Virginia General Assembly Legislative Update 2-2-2012

**********************************************************

CALL NOW - SUPPORT

HJ 118:  Alternate medium of commerce or currency; joint subcommittee to study whether State should adopt.

HJ 118 is on the docket of the Studies Subcommittee of the House Rules Committee for TODAY, Thursday, 2/2/12, 4:00 p.m., 6^th Floor Speaker’s Conference Room.  Please contact your delegate NOW and ask them to vote YES to HJ 118.  Plan to attend the meeting, if possible.

House Rules Committee

Studies Subcommittee

Del. R. Steven Landes (R) (804) 698-1025 delslandes@house.virginia.gov (chairman)

Del. Kenneth C. Alexander (D) (804) 698-1089 delkalexander@house.virginia.gov

Del. Johnny S. Joannou (D) (804) 698-1079 (no email)

Del. Barry D. Knight (R) (804) 698-1081 delbknight@house.virginia.gov

Del. Robert D. Orrock, Sr. (R) (804) 698-1054 delrorrock@house.virginia.gov

Del. R. Lee Ware, Jr. (R) (804) 698-1065 dellware@house.virginia.gov

CALL TODAY - SUPPORT

SJ 3 Constitutional amendment; taking or damaging of private property for public use (second reference).

SB 240 Constitutional amendment; taking or damaging of private property for public use (voter referendum).

Both SJ 3 and SB 240 are on the Senate floor for the first reading TODAY.  Contact your Senator TODAY and ask them to support both SJ 3 and SB 240, without sending either of them back to committee. (See below)

DANGER! DANGER!

(Note:  We made a typo on yesterday’s update.  You may have caught this.  Many did.  SR 3 was supposed to be SJ 3.)

Although SJ 3 passed the Senate P&E Committee, there is a major worry when the bill goes to the Senate floor.  The Senate can, by voice vote, refer the bill back to a committee, perhaps Senate Finance.  If they do this, the amendment will die.  Contact your Senator TODAY and ask them to do 3 things:

1. if a motion is made to refer SJ 3 back to a committee, vote NO
2. if a motion is made to refer SJ 3 back to a committee, request the vote be recorded
3. vote Yes to SJ 3

To find your legislator, please follow this link:

http://conview.state.va.us/whosmy.nsf/main?openform

SUCCESS and CALL NOW - SUPPORT

HB 1035: Eminent domain; lost profits and access.

Success:  HB 1035 passed the House Courts of Justice Committee’s #2 Civil Subcommittee by a vote of 5 to 2.  Send thanks to your delegate for their support if they voted yea.

YEAS--Iaquinto, Kilgore, Loupassi, Habeeb, Minchew--5.

NAYS--Toscano, McClellan--2.

NOT VOTING--Farrell, Johnson--2.

HB 1035 now goes to the full House Courts of Justice which meets tomorrow, Friday, 2/3/12, ½ hour after adjournment (expected to be 12:00 noon), House Room C.  Please contact your delegate TODAY and ask them to vote YES on HB 1035.  Attend the meeting if possible.

House Courts of Justice Committee

Del. David B. Albo (R) (804) 698-1042 deldalpo@house.virginia.gov (chairman)

Del. Robert B. Bell (R) (804) 698-1058 delrbell@house.virginia.gov

Del. Benjamin L. Cline (R) (804) 698-1024 delbcline@house.virginia.gov

Del. Peter F. Farrell (R) (804) 698-1056 delpfarrell@house.virginia.gov

Del. C. Todd Gilbert (R) (804) 698-1015 deltgilbert@house.virginia.gov

Del. Gregory D. Habeeb (R) (804) 698-1008 delghabeeb@house.virginia.gov

Del. Charniele L. Herring (R) (804) 698-1046 delcherring@house.virginia.gov

Del. Salvatore R. Iaquinto (R) (804) 698-1084 delsiaquinto@house.virginia.gov

Del. Joseph P. Johnson, Jr. (D) (804) 698-1004 deljjohnson@house.virginia.gov

Del. Terry G. Kilgore (R) (804) 698-1001 deltkilgore@house.virginia.gov

Del. G. Manoli Loupassi (R) (804) 698-1068 delmloupassi@house.virginia.gov

Del. Jennifer L. McClellan (D) (804) 698-1071 deljmcclellan@house.virginia.gov

Del. Jackson H. Miller (R) (804) 698-1050 deljmiller@house.virginia.gov

Del. J. Randall Minchew (R) (804) 698-1010 delrminchew@house.virginia.gov

Del. Richard L. Morris (R) (804) 698-1064 delrmorris@house.virginia.gov

Del. David J. Toscano (D) (804) 698-1057 deldtoscano@house.virginia.gov

Del. Ronald A. Villanueva (R) (804) 698-1021 delrvillanueva@house.virginia.gov

CALL NOW - SUPPORT

HJ 3 Constitutional amendment; taking or damaging of private property for public use (second reference).

HB 5 Constitutional amendment; taking or damaging of private property for public use (voter referendum).

Both HJ 3 and HB 5 are expected to be voted on in the Constitutional Amendments Subcommittee of the House Privileges and Elections Committee on Monday, 2/6/12 at 8:00 a.m., 4^th Floor West Conference Room.  Please call your Delegate TODAY and ask them to vote YES on both HJ 3 and HB 5.

House Privileges & Elections Committee

Constitutional Amendments Subcommittee

Del. Jackson H. Miller (R) (804) 698-1050 deljmiller@house.virginia.gov (chairman)

Del. Mark L. Cole (R) (804) 698-1088 delmcole@house.virginia.gov

Del. Algie T. Howell, Jr. (D) (804) 698-1090 delahowell@house.virginia.gov

Del. Timothy D. Hugo (R) (804) 698-1040 delthugo@house.virginia.gov

Del. Johnny S. Joannou (D) (804) 698-1079 (no email)

Del. Israel D. O’Quinn (R) (804) 698-1005 delioquinn@house.virginia.gov

Del. David I. Ramadan (R) (804) 698-1087 deldramadan@house.virginia.gov

Virginia Beach City Budget

No tax increase for next year?

No fee increase budget for next year?

With let me spend all your money Spore at the helm?

With let me give your money to Town Center & Ocean Front Spore at the helm?

John Moss ~ Virginia Beach City Council says

Councilman DeSteph and I will be sponsoring a resolution for City Council to provide direction to the City Manager to deliver a no tax increase and a no fee increase budget for next year. As soon as the resolution is finalized, we will make it available. If all goes well, it will be on the February 14th City Council agenda.

