclassification within this bill? That disregard amounts to a little
“cart before the horse” legislation .
Or has the Senator just been bought by the SEIU. Unions stink when they just look out for the Union Leader in a new truck instead of the employee.
And if the AFLCIO was credible in looking out for the working man wouldn’t the combat employment fraud not just Goverment Mandated wage increases.
Why did Senator Edwards fail to address the annual loss of $25,000,000.00 to Va’s General fund???????????????
Well … my, my, my. If the Republicans in Virginia do manage to eek out a legislative advantage for this session they should spend their time tying the hands of the General Assembly for as long as possible. Let’s face it, the RPV has lost the state and it won’t be coming back anytime soon. So, why not propose a bill that requires a referendum before the General Assembly can raise taxes? Trust me, you dyed in the wool conservatives are going to wish that the same restrictions on your county supervisors existed at the state level once the legislature is deep blue (by 2019 is my guess). You’ll wish the counties had more authority and the state less because at least there would be some counties that will remain conservative. As long as the Thundering Herd of Corruption in Richmond can use Virginia’s strict adherence to Dillon’s Rule to bludgeon the localities – Virginia will be whatever color the legislature is. And that color is going to approach purple very quickly. Stop worrying about the county meals tax and start worrying about gun control, sky high statewide taxes, hate crimes for any offense committed against anybody other than a white, male Christian. Legal marijuana, sky high taxes or outright bans on cigarettes, beer, sugary sodas, meat.
Is Eric the troll and a half the only guy on this board who can see the light? Richmond will no more save conservatives in Virginia than it saved Robert E Lee. In fact, it will become the worst monster conservatives ever saw. You think those bills listed in the article are bad? They’ll seem mild in 2021.
Virginia’s conservatives need to call for a state constitutional convention. The 1971 constitution has to go. In its place there needs to be an overt recognition of the rights of localities to as much self-governance as humanly possible. Neuter the General Assembly before it becomes the bright blue monster from hell.
Nothing will save Fairfax and Arlington Counties from taxing themselves into oblivion. The half-wits who piled into NoVa from their failed economies up north have seen to that. But Chesterfield can remain relatively free, maybe even Loudoun, Stafford and some outer NoVa areas.
Conservatives have a choice … Maryland style gun laws in Fairfax or Maryland style guns laws everywhere.
Kill Richmond and preserve liberty!
DJ,
There is not much the GA can do without Dems already. They will need Gov signature remember. Would take a constitutional amendment to overturn the Dillon Rule but you may actually get Dem support for such a measure. Certainly would get my support. If Dems pass a state level tax, however, localities can not overturn that on a County basis. That is for sure, Dillon Rule or not.
“Would take a constitutional amendment to overturn the Dillon Rule but you may actually get Dem support for such a measure.”
I agree. It’s always been the Republicans in Virginia who wanted Richmond to have a chokehold on every corner of the state. The Dems have always been more open to home rule. I just think that the RPV better move quickly before the Dems realize that they are now the party with the chokehold.
“If Dems pass a state level tax, however, localities can not overturn that on a County basis.”
Agree again. However, liberal Maryland has demonstrated that a blue state is willing to share the power of taxation between the state and the localities. Both the state and the counties can levy an income tax. The more conservative counties have relatively low county income taxes while the more liberal counties have relatively high income taxes. At least the more conservative counties have some say over their fiscal affairs.
Any Legislator R or D who votes for the advancement of SB58 (wage increase) without stating concern for the lack of concern to JLARC427 and Employee Misclassification is committing “lunacy”.
Yea raise the wage give even more reason to 1099 an iillegal.
Payroll fraud like stupidity is in abundance in Va.
DC has the “Swamp” , Va has a legislative holding pond for future Swamp Reps.
“Va has a legislative holding pond for future Swamp Reps.”
The swamp in Richmond is smaller but deeper than the swamp in DC. Ask Bob McDonnell to show you his Rolex. Ask Dominion Energy why it donated $318,000 over the years to Dick Saslaw when Saslaw always wins his elections by double digit voting margins. Ask any practicing layer in the General Assembly how they can vote for the judges who will hear the cases they try in front of those judges. Ask any General Assembly yo-yo how the state constitution’s requirement that all political districts be “compact and contiguous” is met by their gerrymandered districts.
