Jim's Blog

Teachers' Retirement Ruling Provides State Opportunity to Avoid Digging a New Financial Hole

2007-02-02T19:26:00.000-05:00

When you find yourself in a hole, the first thing you need to do is stop digging. Former Senate Finance Committee Chairman Oshel Craigo, D-Putnam, was fond of saying this (or something very similar).

Two years ago, the Ruling Party had the bright idea of transferring all public school teachers who were first hired after July 1, 1991, from the Teachers' Defined Contribution Plan to the old Teachers' Retirement System (TRS), the defined benefit plan the Legislature had (in a very rare display of wisdom) closed to new enrollees in 1991 after finding the TRS had a multi-billion (that Billion with a B, folks) dollar actuarial, present-value unfunded liability.

However, fast-forward 14 years. The bleeding had been stopped, the Legislature had adopted a 40-plan to amortize the unfunded liability, and almost half of all public school teachers in West Virginia were on defined contribution retirement plans. However, there was just one problem: the teachers predominately did not receive good financial advice. Many of them were lured into buying some very poor investments by some unscrupulous investment houses who decided to employ former teachers to market these poor investments to current teachers.

In 2005, the Legislature tried (ultimately unsuccessfully) to pass a $5 billion bond to cover the unfunded liabilities in the state's pension funds, predominately the TRS. To help build political support for this measure, the Legislature offered a carrot: all teachers who were hired after the July 1, 1991, closing of the TRS to new members would, together with their defined benefit plans, be transferred to the TRS. This was contingent on a mail ballot election by defined contribution plan members; by a simple majority, plan members who voted voted to approve the merger. However, the TRS-defined contribution pln merger had a critical flaw: the transfer from the defined contribution plan to the TRS was mandatory; teachers had no way of opting out of their private accounts being transferred into the TRS. As I wrote many, many moons go, even before I began law school, this was blatantly unconstitutional.

Last month, Kanawha County Circuit Court Judge Paul Zakaib ruled in favor of more than 1,400 teachers who sued to block the confiscation of their individual retirement accounts and blocked the merger. Now, the Legislature has a fresh opportunity to reconsider this very ill-advised move.

Part of the reason the Legislature wanted to force all teachers, including those who preferred to stay in the defined contribution plan, to participate in the merger was because the merger was going to create a new unfunded liability that will likely measure in the billions of dollars if it happens in some form.

Now, the Legislature is considering a new plan to allow teachers in the defined contribution plan to transfer to the TRS on a voluntary basis. This would likely satisfy the constitutional problem with the mandatory merger. However, the financial result of this plan would be even worse for the state and the taxpayers than the original merger plan. The unfunded liability increase this plan would cause will far exceed the increase the original merger plan would have created because only those teachers who would presumptively benefit would transfer into the TRS.

Before the Legislature takes its shovel and starts digging a new hole, it needs to think through several major issues.

First, the Legislature should do no harm by not passing any bill that would add to the state's unfunded liabilities. The Legislature that has repeatedly told us taxpayers that it won't reduce our excessive tax burden because they want to do the "fiscally responsible thing" and focus on amortizing the state's unfunded liabilities first now faces a major test of its commitment to that goal; otherwise, they will expose themselves as merely wanting every tax dollar they may extract from us without us getting a bit too cranky at the next election and throwing them out of office. This means we need to stick with the defined contribution plan.

Second, the Legislature needs to provide defined contribution plan members with prudent financial advisers and regulate the types of investments that plan members may be offered and the marketing practices of investment houses that market investments to plan members.

Third, the Legislature should consider the potential alternatives available for assisting teachers who made bad investments, largely through no fault of their own. Clearly, many teachers who were first employed in West Virginia over the last 15 years will have difficulty affording retirement because of poor investment decisions, many of which were (as I am starting to become a broken record) through no fault of teachers whose expertise in in educating children, not managing investments. I do not pretend to know exactly how this should be done. However, this is the direction we need to go.

If the Legislature would properly regulate the investment of the defined contribution plan funds, West Virginia's teachers would have a decent range of sound investment choices available and sufficient freedom to choose among different alternatives. The regulation of investment options will be key to making a defined contribution plan work for most people.

So please, before we in West Virginia go down the road of digging a brand new hole for our state's finances, let's pull the emergency brake and carefully consider alternatives along the lines I have suggested above rather than add several billion dollars to our unfunded liabilities. And while we're at it, let's increase the chance the state will have the necessary revenue to support whatever "catch-up" program for teachers who had poor investments by reducing the tax burden on the private sector and grow our state's economy. There is no other way that will work.