Virginia General Assembly Legislative Update 2-1-2012

**********************************************************

CALL NOW - SUPPORT

 Johnny S. Joannou | all patrons 

Eminent domain; lost profits and access.  Provides definitions for the terms "lost profits" and "lost access" and how to determine the amount of just compensation, which includes lost profits and lost access resulting from the taking, that must be paid for property taken by eminent domain. The bill has a contingent effective date of January 1, 2013, provided that the voters approve an amendment to Section 11 of Article I of the Constitution of Virginia at the 2012 November election.

Status: (We support this bill)

01/11/12  House: Referred to Committee for Courts of Justice

01/17/12  House: Assigned Courts sub: #2 Civil

HB 1035 is on the docket for the House Courts of Justice Committee’s #2 Civil Subcommittee TODAY, Wednesday, 2/1/12, ½ hour after adjournment in House Room 1. Please contact your delegate NOW and ask them to vote YES on HB 1035.  Plan to attend this meeting if you can.

House Courts of Justice Committee

#2 Civil Subcommittee

Del. Salvatore R. Iaquinto (R) (804) 698-1084 delsiaquinto@house.virginia.gov (chairman)

Del. Peter F. Farrell (R) (804) 698-1056 delpfarrell@house.virginia.gov

Del. Gregory D. Habeeb (R) (804) 698-1008 delghabeeb@house.virginia.gov

Del. Joseph P. Johnson, Jr. (D) (804) 698-1004 deljjohnson@house.virginia.gov

Del. Terry G. Kilgore (R) (804) 698-1001 deltkilgore@house.virginia.gov

Del. G. Manoli Loupassi (R) (804) 698-1068 delmloupassi@house.virginia.gov

Del. Jennifer L. McClellan (D) (804) 698-1071 deljmcclellan@house.virginia.gov

Del. J. Randall Minchew (R) (804) 698-1010 delrminchew@house.virginia.gov

Del. David J. Toscano (D) (804) 698-1057 deldtoscano@house.virginia.gov

SUCCESS

SJ 3: Constitutional amendment; taking or damaging of private property for public use (second reference).

SB 240: Constitutional amendment; taking or damaging of private property for public use (voter referendum).

Both SJ 3 and SB 240 passed the Senate Privileges & Elections (P&E) Committee by a vote of 13-Y, 2-N.  Contact your senator and thank them for their support.

YEAS--Obenshain, Martin, Deeds, Puckett, Edwards, Petersen, Smith, Northam, Vogel, McWaters, Carrico, Reeves, Garrett--13.

NAYS--Howell, McEachin--2.

DANGER! DANGER!

Although SR 3 passed the Senate P&E Committee, there is a major worry when the bill goes to the Senate floor.  The Senate can, by voice vote, refer the bill back to a committee, perhaps Senate Finance.  If they do this, the amendment will die.  Contact your Senator TODAY and ask them to do 3 things:

1. if a motion is made to refer SR 3 back to a committee, vote NO
2. if a motion is made to refer SR 3 back to a committee, request the vote be recorded
3. vote Yes to SR 3

To find your legislator, please follow this link:

http://conview.state.va.us/whosmy.nsf/main?openform

CALL TODAY - SUPPORT

HJ 118:  Alternate medium of commerce or currency; joint subcommittee to study whether State should adopt.

HJ 118 is on the docket of the Studies Subcommittee of the House Rules Committee for this Thursday, 2/2/12, 4:00 p.m., 6^th Floor Speaker’s Conference Room.  Please contact your delegate TODAY and ask them to vote YES to HJ 118.  Plan to attend the meeting, if possible.

House Rules Committee

Studies Subcommittee

Del. R. Steven Landes (R) (804) 698-1025 delslandes@house.virginia.gov (chairman)

Del. Kenneth C. Alexander (D) (804) 698-1089 delkalexander@house.virginia.gov

Del. Johnny S. Joannou (D) (804) 698-1079 (no email)

Del. Barry D. Knight (R) (804) 698-1081 delbknight@house.virginia.gov

Del. Robert D. Orrock, Sr. (R) (804) 698-1054 delrorrock@house.virginia.gov

Del. R. Lee Ware, Jr. (R) (804) 698-1065 dellware@house.virginia.gov

**********************************************************

WE SUPPORT THESE BILLS

1)  Eminent Domain Constitutional Amendment:

Constitutional amendment (second resolution); taking or damaging of private property; public use.  Revises the prohibition on the enactment by the General Assembly of laws whereby private property may be taken or damaged. An existing provision authorizing the General Assembly to define what constitutes a public use is removed. The proposed amendment provides that private property can be taken or damaged only for a public use, only with just compensation to the owner, and only so much taken as is necessary for the public use. Just compensation must equal or exceed the value of the property taken, lost profits and lost access, and damages to the residue caused by the taking. A public service company, public service corporation, or railroad exercises the power of eminent domain for public use when such exercise is for the authorized provision of utility, common carrier, or railroad services. In all other cases, a taking or damaging of private property is not for public use if the primary use is for private gain, private benefit, private enterprise, increasing jobs, increasing tax revenue, or economic development, except for the elimination of a public nuisance existing on the property. The condemnor bears the burden of proving that the use is public, without a presumption that it is.

Status: (We support this bill)

11/21/11  Senate: Referred to Committee on Privileges and Elections

01/31/12  Senate: Reported from Privileges and Elections with substitute (13-Y 2-N)

SUCCESS:  SJ 3 passed the Senate Privileges & Elections (P&E) Committee by a vote of 13-Y, 2-N.  Contact your senator and thank them for their support.

YEAS--Obenshain, Martin, Deeds, Puckett, Edwards, Petersen, Smith, Northam, Vogel, McWaters, Carrico, Reeves, Garrett--13.

NAYS--Howell, McEachin--2.

SB 240 Constitutional amendment; taking or damaging of private property for public use (voter referendum).

 Mark D. Obenshain | all patrons

Constitutional amendment (voter referendum); taking or damaging of private property; public use.  Provides for a referendum question on the November 6, 2012, election ballot to approve or reject an amendment eliminating the General Assembly's authority to define a public use for which private property may be taken or damaged and (i) requiring that eminent domain be exercised for public uses and not for the primary purpose of private gain, private benefit, private enterprise, increasing jobs, increasing tax revenue, or economic development; (ii) defining what is to be included in determining just compensation for permissible takings; and (iii) prohibiting the taking of more private property than is necessary for the stated public use.