The swamp in Richmond is every bit as slimy and putrid as the one 100 miles or so to the north.
In the past 4 or 5 years on commenting on this site I have never taken the cheap shots a Republican Governor Bob McDonnell over his Rolex gift. This is because his Rolex did not hold intellect as it is an object.
So I take shots at the Republican intelligence.
Republican Governor McDonnell sent a letter to DHS Secretary Napalitano on what to do with the illegal aliens found in traffic stops.
Well Bob you nit wit , let them go it us not you hob as governor to do immigration checks BUT it is your job not to let them work illegally in Va while violating employment, commerce and Contractor laws.
DHS should have responded but Bob you allow VEC Commissioner Broadway classify these illegal alien / unlicensed contractors as “bona-fide independent contractors”. We have reviewed Va Statute
54.1-1100 and we have been unable to determine how an individual or entity that is Unlicensed be “bona-fide “.
Next time before you write a letter for advice on laws please keep sure that you are doing everything within your Executive powers to enforce the laws for which YOU were elected to enforce.
DJ,
Now how is that? I just cyber back handed Bob McDonnell in the face. This was done by using our current laws and his inadequacy.
Yes Republican Governor McDonnell provided Santurary to MS-13 , IILLEGAL aliens, criminals , tax and child support dodgers.
You complain endlessly about people who are here illegally working in your field, but then criticize the former Governor for trying to eliminate illegal immigration? That makes it sound as if you are fine with people coming to the country illegally, as long as they don’t interfere with your livelihood. Could that possibly be? Let them put some other professions out of work, provided it’s not your own?
In regards to illegal immigrants.
The Republicans have had every legal opportunity to stem the flow of illegal immigrants from our payrolls and refuse to do so.
You Republicans allow them to work as unlicensed contractors in Va, well let them get a drivers license and then pull them over for the overreloaded pick up truck with passenger tags while on the way to your jobsites.
Go Senator Edwards cram a minimum
wage down their throats except wouldn’t you Senator see it prudent to tackle Employee Misclassification first? Just being logical to tackle payroll fraud before you mandate an increase wage promoting more payroll fraud? I guess logic escapes both parties.
To bad elections are now won due to the other sides boondoggles instead of good leadership.
SJ9 not only gives voting rights to felons (maybe while still incarcerated?), it also gives voting rights to citizens adjudicated mentally ill.
Regarding HB21. It says: “The mandated coverage does not include abortion services other than when performed when the life of the mother is endangered by a physical disorder, physical illness, or physical injury, including a life-endangering physical condition caused by or arising from the pregnancy itself, or when the pregnancy is the result of an alleged act of rape or incest. The measure provides an exemption for plans sold to religious employers.”
So there is a religious exclusion and only provides for abortion in the case of threat to the mother’s life, rape and incest. Are these problematic?
These are when an insurance company would be mandated to pay 100% of the cost. Insurance doesn’t cover other elective procedures, so why would it cover an elective abortion? I believe the law mandating that this ONE ASPECT ONLY of healthcare be mandated at 100% coverage is a problem, and therefore cannot support the bill. (Why is “reproductive health” covered at 100%, but your health issue or mine are not? Of course, nothing should be covered at 100% because of abuse/overuse of insurance when it’s free.)
But is it problematic that elective abortions aren’t included – no, not at all.
You missed one of the worst:
SB 115 County food and beverage tax; increases maximum tax that any county is authorized to impose.
Introduced by: Mamie E. Locke (by request) | all patrons … notes | add to my profiles
SUMMARY AS INTRODUCED:
County food and beverage tax. Increases from four percent to eight percent the maximum tax that any county is authorized to impose on food and beverages sold by a restaurant, commonly referred to as the meals tax. The bill also removes the requirement that a county hold a referendum before imposing a meals tax.
WOW! You are right, I missed that one. It’s terrible!
Why is giving freedom and control to localities a bad thing? Aren’t the local elected representatives closer to their constituents (and there for more answerable)?
Its the increase to 8% (a restaurant killer) and elimination of the referendum that are bad things.