Governor's State of the State Speech a Snoozer

2007-01-11T23:59:00.000-05:00

Don't blame yourself if you fell asleep or changed the channel for the first time ever during a West Virginia state of the state speech.

Last night's speech from Governor Manchin was uncharacteristically bland & boring, not to mention devoid of big, inspiring ideas to really move West Virginia forward. Tax relief? (crickets chirping) Meaningful public employee pay raises to stem the loss of qualified teachers, state troopers, and correctional officers to other states? (crickets chirping) How about a bold initiative to

Instead of a bold tax relief initiative to transform "Open for Business" from a road sign slogan to reality by adopting broad-based tax reductions over the next decade to be competitive with Virginia (ranked #1 in the Forbes magazine state business climate index--and in which we're 49th), we got a proposal for a state income tax credit to defray the 5% of value-based vehicle privilege tax new residents must pay when registering their cars in West Virginia. Don't get me wrong, this will make becoming a new West Virginia resident a bit less expensive for the handful of people who actually move into this state each year, but it's peanuts when you look at the real picture and does noting to address the fundamental unfairness of the privilege tax. We reduced our corporate income tax from 9% to 8.75% last year, yet we got nothing last night that would have made us competitive with Virginia's 6%. Although the Legislature adopted a small reduction in the punitive business franchise tax last year, we heard nothing about either reducing it further or scheduling it for a full phase-out. Relief from the food tax will continue to drip like a leaky faucet; a reduction to 4% is scheduled for July 1, 2007, and a reduction to 3% is scheduled for July 1, 2008. Why not repeal it now and save thousands of small businesses the administrative headache of having to make at least 2 more adjustments to their accounting systems to tax groceries at a reduced rate? Of our neighboring states, only Virginia (at a reduced rate of 1.5% on the state level and 1% on the local level) still taxes groceries and they're making progress toward eliminating it. Finally, on an even larger scale, no one has even discussed long-term initiatives to reduce our sales and personal income taxes. The sales tax has gradually doubled over the last quarter-century, going from 3% to 5% in 1983 and to 6% in 1988. The 5 brackets of our personal income tax, ranging from 3% to 6.5% have gone untouched since 1987 and no one proposes addressing the marriage penalty (the brackets are identical for both single filers and married couples) or the lack of inflation indexing of the brackets. In 2007, if we had eliminated the marriage penalty and indexed the brackets for inflation since 1987, the top rate of 6.5% would begin at $110,000 for single individuals and $220,000 for married couples instead of its current $60,000 for both. Even with our state's anemic economic growth, a comprehensive tax relief package to 1) eliminate the food tax, 2) reform the privilege tax to treat motor vehicles the same as all other tangible personal property and only tax the sale one time, 3) reduce the state income tax rates by 10% percent across-the-board (1% every year)--which would mean reducing the bottom rate from 3% to 2.7% and the top rate from 6.5% to 5.85% by 2017, 4) eliminate the marriage penalty, 5) institute inflation indexing of the brackets and phase-in this indexing to expand the brackets to what they would be if we had been indexing them for inflation since 1987, and 5) reduce the state sales tax rate from 6% to 4% by 2017 can be done without adversely affecting current revenue levels because the gradual nature of each year's tax cut would both increase economic growth and, to the extent there may be revenue reductions compared to the status quo, could be covered by the small increases we already have from year to year in state revenues.

On the other side of the equation, Governor Manchin proposed raising teacher salaries by 2.5% and correctional officers by $1,000 a year. (yawn) Unlike many states and the federal government, West Virginia has not established automatic, annual cost-of-living adjustments to public employee salaries to prevent inflation from eroding the value of their compensation. At best, the governor's proposal would compensate for inflation since last year. Although I would, in the long term, like to see additional reforms such as hosing cost allowances for the Eastern Panhandle, merit pay to reward outstanding performance and a return to the defined contribution retirement system, I also agree with the WVEA's call for a 6% across-the-board pay raise, especially after they settled for less last year for the since-broken promise of a bigger raise this year. Because of the massive turnover of corrections officers resulting from substantially higher salaries from other states and the growing number of federal prisons in this state, I believe that we should adopt the $5,000 raise desired; on a budgetary level, this raise may actually save the state money by reducing the costs associated with training large numbers of new officers to replace the officers lured to other facilities by their higher pay shortly after being trained in this state.

Finally, I was just incredulous at one of the governor's supposed big ideas: tying "economic development" (pork) funding to counties' efforts on litter control. After the resounding sound of silence after what was supposed to have been the applause line for this initiative, the governor started running through some subsequent applause lines without pausing for the not-so-guaranteed response from a friendly audience.