Status: (We support this bill)

01/10/12  Senate: Referred to Committee on Privileges and Elections

01/31/12  Senate: Reported from Privileges and Elections with amendment (13-Y 2-N)

SUCCESS:  SB 240 passed the Senate Privileges & Elections (P&E) Committee by a vote of 13-Y, 2-N.  Contact your senator and thank them for their support.

YEAS--Obenshain, Martin, Deeds, Puckett, Edwards, Petersen, Smith, Northam, Vogel, McWaters, Carrico, Reeves, Garrett--13.

NAYS--Howell, McEachin--2.

 Johnny S. Joannou | all patrons 

Eminent domain; lost profits and access.  Provides definitions for the terms "lost profits" and "lost access" and how to determine the amount of just compensation, which includes lost profits and lost access resulting from the taking, that must be paid for property taken by eminent domain. The bill has a contingent effective date of January 1, 2013, provided that the voters approve an amendment to Section 11 of Article I of the Constitution of Virginia at the 2012 November election.

Status: (We support this bill)

01/11/12  House: Referred to Committee for Courts of Justice

01/17/12  House: Assigned Courts sub: #2 Civil

HB 1035 is on the docket for the House Courts of Justice Committee’s #2 Civil Subcommittee TODAY, Wednesday, 2/1/12, ½ hour after adjournment in House Room 1. Please contact your delegate NOW and ask them to vote YES on HB 1035.  Plan to attend this meeting if you can.

House Courts of Justice Committee

#2 Civil Subcommittee

Del. Salvatore R. Iaquinto (R) (804) 698-1084 delsiaquinto@house.virginia.gov (chairman)

Del. Peter F. Farrell (R) (804) 698-1056 delpfarrell@house.virginia.gov

Del. Gregory D. Habeeb (R) (804) 698-1008 delghabeeb@house.virginia.gov

Del. Joseph P. Johnson, Jr. (D) (804) 698-1004 deljjohnson@house.virginia.gov

Del. Terry G. Kilgore (R) (804) 698-1001 deltkilgore@house.virginia.gov

Del. G. Manoli Loupassi (R) (804) 698-1068 delmloupassi@house.virginia.gov

Del. Jennifer L. McClellan (D) (804) 698-1071 deljmcclellan@house.virginia.gov

Del. J. Randall Minchew (R) (804) 698-1010 delrminchew@house.virginia.gov

Del. David J. Toscano (D) (804) 698-1057 deldtoscano@house.virginia.gov

2)  Currency:

 Robert G. Marshall | all patrons

Study; joint subcommittee to study alternative medium of commerce or currency; report. Establishes a joint subcommittee to study whether the Commonwealth should adopt an alternate medium of commerce or currency to serve as an alternative to the currency distributed by the Federal Reserve System in the event of a major breakdown of the Federal Reserve System.

Status: (We support this bill)

01/20/12  House: Assigned Rules sub: Studies

Gag of Political Correctness

Race~Baiting Keeps Norfolk City Councilman Riddick in Office?

Booker T. Washington had this to say about people like Riddick;

"There is another class of coloured people who make a business of keeping the troubles, the wrongs, and the hardships of the Negro race before the public. Having learned that they are able to make a living out of their troubles, they have grown into the settled habit of advertising their wrongs — partly because they want sympathy and partly because it pays. Some of these people do not want the Negro to lose his grievances, because they do do not want to lose their jobs."

Andy Protogyrou, who Riddick in the past has called, a ninny seems to have lost his gonads as he has said, ""I'm not going to put my ethical or moral beliefs on somebody I sit next to". Maybe Riddick did describe Andy, a real ninny. 

Kerry Dougherty seems to found Protogyrou's lost manhood with her piece on Riddick

Dougherty addresses [1] Riddick's race-baiting and  [2] the Fear of Norfolk's race baiting industry that allowed that industry to put forward and maintain second rate people like Riddick.

The "race-baiting" industry is an extortion based industry, led by robber barons of hate like Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, Barack Obama, Democratic Representatives Sheila Jackson Lee, Al Green and House Majority leader Steny H. Hoye that for decades been a burgeoning [burgeon >verb grow or increase rapidly. -ORIGIN Old French bourgeonner 'put out buds', from Latin burra 'wool'.] growth industry, generating millions of dollars annually. Now Norfolk’s officials, officers, employees, and commissioners as well as Norfolk’s officials, officers, employees and city council members has joined their ranks by remaining silent about Riddick.

This will come to light when from the witness chair members of Norfolk’s city council will have to testify that members have allowed race bating threats to give Riddicks a pass.

*

*

Look, someone has to assure City Councilman Tommy Smigiel that he shouldn't take it personally. Guess I'll have to do it.

So what if he is the only member of that governing body who wants to stand up and denounce Councilman Paul Riddick's long history of not paying taxes?

Lack of courage on Norfolk's City Council? Color me unsurprised.

It's not just Norfolk, either. Over in Virginia Beach, a councilman was once shunned after he tried to get the city to refrain from public-private partnerships with convicted felons.

Then, as now, the indifference of the majority says more about those gutless politicians than it does about the lone wolf baying at the moon.

According to a story by Harry Minium in Tuesday's Pilot, Smigiel has tried to drum up support for a move to censure Riddick, who is being sued by the feds for about $246,000 in back taxes.

Frankly, the flaccid "no comments" and "I don't want to pass judgment on my colleague" reactions to Smigiel are sickening shows of cowardice. Ever wonder how things have gone so wrong recently in Norfolk? Look no farther than the city's sapless leaders.

Fact is, most on the Norfolk City Council seem to fear Riddick. No one's quicker to play the race card than the man from Ward 4, and these trembling milquetoasts wilt at the prospect of being called racists. Or crackers. Or rednecks. Terms hurled in the past at those who displeased Riddick.

Then again, many on the council are just being true to their nature. They're politicians, after all. They may need Riddick sometime, so why aggravate the volatile man?

No one expects the mayor to take the lead on something like this, but newcomer Andy Protogyrou's "I'm not going to put my ethical or moral beliefs on somebody I sit next to" is profoundly disappointing.

Protogyrou is a lawyer - OK, so is the mayor - so surely he knows the difference between ethical obligations and legal ones.

Paying taxes isn't something most of us do out of a sense of moral duty. We pay them because if we don't, we'll be slapped with interest, penalties, loss of wages, liens against our property or jail time.

Expressing outrage at an elected official who didn't contribute his fair share isn't passing moral judgment. It's telling a person in a position of public trust that they are wrong.