Why? If it up to local elected officials to tax their own citizens, I don’t see why the state should have any say at all.
It’s not that the state has control – it’s that the citizens should have control. Removing the referendum requirement removes the voice of citizens.
Bingo
So local elected officials are precluded from putting it to referendum? I think not. No this is just more State control over local elected officials and it is wrong. If you want a referendum on local taxes before they are enacted then elect local officials who will do that. It is the basis of representative government. Localized authority is better than central authority with few exceptions.
What effing planet are you living on, some local officials, Fairfax and Prince William counties come immediately to mind, would absolutely forego the referendum and adopt the new tax at the first opportunity.
And they would not be representing their constituents HOW, exactly? Again, I fail to see why citizens of Tazwell County (for example) should have a say as to the terms under which Fairfax County can tax its citizens. They shouldn’t and, you know what, with VA turning Blue, you might want to rethink the idea that the state has a say in what localities can and can not do in regards to their own citizenry. I have always been against Dillon Rule BS and this is a prime example of it – you might want to get on the bandwagon. Just saying….
You really need to read the existing statutes before commenting, the referendum is only for the voters of the county impacted. Please do your homework so I don’t have to waste my time.
I know that – you should read my post closer. My question is why should representatives of Tazwell for example (i.e. STATE legislators) have a say in the terms under which Fairfax for example can tax their citizens at all (i.e., the requirement that Fairfax can only tax its own citizens if it does a referendum on the matter is a State-level requirement voted on by representatives from outside the jurisdiction). Again, it is none of the state’s business how or under what terms localities tax their own citizens. Imagine, if you will the federal government saying that Virginia can not tax its own citizens to fund schooling and ALL funding must come through federal grants. Imagine the howling such legislation would create here on this site – and rightly so. But you rightwingers are so used to having your way and abusing localities with the Dillon Rule in Virginia, that I think you are in for a rude awakening fairly soon. Either localities will see liberty from right wing Dillon Rule abuse or they will be abused by the Left with the Dillon Rule as well. I am hoping you wake up and the former prevails.
Unless you have some magic formula or new form of government by which the state code can be modified such that only the legislators elected by affected jurisdictions are solely empowered to enact legislation that impacts their constituents you are making no sense. Take a civics class.
The question is how to address the current reality which is by and large that a referendum is required before a county can adopt a meals tax, a referendum that only those county residents can vote in as a matter or existing statutes. Sen. Locke’s bill removes the provisions for referendums and even public hearings leave the levying of those new taxes solely in the hands of the BOCS members. I suspect I speak for the overwhelming majority of the Commonwealth’s residents and virtually all of its restaurants in stating that such a revision is absolutely unacceptable. The principal manner by which the state code is amended is by vote of the whole State legislature, please deal in reality.
The point being, the state code should not be used to constrain the localities’ ability to tax their own constituents at all. Sorry you can’t grasp this simple concept.
“I suspect I speak for the overwhelming majority of the Commonwealth’s residents and virtually all of its restaurants in stating that such a revision is absolutely unacceptable”
Well, then the local representatives won’t sidestep a referendum if that is true (or will be voted out of office by the very people impacted by their decision if they do). This is the way representative government should work.
“The principal manner by which the state code is amended is by vote of the whole State legislature, please deal in reality”
The State Code is just not where these provisions should reside. Power to tax locally should solely reside at the local level. Period. Hopefully SB115 is passed and signed into law and power is returned to the localities – where it belongs.
It is pointless to debate reality with a full troll and half-wit. Good luck in half troll fantasy land.
Eric is simply and correctly observing that if you believe in less government and less substitution of judgment by govt then you want state govt to leave local govts free to act as their constituents choose. Besides, it’s axiomatic conservatism to support the most local governance practical.
If the federal govt imposed its will upon states or localities in these matters, you would no doubt object to the expansion of federal power. For the sake of consistency, you need to take the same position with regards to state law imposing its will upon localities.
I’m in favor of the localities being allowed to decide whether or not to impose a meals tax – but only if the locality has the citizens vote on the tax increase.
Agreed, I’m good with limiting tax increases to referendums. In fact, I say more power to the referendums. The public has a number of referendums they may well bring forward and I support both the ends and the means of them.