Byrd Swears off Earmarks? I Don't Think So; Watch for the Federal Budget Digest

2006-12-14T00:37:00.000-05:00

By now, you've probably seen the report from al-AP that the incoming chairmen of the House & Senate Appropriations committees, Congressman David Obey of Wisconsin and West Virginia's very own Robert C. "Big Daddy" Byrd, both of whom chaired their respective committees prior to the 1994 GOP takeover of Congress, have announced they will strip all of this year's remaining appropriations bills of earmarks.

Lest you think the Byrd is changing his ways, fear not my fellow pork-starved West Virginians. Either this is a one-time publicity stunt by a pair of leopards who want you to think they've changed their spots or they've got an even more insidious trick up their sleeves.

The second option is that Byrd will bring to Washington a West Virginia novelty whose use in our state Legislature was abolished early this year, the budget digest.

West Virginia's budget digest was a system whereby the chairmen (later expanded tot he full committee membership) of the finance committees of our state Senate and House of Delegates promulgated a list of projects they intended to have funded from the budget bill. Under this system, our state budget had no earmarks. Although the budget digest was not legally binding, career bureaucrats knew their lives would be much easier if they strictly adhered to the digest. And, as a legally nonbinding instrument, the governor did not have line item veto or reduction powers. This system was severely abused by the leadership of the House of Delegates, leading to a series of lawsuits that eventually prompted the legislative leadership to abolish the budget digest system so they could render the pending litigation moot and prevent discovery of very embarrassing evidence of this abuse.

WV House Speaker-elect Rick Thompson Names Leadership Team

2006-12-13T20:19:00.000-05:00

Sunday, triumphant West Virginia House Democrats overwhelmingly voted to elect trial lawyer Rick Thompson, D-Wayne, as their Speaker to succeed retiring Speaker Bob Kiss, D-Raleigh/Kanawha. With that vote, I suspected there would be grab bags of goodies for both southern machine politicians and a variety of liberal interests.

I was not wrong. Today, Speaker-elect Thompson named his new leadership team. Gambling interests drew a full house with the appointment of Mountaineer Park horse trainer Delegate Joe DeLong, D-Hancock, to be the Majority Leader. Labor unions also fared well, as United Mine Workers official Delegate Mike Caputo, D-Marion, was appointed Majority Whip. Southern coalfields politicos won a major victory with the appointment of Delegate Harry Keith White, D-Mingo, as House Finance Committee Chairman. With little surprise, teachers' unions got their choice with the appointment of Delegate Mary Poling, D-Barbour, to chair the House Education Committee.

However, the true gem of the new leadership team will be in the House Judiciary Committee. Trial lawyers, abortionists, gay marriage supporters, the Charleston Gazette, and every possible left-wing cause you could imagine except gun control will cheer tonight as they learn that Delegate Carrie Webster, D-Kanawha, will take over the gavel of the Judiciary Committee from her (comparatively) far more moderate fellow Kanawha County Delegate Jon Amores. However, thanks to the election of socialist Delegate Nancy Peoples Guthrie, D-Kanawha, and the return to office of Delegate Barbara Evans Fleischauer, D-Monongalia, Webster will have to settle for being just the third most liberal member of the House.

Dems Take Control of PA House; New Speaker to Push Table Games

2006-11-29T10:13:00.000-05:00

One of the last remaining unsettled elections this year was settled yesterday, resulting in Democrats winning a 102-101 majority in the Pennsylvania House of Representatives after a recount changed the outcome of one race. At the top of the agenda of former and future Speaker Bill DeWeese is the legalization of full-service casino gambling at the state's new slot machine parlors.

The prudential question for West Virginia lawmakers, who have been told by gambling lobbyists they must enact table games legislation to stay ahead of surrounding states and keep our "gaming establishments" competitive, is to what new low will the tracks go now? As I have said before, I suspect the next move by the tracks will be to legalize prostitution so they can expand their offerings from simple casinos to casinos with full-service brothels.

UPDATE: Fast Eddie says "Not so fast" to table games; PA may also consider barroom poker machines to spawn roadside mini casinos to compete with West Virginia's poker bars.

Ouch!

2006-11-08T00:14:00.000-05:00

A quote from the past is quite in order today:

"A freight train came through here last night ... If Santa Claus had been running on the Republican ticket, he would have been defeated."
--Gov. Arch A. Moore, Jr., November 6, 1974

That's all I have to say.

Defying the Odds: GOP Victory Tomorrow in Our Hands

2006-11-06T01:38:00.000-05:00

We have reached the end of the journey. Tomorrow is Election Day. The stakes are high. Almost everything that can be done, has been done. Let there be no doubt: the choices we make will impact our future for better or for worse.