Finally, there's the reaction of Councilman Barclay Winn, who responded to Smigiel's request with a resigned "I'm not sure what that would accomplish."

Well, I am.

A strong, unanimous denunciation of Riddick would set a terrific tone. It would isolate the resident scofflaw, which might hasten his resignation. It would also demonstrate revulsion for individuals who don't pay their taxes, making it more palatable when the city pursues ordinary tax delinquents who don't hold public office.

Finally, it would send a clear message to the voters of Ward 4 that they're being represented by someone who is becoming a pariah.

Whom are we kidding? That won't happen.

Still, Tommy Smigiel needs to stay strong as he embarks on this lonely crusade. It isn't easy being the only person on the council with courage.

News researcher Maureen Watts contributed to this column.

Kerry Dougherty, 757-446-2306, kerry.dougherty@cox.net

1/30/2012 Virginia General Assembly Updates

**********************************************************

Call MONDAY

CALL MONDAY - SUPPORT

Both SJ 3 and SB 240 are on the docket to be heard by the Senate Privileges & Elections (P&E) Committee on Tuesday, January 31^st, 4 p.m., Senate Room A.  Please contact your senator on Monday and ask them to vote YES on both SJ 3 and SB 240.  Plan to attend this meeting if you can.

Senate Privileges & Elections Committee

Sen. Mark D. Obenshain (R) (804) 698-7526 district26@senate.virginia.gov (chairman)

Sen. Charles W. Carrico, Sr. (R) (804) 698-7540 district40@senate.virginia.gov

Sen. R. Creigh Deeds (D) (804) 698-7525 district25@senate.virginia.gov

Sen. John S. Edwards (D) (804) 698-7521 district21@senate.virginia.gov

Sen. Thomas A. Garrett, Jr. (R) (804) 698-7522 district22@senate.virginia.gov

Sen. Janet D. Howell (D) (804) 698-7532 district32@senate.virginia.gov

Sen. Stephen H. Martin (R) (804) 698-7511 district11@senate.virginia.gov

Sen. A. Donald McEachin (D) (804) 698-7509 district09@senate.virginia.gov

Sen. Jeffrey L. McWaters (R) (804) 698-7508 district08@senate.virginia.gov

Sen. Ralph S. Northam (D) (804) 698-7506 district06@senate.virginia.gov

Sen. J. Chapman Petersen (D) (804) 698-7534 district34@senate.virignia.gov

Sen. Phillip P. Puckett (D) (804) 698-7538 district38@senate.virginia.gov

Sen. Bryce E. Reeves (R) (804) 698-7517 district17@senate.virginia.gov

Sen. Ralph K. Smith (R) (804) 698-7519 district19@senate.virginia.gov

Sen. Jill Holtzman Vogel (R) (804) 698-7527 district27@senate.virginia.gov

**********************************************************

WE SUPPORT THESE BILLS

1)  Eminent Domain Constitutional Amendment:

Senate Privileges & Elections Committee

Sen. Mark D. Obenshain (R) (804) 698-7526 district26@senate.virginia.gov (chairman)

Sen. Charles W. Carrico, Sr. (R) (804) 698-7540 district40@senate.virginia.gov

Sen. R. Creigh Deeds (D) (804) 698-7525 district25@senate.virginia.gov

Sen. John S. Edwards (D) (804) 698-7521 district21@senate.virginia.gov

Sen. Thomas A. Garrett, Jr. (R) (804) 698-7522 district22@senate.virginia.gov

Sen. Janet D. Howell (D) (804) 698-7532 district32@senate.virginia.gov

Sen. Stephen H. Martin (R) (804) 698-7511 district11@senate.virginia.gov

Sen. A. Donald McEachin (D) (804) 698-7509 district09@senate.virginia.gov

Sen. Jeffrey L. McWaters (R) (804) 698-7508 district08@senate.virginia.gov

Sen. Ralph S. Northam (D) (804) 698-7506 district06@senate.virginia.gov

Sen. J. Chapman Petersen (D) (804) 698-7534 district34@senate.virignia.gov

Sen. Phillip P. Puckett (D) (804) 698-7538 district38@senate.virginia.gov

Sen. Bryce E. Reeves (R) (804) 698-7517 district17@senate.virginia.gov

Sen. Ralph K. Smith (R) (804) 698-7519 district19@senate.virginia.gov

Sen. Jill Holtzman Vogel (R) (804) 698-7527 district27@senate.virginia.gov

Senate Privileges & Elections Committee

Sen. Mark D. Obenshain (R) (804) 698-7526 district26@senate.virginia.gov (chairman)

Sen. Charles W. Carrico, Sr. (R) (804) 698-7540 district40@senate.virginia.gov

Sen. R. Creigh Deeds (D) (804) 698-7525 district25@senate.virginia.gov

Sen. John S. Edwards (D) (804) 698-7521 district21@senate.virginia.gov

Sen. Thomas A. Garrett, Jr. (R) (804) 698-7522 district22@senate.virginia.gov

Sen. Janet D. Howell (D) (804) 698-7532 district32@senate.virginia.gov

Sen. Stephen H. Martin (R) (804) 698-7511 district11@senate.virginia.gov

Sen. A. Donald McEachin (D) (804) 698-7509 district09@senate.virginia.gov

Sen. Jeffrey L. McWaters (R) (804) 698-7508 district08@senate.virginia.gov

Sen. Ralph S. Northam (D) (804) 698-7506 district06@senate.virginia.gov

Sen. J. Chapman Petersen (D) (804) 698-7534 district34@senate.virignia.gov

Sen. Phillip P. Puckett (D) (804) 698-7538 district38@senate.virginia.gov

Sen. Bryce E. Reeves (R) (804) 698-7517 district17@senate.virginia.gov

Sen. Ralph K. Smith (R) (804) 698-7519 district19@senate.virginia.gov

Sen. Jill Holtzman Vogel (R) (804) 698-7527 district27@senate.virginia.gov

2)  Currency:

 Robert G. Marshall | all patrons

Study; joint subcommittee to study alternative medium of commerce or currency; report. Establishes a joint subcommittee to study whether the Commonwealth should adopt an alternate medium of commerce or currency to serve as an alternative to the currency distributed by the Federal Reserve System in the event of a major breakdown of the Federal Reserve System.