I agree that it’s totally unacceptable. In PWC, the BOCS would immediately add a meals tax if they could, without consulting the citizens of the county.
The PEOPLE of Fairfax and Prince William County do NOT want an additional meals tax, and they prove it whenever it’s put to a vote.
Derecho, Jeanine – I will take this up – post coming soon! – also, Eric because Dillon rule state
Then you will also need to consider HB302
Jeanine, as regards HB159, isn’t the bill simply repealing regulations that require teaching abstinence?
Doesn’t it simply restate the existing law while removing one of its mandates? Anytime you remove a mandate from a law you take a step toward freedom.
Is this where you favor government dictates, involvement and regulation? Or do you instead agree with me that our local school administrators should decide these issues with less state intervention and regulation?
If so, it sounds like this is not the “worst new bill”. It sounds like a pretty good idea: More freedom from state regulation.
The problem is, it removes the wrong mandates.
Less mandates = Good. More mandates = Bad.
More freedom for local school districts!
This cannot then be the “worst new bill” and cannot even be negative as it causes the hand of the state to recede even one inch from the local school.
Apparently, you wish it were more positive. Me too, but it’s a step in the right direction, right?
It will end up teaching young children that marriage, postponing sex until older, or that adoption as a remedy for an unwanted pregnancy are all outdated ideas. If we are going to teach values to kids, we shouldn’t eliminate the values that contribute to a stable society.
Advocating for sex at a young age, single parenthood, or abortion/teen parenthood as a solution to an unplanned pregnancy do not benefit school-age kids or our society in any way. I realize that times have changed, but that doesn’t mean we have to assume that all change is for the best. The family has been the basis of our social structure since the discovery of fire. Undermining the family, which is the goal of these changes, will have a detrimental effect on the entire country.
The democrats see it only as a way to gain votes. Single mothers (especially those still children themselves) need the government to play the role of the girl’s father, and daddy to her children – which the democrats offer. The democrats have long understood that people dependent upon the government are far more likely to vote for their party. Unfortunately, such policies are formed in order to increase democrat votes – even when it is detrimental to the girls involved, keeping teens forever childlike and incapable of caring for themselves and their children. If democrats truly cared about them, they would vote for policies that help the girls become independent, and to stay with her parents until adulthood.
This purely about mandate yes or mandate no, not about what school districts may, will or should teach. The school district will keep teaching that which it deems best to teach, which includes the values you favor. The point: It shouldn’t be the state telling the local district what to do. The local school district should make good decisions all their own.
Parents are responsible to teach their kids until it comes to abstinence. Then it is the obligation of a school system that you admittedly abhor to do so?
Why would you want to put such a pitiful institution over and above the responsibilities of the parents?
Is there an objection to permitting the citizenry freedom to decide to cast an absentee ballot without the state sticking its camel’s nose into the tent about the decision to do so? Isn’t this more mindless regulation that should be repealed? I associate freedom with Republican values, so absent some good reason to the contrary it would seem good Republicans would favor freedom to decide when you cast your ballot (provided it is done in a secure manner as with all absentee ballots today in Virginia). Less govt substitution of judgment, more freedom for citizens.
The problem with absentee ballots is that the Voter ID laws do not apply. Voter fraud is extremely easy to do if you vote absentee rather than at the ballot box. With an ever-increasing number of non-citizens in the area, voting by non-citizens is a serious, but unaddressed, concern.
I have no problem with requiring no reason absentee ballots to appear in person with ID to receive one. Are we agreed then? More freedom better?
That would be acceptable to me, but it isn’t the law. Any absentee ballot can be mailed in with no identification. And since no one has to show proof of citizenship to register to vote in Virginia, we have an ever-increasing number of non-citizens on our voter rolls.
This proposed law has no effect on your objection as it does not change absentee ballots except insofar as it removes the need to have a reason.
Of course it does. It allows every single person to vote absentee if they wish. Non-citizens will be more likely to vote if they realize they don’t have to do it at the polling places where they have to show a photo ID that matches their face.
I thought we agreed the additional freedom is a good idea with the additional condition that “no reason” absentee ballots should be picked up in person with an ID?
With an amendment, this is a good idea, yes?