As I said, almost everything that can be done, has been done. The one thing that remains is to get out the vote. Despite a seeming eternity of media prognostications that the GOP is roadkill, that Karl Rove has lost his mojo, and that the arrival a new era of liberal supremacy is unstoppable, final polling of a number of key races shows the outcome is too close to call. After all, why should we doubt the apparent confidence of a journalistic establishment that, in an earlier era, went to press before the votes had been counted proclaiming: Dewey defeats Truman? At this moment, I honestly cannot predict the partisan control of either house of Congress come January 3rd.

This is the fourth general election in which I will have cast a ballot--and about the eighth I have monitored closely. (I know, I know: I am not normal, for I have closely watched every election since I was old enough to know what politics & elections were--and I come from a family where no one before me had done anything higher than working the polls.) While I have very strong beliefs regarding the best outcome, I have also developed a keen sense for predicting the likely outcome in advance.

Time will tell whether I've shifted away from a seemingly natural tendency to try to identify a winner and go with him regardless of principle. Once upon a time, when I was very young and foolish, I was a Clinton Kool-Aid drinker. In 1999, although I had already decided that I would oppose Al Gore because his radical environmental policies would destroy the coal industry, I sensed that West Virginia was ready to vote Republican, although I had no idea how consequential our 5 electoral votes would prove. In 2001, after we changed history and put President Bush over the top, I was one of few Republicans (and a new Republican at that, as I was a registered Democrat for about a year, only because I lived in one-party Logan County at the time) who sensed that West Virginia was ready to consider electing Republicans in significant numbers down the ticket; we have since moved into position to take control of the House of Delegates and have more than doubled the number of Republican state senators over the last 5 years. With that in mind, I adamantly prefer another history-defying Republican victory but can only predict that the outcome lies in the hands of those of us who share this preference and whether we vote in sufficiently strong numbers to produce this result.

My appeal today has two audiences: first, my fellow conservatives who are at a crossroads over whether to vote--and vote Republican; second, the very small handful of you who are legitimately independent swing voters.

Elections have consequences--every single one of them. The outcome tomorrow will determine whether our resolve to defeat the terrorists and their allies outweighs the desire of the terrorists to kill us. The terrorists believe that America is a paper tiger--that we are, at our core, a bunch of yellow-bellied cowards who will run from a fight. They believe that, unlike President Bush, most Americans are no longer willing to say, as President Kennedy did 45 years ago:

". . . we shall pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe, in order to assure the survival and the success of liberty."

There is no doubt that the cut-and-run liberals who harken back to the days of Vietnam and Watergate lack the spine and the willingness to win this battle of wills, but are we as a country of like mind? Five years of no attacks on U.S. soil is no accident and has happened only because we have a President who has committed himself to defending our country, no matter what it takes. In 1974, American conservatives stayed home, allowing nearly 50 liberal "Watergate babies" to be swept into the House of Representatives; in 1975, Congress pulled the rug of financial support from under the South Vietnamese, leading to their defeat and the rise of the killing fields--and leaving in vain the deaths of the 58,000 American servicemen who never came home. That must not happen again as the Iraqi people put their lives on the line to establish a free society and representative government that will shine like a beacon over the entire Middle East, inspiring the oppressed to seek freedom instead of terror and futures as contributing, productive members of open societies instead of martyrs in the cause of jihad.

At home, the consequences are just as stark. For those of us on the right, perhaps no issue is more important than realigning the federal judiciary. Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Sam Alito would not have been confirmed to the Supreme Court under a Democratic Senate. In 1986, a Republican Senate unanimously confirmed Antonin Scalia to the Court; however, in 1987, a Democratic Senate Borked the nomination of Judge Robert Bork. In the wake of Bork's defeat, a moderate Anthony Kennedy was confirmed and President Bush the elder timidly chose David Souter as his first Supreme Court nominee instead of a known conservative. The 1986 election turned the 55-45 Republican majority into a 53-47 Democratic majority; 5 of those losses were by very narrow margins. A few thousand votes in a handful of states (most of which were conservative southern states) meant that 20 years later, a Supreme Court that could have had a reliable 6-3 conservative majority is now divided 4-4-1.

In the War on Terror, Republicans supported spying on the terrorists, tracing and blocking their money, and getting aggressive with them during interrogations at Club Gitmo when they tried not to spill the beans on their upcoming plans. Democrats did not. Their allies at the New York Times blew the cover of our NSA terrorist surveillance program and financial monitoring program. In a just society, the editorial suite of the Old Gray Lady would be marched to the gallows for treason.