WE OPPOSE THESE BILLS

1)  School Choice:

 James P. "Jimmie" Massie, III | all patrons 

Income tax; educational improvement scholarships tax credits.  Establishes a credit beginning in taxable year 2012 for corporations donating cash or property to nonprofit organizations providing education improvement scholarships to students who would have been eligible for the free and reduced lunch program under federal law, in order for them to attend nonpublic elementary or secondary schools. Nonprofit organizations to which donations are made would be required to distribute at least 90 percent of their tax-credit-derived funds for such scholarships. The credit would equal 70 percent of the donation made by the corporation and would be refundable. Any corporation taking a charitable deduction on its federal income tax return would be required to add that amount back to its Virginia taxable income in order to receive the credit. There is a $25 million annual cap for the credits.

*

*

President Barack Obama spoke up for the economic interests of the little guy in his State of the Union speech to Congress on January 24th.  On January 26th, the President spoke in Las Vegas about using taxpayer dollars to improve the economic well-being on one of those little guys in particular—Texas billionaire T. Boone Pickens.  He urged voters to support the Pickens Payoff Plan (officially titled the NAT GAS Act), a bipartisan bill sponsored in the Senate by Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada and in the House by Representative John Sullivan (R-Okla.).

The bill, H. R. 1380 in the House and S. 1863 in the Senate, would provide huge new subsidies to buyers and users of heavy duty trucks that use natural gas.  Pickens owns Clean Energy Fuels, which builds and runs natural gas service stations.  He also has major investments in a number of companies in the natural gas industry.  The value of these investments would probablyi ncrease by several billion dollars if the bill were enacted.

However, Pickens has been clear that he has spent $100 million “of his own money” to promote the Pickens Your Pocket legislation only out of love for his country.  “I’m sure not doing this for the money,” he told the New York Times last May.

Report: Obama has no constitutional authority on oil decision

When President Obama denied a permit for the $7 billion Keystone pipeline project stretching from Canada to Texas, many feared the project was dead – but a Republican lawmaker is preparing to bypass the president altogether and get the pipeline back on track.

H.R. 3548, submitted by Lee Terry, R-Neb., would take the decision out of Obama’s hands and order the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, or FERC, to issue a permit within 30 days.

Some say the decision never belonged to the president anyway.

According to a March 2011 report by the Congressional Research Service, it was a presidential executive order in 1968 that first laid claim to giving the president authority over cross-border oil infrastructure.

“The executive branch has exercised permitting authority over the construction and operation of ‘pipelines, conveyor belts, and similar facilities for the exportation or importation of petroleum, petroleum products’ and other products at least since the promulgation of Executive Order 11423 in 1968,” according to the report.

The report said no constitutional authority is cited that would give any president this authority normally reserved for Congress.

“Generally, powers exercised by the executive branch are authorized by legislation or are inherent presidential powers based in the Constitution. E.O.,” it states. “11423 makes no mention of any authority.”

In the 1990s, the Sierra Club argued this very point, claiming then-President Clinton lacked authority to issue a permit for another cross-border pipeline, the Alberta Clipper, because E.O. 11423 doesn’t identify where that power originated.

Clinton argued that the president does have authority, if not through executive order, then surely as commander in chief, as well as through a president’s responsibility over foreign affairs.

In the Sierra Club case, a U.S. District court agreed with Clinton, largely due to years of inaction on the part of Congress in assuming control of the process.

“Congress has not attempted to exercise any exclusive authority over the permitting process,” the court said. “Congress’ inaction suggests that Congress has accepted the authority of the president to issue cross-border permits.”

H.R. 3548 aims to change that.

In her Jan. 25 testimony before a House subcommittee on energy regarding H.R. 3548, Assistant Secretary of State Kerri-Ann Jones acknowledged receipt of the permit application for the 1,700-mile pipeline back in 2008.

She said, “A rigorous and transparent process was begun to determine if the pipeline was in the national interest.”

Based on a proposed route change affecting the sand hills of Nebraska, Jones told the committee the process was stopped in November so a new impact study could be launched.

Jones said her department needs until early 2013 to “complete our assessment.”

She then explained that the Temporary Payroll Tax Cut Continuation Act (H.R. 3765) signed by Obama in December contained language requiring a decision within 60-days. Based on a lack of time to conduct further assessment, the secretary of state recommended that the president deny the permit request.

Rep. Terry recently told Nebraska Radio Network Obama’s statement regarding the denial was not what Congress had been told over the course of the last year.

“The president’s statement said they wanted more time, which is contradictory to what they told us in April, May, June, July, and August and September, where they said they had all the information,” he said

“The law [H.R. 3765] signed by the president said he could only deny it [Keystone XL permit] if it’s in the national interest to deny it,” Terry explained. “They did not make any statement of national interest. They just said they needed more time.”

The president’s statement from Jan. 18 says in part:

“As the State Department made clear last month, the rushed and arbitrary deadline insisted on by congressional Republicans prevented a full assessment of the pipeline’s impact, especially the health and safety of the American people, as well as our environment.

“As a result, the secretary of state has recommended that the application be denied. And after reviewing the State Department’s report, I agree.”

Rep. Fred Upton, R-Mich., also spoke at the Jan. 25 hearing and explained that the deadlines both Jones and President Obama referenced were anything but “arbitrary.”

“Last July, the House passed a bill requiring the State Department to make its long-overdue decision on Keystone XL by Nov. 1. It was truly a bipartisan effort, with 47 Democrats joining nearly all Republicans in supporting this reasonable measure,” he said. “The bill probably would have garnered even more votes if not for the administration’s repeated assurances that it is going to make a decision before the end of 2011, and that a legislated deadline is not necessary.

“Unfortunately, as the end of the year approached, the administration reversed position and postponed its decision to 2013 at the earliest.

“In response, Congress gave the president a second chance to do the right thing by providing him another 60 days to approve Keystone XL as part of the payroll tax bill, but last week he decided to reject the project.”

Upton said he supports H.R. 3548 because the “shovel ready” project will create tens of thousands of American jobs, reduce gas prices at the pump and strengthen the nation’s energy security by reliably bringing in oil from “our ally Canada” rather than importing from “far less friendly producers.”

“It is no surprise that so many American’s consider this decision to be a no-brainer,” he said.

Rep. Ed Whitfield, R-Ky., also spoke at the hearing, noting, “The phrase ‘national interest’ should be somewhat simple to understand.”

“If the nation is plagued by persistent unemployment and a private company is willing to spend $7 billion to construct an infrastructure project, putting over 100,000 people to work – that sounds like something that serves the national interest,” he said. “If our president decides that sending aircraft carrier strike groups to the Strait of Hormuz to defend oil flow is in the national interest, then one would also think a pipeline from Canada that would help eliminate our Middle East oil imports also serves the national interest.”