You are unaware of the amount of voter fraud that goes on. Give me a foolproof way to limit voting to citizens, and I’m all for anything that makes it easier for citizens to vote. But it would have to begin with a law that requires proof of citizenship in order to register to vote. We don’t have that, and until we do, the amount of voter fraud in Virginia will continue to rise. The integrity of our system of Elections should come first. Convenience comes second.
Now wait just a minute here: I agree that if we are to extend this freedom of absentee ballot to those without a reason, we require positive photo ID. But that’s not good enough for you, who would withhold more freedom from people until you get proof of citizenship to exercise the right to vote? Tell us: How do we prove our citizenship under your proposed system? Just what is enough? Swearing to citizenship at registration not enough? (BTW, I am not at all unaware of the amount of voter fraud, having worked at the polls myself, learned the rules and come to realize how little voter fraud there is and how unlikely it is to have determined the result of even one election.)
Until recently, we required proof of citizenship in order to register to vote. Showing a birth certificate or naturalization certificate would be a simple way to prove that one has the right to vote, without being onerous on citizens. Why did we drop the requirement? And why would we “assume” that the individual is a citizen if they do not check the box claiming to ba citizen? If someone does not check that box, the default should be that we assume that they could not honestly claim citizenship.
A country that doesn’t limit elections to its’ citizens will eventually be ruled by those who have no vested interest in the country or her future.
Working at the polls (as I have also done) does not give you a clue into voter fraud if the non-citzens are registered to vote. It takes experience with the process by which we conduct voter registrations (which I also have) to realize the extent of non-citzens who are registered to vote.
In addition, a recent post-vote evaluation of absentee ballots in one County revealed a fraud rate greater than 7%, which is enough to swing an election.
Until recently? I’ve never had to prove my citizenship to vote. I have literally no idea where my birth certificate is, and I have little idea how to procure one. Homeland Security did not require one when I got my Global Entry card, nor when it was renewed, so it is a surprise you want me to display one to register to vote.
If there is even the whiff of fraud, you and I both know it is time for a provisional ballot that will not be counted unless determinant and vetted by a judge.
Your last sentence is mistaken. if the non-citzen has registered to vote, those who work on election day would have no reason to enact a provisional ballot. if someone shows up, and they are on the rolls and at the correct polling station, on what grounds would you make it a provisional ballot? At that point, you assume they are qualified to vote, even when they aren’t.
I had to show my birth certificate to register to vote. My friends who are naturalized citizens had to show their naturalization papers. Your experience is exactly what I’m talking about. How do we know you are eligible to vote if there is no requirement to prove it? Without proof, anyone can register, which is precisely how we got so many non-citzens on the voter rolls. You have proven my point. Thank you.
It now seems clear you heed the Republican call to lower the number of voters such that the minority has a better chance against the majority. Me? I want the maximum participation in the election.
Requiring a printed birth certificate in a digital age is ridiculous. There are plenty of electronic records and ultimately we do what we do to satisfy courts of law: Swear under the penalty of perjury.
I would like to see voter participation increased, but only by those who are actually eligible to vote. There are few things you can do in the legal world just giving your word, and voting should never be one of them. The integrity of the vote is essential in a democracy (or republic like ours,). When the people cannot trust the outcome of the vote, chaos will reign. There are a number of foreign countries you can look to for evidence of this.
Secondly, you are again putting words in my mouth, since I never claimed that a paper versus electronic version should be required.
By the way, since you obviously misplaced your birth certificate, you can easily get a replacement. I’d suggest you do so now because before long, your identification will be worthless if it hasn’t been verified.
A birth certificate is paper. Anyone with access to federal or state digital records can verify my citizenship, which is why DHS doesn’t ask. I have no worries about needing to prove my citizenship to anyone with a piece of paper (which itself can be forged) — it’s an unreasonable request I will never face. Which is why you raise it as a condition to exercising a constitutional right. Tell me: What would be your response to those who would require a birth certificate each time someone purchased or transferred a firearm? I would find it wrong and unduly burdensome. Given the slippery slope of liberty, requiring one for registering to vote will lead to requiring one for a gun, which is intended to deprive people of the right. I object.