Whitfield added, “Unfortunately, that is not the same conclusion that President Obama reached, stating that they needed more time. Over three years was not enough time. Eleven agencies reviewing the pipeline was not enough review.”

He concluded by reminding the committee of the State Department’s own assessment, that the “no-action” option is the wrong option.

“But I fear that is exactly where we’re headed,” Whitfield said.

With the president nixing the project, the best hope for the pipeline project may be through H.R. 3548, which supporters say has a good chance of passing since there is a Republican majority in the House.

The larger hurdle may be in the Senate, but according to Rep. Terry, “There are a lot of senators, even a majority of senators, in favor of the pipeline.”

Terry added, “Harry Reid has been such a strong-arm blocker for the president – Harry Reid will be the problem on this.”

How Reid and Obama will react to H.R. 3548 remains to be seen.

Fox News reported “liberal donors even threatened to cut off funds to Obama’s re-election campaign to protest the project.”

Also, it has been widely reported that Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper is forging ties with China and pushing energy exports to make Canada a global energy “superpower.”

IRAN DISPATCHES HEZBOLLAH TERROR CELLS TO ATTACK

Goal is to intimidate until nuclear capability can be announced

Obama refuses to stop his moslem brothers 

Was this in the

US Marxist Propaganda Media Organs;

New York Times

The Washington Post

L.A. Times

Boston Globe

San Francisco Chronicle

Daily Press

Baltimore Sun

Virginian Pilot

Richmond Times Dispatch

Maybe that is why they are Dying?

Was this on

CNN

MSNBC

ABC

CBS

NBC

FOX

Will it ever be?

News Reports ignore first time Obama ineligibility evidence entered into court record

Was this in the

US Marxist Propaganda Media Organs;

New York Times

The Washington Post

L.A. Times

Boston Globe

San Francisco Chronicle

Daily Press

Baltimore Sun

Virginian Pilot

Richmond Times Dispatch

Maybe that is why they are Dying?

Was this on

CNN

MSNBC

ABC

CBS

NBC

FOX

Will it ever be?

The mainstream media appears to have been put under a “cone of silence” about the first court proceeding to enter into the record evidence that Barack Obama is ineligible to be president based on the Constitution’s requirement that that office be occupied only by a “natural-born citizen.”

Georgia administrative law judge Michael Malihi on Thursday heard evidence from a variety of witnesses on why the president’s name should not appear on the Georgia state ballot for the 2012 election.

Earlier in the month, the judge had issued a subpoena for the president to appear before his court to answer challenges to his eligibility as a candidate.

Georgia law permits the secretary of state and “any elector who is eligible to vote for a candidate” in the state to challenge the qualifications of any candidate.

Michael Jablonski, attorney for Obama, attempted to have the subpoena quashed, arguing that taking the time to appear would “interrupt [Obama's] duties as president of the United States.”

While Thursday’s hearing was taking place, Obama was speaking to a group of UPS workers in Las Vegas, one of the states where he hopes to gain a vote advantage in the November election.

Following the judge’s refusal to drop the subpoena, the president’s lawyers stated they would ignore the subpoena and not participate in the proceedings.

Later, appearing on the Rachel Maddow show, Mike Berlon, Georgia Democratic Party chairman, defended the president’s actions, saying the case was much ado about nothing.

“This has been thoroughly and richly litigated for a long time, and every court that has looked at it has determined that the president is a citizen,” he said.

But the facts don’t support Berlon’s statement, as this week’s hearing marks the first time that the evidence against the president’s eligibility has been entered into any court record. The dozens of previous cases that have been brought against the president have been dismissed on technicalities such as “standing.”

It is also the first time arguments have been made that the president is ineligible based on his own statements.

The presidency is unique among all of the constitutionally held offices in that it requires the person holding the position to be a “natural-born citizen,” not just a typical citizen of the U.S.

While the Constitution does not define the term “natural-born citizen,” many constitutional experts define it as the offspring of two citizen parents. The argument is supported by a U.S. Supreme Court decision from 1875, Minor v. Happersett.

The ruling, which is one of the few cases addressing the issue of natural-born citizenship as opposed to a naturalized citizen, states:

The Constitution does not in words say who shall be natural-born citizens. Resort must be had elsewhere to ascertain that. At common law, with the nomenclature of which the framers of the Constitution were familiar, it was never doubted that all children born in a country of parents who were its citizens became themselves, upon their birth, citizens also. These were natives or natural-born citizens, as distinguished from aliens or foreigners.

Based on this standard, the birth certificate released by Obama proves he is not eligible as his father was a non-citizen who came from Kenya.

The hearing Thursday produced a wide range of evidence from experts testifying that the president’s birth certificate was a forgery to issues with his Social Security number, which does not match the president’s name in e-verify.

Regardless of political persuasion, a sitting U.S. president openly defying a court subpoena for a hearing at which evidence indicating he’s a usurper is entered into the record is newsworthy.

However, a look at mainstream media websites shows an almost total blackout.

CNN, ABC, CBS and NBC did not run any coverage on Thursday’s hearing, with the exception of some local affiliates in Atlanta. The Fox News Channel’s report was a day later.

WND contacted the news organizations asking for comment on why they did not believe the story was newsworthy, considering the precedents set in the hearing. At the time of this article’s publication, none chose to respond.

The Atlanta Journal Constitution was one of the few newspapers to cover the event; however, its coverage did not discuss the ramifications if the judge were to rule Obama ineligible to appear on the ballot.

The media blackout of the Georgia case is part of a continuing pattern of covering up serious discussion of the birth certificate issue.

During the court martial of Lt. Col. Terry Lakin, who refused to obey orders over concerns about the president’s eligibility, the media for the most part refused to cover the issue.

Stars and Stripes, Military.com, WND and a local reporter from Lakin’s home town were at the proceedings, however there was almost no representation by major media outlets.

Many retired officers who come out against the president’s eligibility, such as Maj. Gens. Jerry Curry and Paul Vallely, have also been ignored by media.

Media have also refused to report polls showing many Americans still have doubts about the president’s eligibility.

Just last month, a Democratic polling company’s survey indicated that a majority of Iowa caucus goers still did not believe the president was born in the United States.

Public Polling Policy released the results of a poll conducted Dec. 18, which showed that 52 percent of self-identified caucus goers either did not believe or were not sure the president was born in the U.S.

WND founder and CEO Joseph Farah also has been the subject of a media blackout over the issue.

Farah used to be a frequent guest on cable news shows, however once he made the decision to cover the constitutional issues of a president of the United States possibly being ineligible for the office, he became “persona non grata” on many of the same media outlets.

Egypt sees BAM as many voters do, a man with his head up his ass

Egypt's government is holding US citizens prisoners as they have no fear that their fellow moslem brother will raise a hand to stop them.

Obama’s State of the Union address - coupled with recent troubling decisions by his administration to expand a pattern of de facto amnesty for illegal immigrants - cemented the unfortunate reality that this president continues intentionally to abdicate a responsibility to advance serious immigration reform. Empty rhetoric, repetitive platitudes and continued support for the already-rejected Dream Act do not make up a comprehensive proposal to this complex policy issue.

These remarks follow the administration’s decision to ease certain regulations on the visa program and move to release some deportation cases by focusing solely on whether a person poses “a national security threat,” only the latest addition to a list of blatant unilateral White House orders intended to curry favor with Hispanics.

The politics is conniving: Portray reform-minded Republicans and conservatives as unsympathetic to this fastest-growing demographic sector and bolster the president’s re-election chances in swing states with significant Hispanic votes, such as Florida, New Mexico, Virginia, Colorado and Arizona.

This scheme is not only misguided, but to someone who legally entered this great nation as a youth, it’s appalling.

I join most Americans, especially fellow Hispanics, across the political and ideological spectrum who understand the importance of legal immigration as vital to sustaining the greatness of America’s economic and cultural fabric.

It’s an absurd idea - fronted by liberals and often a complicit media - that legal immigrants, including Hispanics, who chose to follow the rule of law and contribute to the American community would be willing to give a subservient pass - let alone their vote - to politicians who embrace and promote the politics of illegal immigration and leave nearly 12 million undocumented aliens in limbo.

With a broken system, illegal immigration makes a mockery of the promise of legal immigration, and the American people are rightfully fedup.

According to a Gallup poll released last week, liberals were the only ideological or party segment to express greater satisfaction than dissatisfaction with current levels of immigration. All others, including Democrats, supported a decrease in immigration levels.

Gallup also found that “Americans’ dissatisfaction with immigration ranks third highest among 17 issues Gallup asked about.”

It’s little wonder that immigration is gaining as a critical election-year issue, with voters questioning inaction on reform.

Republicans in their presidential primary are taking note and debating immigration proposals - as they should. As Florida, my home state, takes center stage in the primary cycle, expect voters to demand more answers on immigration. Today, the leading Republican candidates will address the Hispanic Leadership Network’s annual conference in Miami, hosted by former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush. It’s the perfect opportunity for them to outline their specific proposals.

There is little chance that Congress will address significant immigration reform this year. However, the issue must be a top priority in the first 100 days of 2013, and any serious reform legislation must embrace these key principles: vastly improved border security; visa reform for highly skilled workers, investors and agricultural workers; and the documenting of the millions of illegal immigrants already here.

The first priority must be to develop a comprehensive border-security-and-surveillance strategy to include increased border manpower, strengthened border barriers, expanded surveillance capabilities, enhanced investigative personnel and enforced border detention.

Update From Tertium Quids on the 2012 Virginia General Assembly Session

*

John Taylor:

Legislative Update 1-26-2012

**********************************************************

Call TODAY

OPPOSE

This bill, patroned by Del. Massie and brought to the House again this year, purports to bring school choice to Virginia.  However, Massie's bill does not provide real choice, but it would provide political cover for politicians while rising costs and falling public educational outcomes continue to plague all but the tiniest fraction of students, parents and taxpayers. As Dr. Adam Schaeffer of the Cato Institute says, a bad law is worse for school choice than nothing at all.

**********************************************************

WE SUPPORT THESE BILLS

1)  Eminent Domain Constitutional Amendment:

2)  Currency:

 Robert G. Marshall | all patrons

Study;joint subcommittee to study alternative medium of commerce or currency; report. Establishes a joint subcommittee to study whether the Commonwealth should adopt an alternate medium of commerce or currency to serve as an alternative to the currency distributed by the Federal Reserve System in the event of a major breakdown of the Federal Reserve System.

WE OPPOSE THESE BILLS

1)  School Choice:

 James P. "Jimmie" Massie, III | all patrons 

Income tax; educational improvement scholarships tax credits.  Establishes a credit beginning in taxable year 2012 for corporations donating cash or property to nonprofit organizations providing education improvement scholarships to students who would have been eligible for the free and reduced lunch program under federal law, in order for them to attend nonpublic elementary or secondary schools. Nonprofit organizations to which donations are made would be required to distribute at least 90 percent of their tax-credit-derived funds for such scholarships. The credit would equal 70 percent of the donation made by the corporation and would be refundable. Any corporation taking a charitable deduction on its federal income tax return would be required to add that amount back to its Virginia taxable income in order to receive the credit. There is a $25 million annual cap for the credits.

To find your legislator, please follow this link:

Tax credits; assistance to low-income families, scholarships for K through 12 students attending private schools.  Establishes a credit beginning in taxable year 2012 for certain business entities making monetary donations to nonprofit organizations providing education improvement scholarships to students whose family's annual household income is not in excess of 300 percent of the current poverty guidelines and certain students with disabilities, in order for them to attend nonpublic elementary or secondary schools. Nonprofit organizations to which donations are made would be required to distribute at least 90 percent of their tax-credit-derived funds in the form of scholarships to such students. The credit would equal 84 percent of the donation made by the business entity and any unused credit for the taxable year would be refundable. There is an annual cap of $50 million in tax credits for the scholarship program. The Department of Education would administer the tax credit program.

The bill also expands the current Neighborhood Assistance Act Tax Credit program by increasing the tax credit percentage from 40 to 64 percent; expanding the eligibility criteria for programs qualifying for tax credits to encompass programs providing services to certain students with disabilities and individuals whose family's annual household income is not in excess of 300 percent of the poverty guidelines; and repealing the July 1, 2014, sunset for the program. Current law provides that programs qualifying for tax credits must provide services to individuals whose family's annual household income is not in excess of 200 percent of the current poverty guidelines.

To find your legislator, please follow this link:

http://conview.state.va.us/whosmy.nsf/main?openform

            Please feel free to forward this message and future updates to your list.