In other words, you have no objections to everyone voting, whether or not they are legally eligible. Your birth certificate is the only way to show proof of citizenship. Since you need to do so only once in your lifetime, it’s not an onerous regulation.
To get a cc permit, you must prove your identity and be fingerprinted. To travel overseas you need a passport – which requires that you provide a birth certificate. To get on an airplane you must prove your identity. To get a hotel room, rent a car, visit your Congressman or go to the White House, or do many other things, you must prove your identity. We use our driver’s licenses for that. But how did you first get a driver’s license? You didn’t just tell them that your name is Andrew Olsen and they took you at your word. You had to show your birth certificate – or at least, I did. When I first got my license, no one got a license without proving who you are. It is equally (or more) important to prove who you are when registering to vote. Otherwise, you could register a dozen times (or a thousand times), using different names and birthdays. It’s our sole method of enforcing our “one man, one vote” rules, as well as proving our citizenship.
Your words evidence sophistry on your part. Let’s be clear: I want only eligible voters voting, despite your unevidenced false claim to the contrary.
Some jurisdictions (Maryland among them) permit non-citizens to vote. Most do not. We have ample databases to determine in which category an individual belongs.
I ask again, and note your lack of interest in answering: Should a birth certificate be required to purchase a firearm? Me: No, it is unduly burdensome and unnecessary.
Likewise voting, with the added proviso that where we have doubt we can cast votes provisionally such that they are available if needed and only if absolutely vetted by a judge. Similarly correcting errors with firearms has a limitation: We cannot bring back the dead.
FWIW, you are incorrect. We needn’t prove our identity to fly, visit our Congressman, etc. But I will offer a compromise: You get registered to vote when you register for a drivers license. Work for you? Or are you still trying to make it as burdensome as possible to exercise the voting franchise?
I would indeed like to eliminate voting by those who are not citizens, and are therefore not legally allowed to vote. But your minority/majority comment is utter hogwash. Whether you are referring to racial minorities or political majorities doesn’t matter, it’s hogwash all the same. I would prefer to see 100% participation in our elections by everyone who is legally entitled to vote. But I want 100% of the voters to be legally permitted to cast a ballot. It’s a simple concept that you don’t seem to understand.
I am with you: Make everyone eligible to vote automatically registered to do so.
I am referring to the minority status of the Republican Party of Virginia.
A simple concept I don’t understand? Is insult your best vehicle here? I had thought you more mature, but you are showing something else: Contradiction between your words and deeds.
If you want everyone eligible to vote to do so, accept them at the polls on Election Day, regardless, and let them cast provisional ballots, counted only if determinant of the outcome and properly vetted in a court of law by a judge. With me on that?
PS:. You don’t have to be a citizen to receive a Global Entry card, so it cannot be used to register to vote.
We do have a lot of northerner’s moving here and south of us. They don’t like the taxes, regulations, lack of opportunity up there. It would nice if they would recognize that virginia is now becoming a New England state and vote DIFFERENTLY! Our schools – both public and private – are turning out more and more socialists and Bernie Sanders types than many of us realize. Have you seen a history text book lately? I would like to see Trump demand Civics for every American – not even our “best” private schools teach that any more.
Virginia has a civics requirement for graduation.
Our great local private school does not offer that. They used to teach it in the 6th grade, but no longer. AP government is taught there as an elective in high school.
Hahaha, have you seen the Civics books? They’re awful, filled with propaganda. A group of teachers in FFX rejected one Civics book because it was “too patriotic”.
Every locality sees these issues differently, which is the point of local control of schools. Unless we live in Fairfax — and I do not — we should simply note that it is a good arrangement that permits your locality its own control of its own schools.
History is a set of lies agreed upon, written by the winners.
I don’t think so. My grandson is in 11th grade (Virginia, public school)and has never had a single civics class.
https://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/12/circle-study-finds-most-s_n_1959522.html
There is a commission that oversees this:
http://www.doe.virginia.gov/instruction/history/everyday-civics/index.shtml
I can conform from personal experience learning about this requirement for our 14yo son.
Apparently, it’s enforced in some school districts, but not all. As I said, my 16 year old grandson has not yet had a single civics class. He learns current events from his grandfather and me.