John Taylor

President

Tertium Quids

282 Bald Rock Road

Verona, VA  24482

540-245-1776

JTaylor@TertiumQuids.org

Update From Tertium Quids on the 2012 Virginia General Assembly Session

*

John Taylor:

2012 General Assembly Session  

            Let me begin by reminding you what an advantageous position we are in right now.  When a political party controls everything, as the Republicans currently do in Virginia, we learn what that party really stands for.  In the next several years, if not the next several months, we will know if the Virginia GOP is truly about limited government, low taxes, the protection of private property, and improving K-12 education through competition, or whether free markets and conservative principles are nothing more than empty words that are paid lip service during campaigns, but forgotten as soon as one is sworn in to public office.  We will quickly learn whether our Delegates and Senators are representing their constituents back home in their districts, or whether they are representing the interests of the state government apparatus in Richmond.  Do they represent you, or are they simply serving as financial intermediaries between the citizens of Virginia who produce wealth (that’s you and me), and the special interests who want access to that wealth and who currently can be seen jamming the hallways of the General Assembly building?

            Yes, the Republicans control the Governor’s mansion, the Lt. Governor’s office, the office of the Attorney General, the Senate, and the House.  There will be no blaming the Democrats for failure or weak efforts.  We are about to learn if the Republicans can be counted on as the foil to the Progressives, or whether we must start looking elsewhere for leaders who, in fact, do understand the legacy of Washington, Jefferson, Madison, Henry, Mason, and Monroe.

             This year, once again, we will be tracking a number of bills that have been introduced in the General Assembly.  Some of these bills, we support.  Others, we oppose.

             As is our custom, we will send out daily updates regarding the change in status of these bills – what subcommittee or committee the bills are in, when they are due to be voted on, who is on that committee, what are the phone numbers and e-mail addresses of those legislators.

             Let’s get started –

SUPPORT

HJ 3 (Del. Robert Bell)

SJ 3 (Sen. Mark Obenshain)

Our main effort for this session is the second passage of the constitutional amendment pertaining to eminent domain reform.

I recently forwarded a memo written by Jeremy Hopkins, partner with the law firm Waldo & Lyle in Norfolk, that provides answers to the commonly regurgitated criticisms of the amendment.  If you did not receive that memo, contact me and I will send you one.

This constitutional amendment pits the people of Virginia against the special interest condemnors (i.e., businesses that want your property, but would prefer not having to pay for it), and the state and municipal governments (i.e., VDOT).  Now who will our elected officials choose to represent?

HB 5 (Del. Robert Bell)

SB 240 (Del. Mark Obenshain)

These bills provide for a referendum question on the November 6, 2012 election ballot to approve or reject the constitutional amendment referenced above.

HJ 118 (Del. Robert Marshall)

Establishes a joint subcommittee to study whether Virginia should adopt an alternative medium of commerce or currency to serve as an alternative to the currency distributed by the Federal Reserve System in the event of a major collapse of the Federal Reserve System.

For those lucky individuals who attend the Tuesday Morning Group coalition meetings, you recently heard Tom Rustici, Ph.D., assistant professor of economics at George Mason University, and Edwin Vieira, Ph.D., J.D. describe the necessity of acting now to study this issue.  Professor Rustici mentioned during his presentation that Professor Don Boudreaux, Ph.D., J.D., the former chairman of the economics department at George Mason, Professor Walter Williams, Ph.D., the former chairman of the economics department at George Mason, Professor Lawrence White, Ph.D., also of George Mason, and Nobel laureate Vernon Smith, Ph.D. had endorsed this effort.

______________________________________________  

 OPPOSE

             For the second year in a row, we were unable to find a free-market conservative to carry our school choice bill.  We work with policy professionals – Adam Schaeffer, Ph.D. at the Cato Institute and Lindsey Burke at The Heritage Foundation – to produce the policy reports that provide the intellectual ammunition for what we will later propose.  We develop draft language for legislation.  We build support at the grassroots level by obtaining the endorsements for this legislation from the individual organizations within the Tuesday Morning Group coalition as well as the Virginia Tea Party Patriots Federation.  Polling shows that in every demographic group at least 60% of voters support school choice.  And yet, in this session we have three watered-down school choice bills that, if passed, would actually become obstacles to meaningful legislation in the future.

            The three weak school choice bills, which we oppose, are:  

HB 321           Del. Jimmie Massie

SB 241            Sen. Mark Obenshain

SB 131            Sen. Bill Stanley  

            Adam Schaeffer, Ph.D. identified the flaws in these three bills as well as those components which should be included in a good bill:  

1. There is no auto-expansion provision.
2. It allows only a 70% or 90% credit for donations to scholarship-granting organizations.
3. It allows only businesses, not individual taxpayers, to claim education tax credits.
4. Parents cannot claim tax credits for their child’s education expenses.
5. It does not cover all families.

This kind of policy, rather than advancing education reform, would most likely block a real expansion of educational freedom in Virginia for years if not decades. This education tax credit policy is not a sufficient reform.

1. Provide a 100% credit,
2. Have an automatic cap increase of 25% per year if 90% of the credit cap is claimed.
3. Apply to individuals and businesses.
4. Allow the use of credits for donations and one’s own children.
5. Include all children.
6. Cover home-schooling expenses, not just private school tuition.
7. Begin at $100 million.

            Senator Bill Stanley at a recent Tea Party event said that he knew constituents were unhappy with the weak school choice legislation that is being put forward, but “we need to start the conversation in Virginia.”  Since I founded the Virginia Institute 16 years ago, almost every year I have listened to arguments that this school-choice bill or that school-choice bill, while representing a nose-of-the-camel-under-the-tent approach, is the most we can hope to get passed.  Every year the legislation fails because it affects so few students and parents that public support for the measure is minimal.  And every year states with less of a Republican majority than Virginia, and with a much more powerful teachers’ union, leave Virginia in the dust by moving forward on school choice.  Who should the voters in Virginia hold accountable for the lives of children that have been wasted in the last 16 years while we knowingly assigned students to public schools in which they could not possibly get an education?  

            But Senator Stanley wants to “start the conversation!”  Considering that the idea of school choice was originally put forward by Nobel laureate Milton Friedman in the 1960s, it is somewhat underwhelming that a half-century later we are going to “start the conversation” in Virginia. Real conservatives will never stand by and watch as the meaning of conservatism becomes synonymous with “left behind and out-of-date.”  

            We may add other bills to our Support/Oppose lists as the session progresses if something particularly good is identified, or something particularly egregious comes to our attention.  As always we appreciate your participation in ensuring that the people of Virginia remain sovereign and the Commonwealth remains open to freedom and prosperity.

            Please feel free to forward this message and future updates to your list.

John Taylor

President

Tertium Quids

282 Bald Rock Road

Verona, VA  24482

540-245-1776

JTaylor@TertiumQuids.org