This stuff sounds crazy now (to most of us), but give it another 10-15 years and these bills will be getting passed/signed.
So where are the rest of you planning to move? I’m thinking somewhere in the Sun Belt.
sooner than that.
they’re gonna make Va “FeelDaBern”
too late. already do.
It’s a real shame, how blue this Commonwealth has become, in the past dozen years
So true and so sad.
part of the plan
Yes, as Republicans abdicate the center those of us in the middle lose, no longer the objects of competition for our affection. Those with a right mind are compelled to vote for Democrats all too often. This is unfortunate and something I hope to see change such that the RPV is once again competitive in statewide politics. I write statewide because within gerrymandered districts the RPV remains somewhat in control, although there were some big surprises in the last election due to factors I mentioned when starting this paragraph.
If republicans are so unhappy because Democrats are doing what Democrats do, they why didn’t republicans give us something better?
Trump lies and corruption, trump unaffordable healthcare, Bob McDonnell/republican tax increases, crooked judges, are not exactly the right road to winning elections.
Agreed, Republicans should compete for the center, offering more freedom on centrist-appealing issues. Numerous examples, and yet the Republican-mind wanders to the right in pursuit of a nanny state of telling people what to smoke, what to teach, even which bathroom to use.
Republicans need to show unconditional support for law enforcement, most especially the FBI and the DOJ. It is a mistake to turn on law enforcement and leaving their support in the hands of Democrats is a mistake Republicans will regret.
Republicans need to either unify on immigration — businesses large and small want the labor — or make moderate moves towards addressing the issue in a fair and open-minded manner. As a practical matter, food will rot in fields. As a practical matter, military service has proved an important route to citizenship. Again, as a matter of practice there has evolved a group of dreamers who appeal to many Republicans.
Finally, it would help for Republicans to make a u-turn on academia, becoming the friend of education. Research and learning are important to the future. The party that once boasted Milton Friedman and William F. Buckley as leaders would no longer permit their ideas. Sad reflection on the times.
I can’t disagree that Republicans have often abdicated the center. However, so have the democrats. So, if you choose the democrats over the republicans, I’d guess you were never really a centrist in the first place, especially as the democrats have become unabashed socialists. The GOP still believes in Capitalism, which is a 200+ year tradition in this country. In my view, that makes the GOP far closer to the center than the democrats.
Each party goes to its fringe sometimes, but from my POV it happens more often and in unacceptable ways more often with the RPV than in other places. This is subjective of course and so we each feel it differently. I do not agree that the VA GOP is unified around capitalism — they say it and practice something else. In our County the govt holds forever the conservation rights for over 100,000 acres of land and bought much of this land with tax money. They do not leave real property rights to the market around here.
You are right about the GOP in some cases. But if the question is, which party is closer to Capitalism, there is no question that the answer would have to be the GOP. The new crop of Democrats (at least in the No. Va. area) are all socialists, which is definitely a trend in the democratic party. As someone who knows that socialism is not a successful economic method (to say nothing of an unsuccessful social system!), the democrat’s tendency toward socialism is not an encouraging sign.
From what I can tell, every Virginia county practices socialism, meaning they leave non-essentials to the market and regulate or directly manage land use, electricity, telecom, water, sewer, education, emergency responses, schools, etc. None leaves the above wholly to the market, some go even further in directly owning/managing.
Not wholly, but to a greater or lesser degree: Democrat = greater; Republican = lesser. Surely you aren’t going to deny that democrats are more socialist than the GOP, and more socialist than they used to be?
Again, in some cases, but I’ve never seen socialism run as deep and wide as with these so-called conservation easements purchased with tax money in some very Republican counties. Not yet seen this in a very Democratic county.
Another example: Surely you will not deny that Republicans cling to antiquated nanny state laws and practices surrounding personal behavior in spite of the idea that Republicans should be championing personal freedoms (and are in some good more forward-thinking places).
Yes, you are correct.
It is also a shame how Democrats AND Republicans have allowed Va. to become a Santurary State with illegal employment illegal commerce , payroll fraud and Worker Comp. Insurance fraud.
When Republicans don’t stand for the rule of law and working class conservatives you have Blue.