We also face choices on whether the President's tax cuts that have revived an economy that was once reeling in the wake of a recession exacerbated by 9-11 and accounting scandals should continue or whether we should, by inaction, allow the largest tax increase in our history to silently take effect. Because of an unprecedented move by Senate Democrats in 2001 to filibuster the tax cuts, the tax cuts had to be enacted under arcane rules that automatically repealed them in 10 years unless renewed by a future act of Congress. So now, the clock is ticking. Over the next 5 years, the top marginal rates in each tax bracket will rise between 13% and 50%; taxes on capital gains will rise by 1/3; dividend taxes will rise 164%; the 55% Death Tax, scheduled itself to die in 2010, will rise from the dead in 2011; small businesses will lose a variety of favorable tax accounting rules that have created huge incentives for job-creating investments; and families with children will see $500 per child in new taxes just through the loss of the increased child tax credit, which will drop from $1000 per child to $500 per child, not to mention other factors that will increase their tax bills. That is, unless Congress makes the tax cuts permanent. The House of Representatives has voted every year to do so; the Senate has not because breaking a filibuster requires 60 votes and there are only 55 Republican senators, not all of whom can be counted upon all the time. House Ways and Means Committee Ranking Member (and Chairman if the Democrats take control) Charlie Rangel says there's not one of the hundreds of provisions of the tax cut package he would like to continue. House Speaker Wannabe Nancy Pelosi, D-San Francisco, says she likes tax cuts; as the President has been saying, she must be a secret admirer, because she has not voted a single time to cut taxes when it counted.

Thanks to the President's tax cuts and resulting economic boom, unemployment in the U.S. today is 4.4%; unemployment in France is twice the U.S. rate, at 8.8%; Germany is two and a half times ours, with 10.4% unemployment; even our neighbors to the north in Canada have 40% higher unemployment, at 6.2%. U.S. stocks are trading at all-time highs; interest rates still remain near historic lows; inflation is tame at under 3%; and gas prices, while still high, are well below historic, inflation-adjusted highs (does anyone who is old enough remember the days of Jimmah Cotta? Do you really want to go back?).

Some people say we should deliberately split control of Washington; that our constitutional system of checks and balances can only work effectively if there is a real friction between the two ends of Pennsylvania Avenue. In a time when continuing the status quo on autopilot would leave our country strong, safe, secure, prosperous, and free, maybe you would be right. However, we deal today with a perilous status quo in which inaction leads straight to disaster. The party in opposition would gladly sit silently as taxes increase dramatically and approaches foreign policy with its head in the sand, failing to recognize that 5 years of no attacks on U.S. soil does not mean the threats we face have subsided. Liberal Democrats in Congress do not share our vision of doing whatever it takes to win the War on Terror and cutting taxes to keep our economy the envy of the world. While we certainly have our faults for failing to act to shrink government, liberal Democrats have resisted these efforts in the past at almost every turn, instead seeking to constantly enlarge the role of government far beyond anything for which we conservatives have rightfully criticized the Washington Republicans.

In summary, my fellow conservatives: whatever grievances you may have with the Washington Republican establishment will pale in comparison to what a Democratic Congress--even a Congress of split control--will do. The time for action is in primary elections, especially in solidly Republican states and congressional districts where we do not need to nominate RINOs to win, not by staying home during the general election when the polls are tighter than the rusted lugnuts on a '55 Ford and whether we vote will decide the balance of power and the outcome of numerous issues far beyond those I have mentioned here.

To those of you who are honestly and truly independent, swing voters, I offer you much the same as to why I hope you will stick with the tried and tested leadership of the last few years. Everyone encounters their stumbling blocks when in power. The Democrats have their scoundrels and we have ours; we try to dispose of ours more so than they do theirs. However, the leadership of President Bush and Congressional Republicans has produced a safer, more prosperous America that, despite all the naysaying of the doom-and-gloom crowd, offers more opportunities to more people than any country at any time in the history of our world. While I believe nothing in our history has been inevitable, I believe that the right decisions will mean that, as Ronald Reagan said in his final public message in 1994, America's best days are ahead. That hangs in the balance tomorrow.

A lot rides on the outcome of the election tomorrow. Vote, vote early, only vote once, but vote Republican and let's keep moving forward toward that safer, more prosperous, more hopeful America that lies ahead.

Out-of-State Gambling Interests, Trial Lawyers Fund Last-Minute Attack on Incumbent GOP Delegates

2006-11-02T19:14:00.000-05:00

Yesterday and today, numerous radio stations began running political ads targeting several incumbent Republican delegates funded by a group called West Virginians for a Brighter Future.

WVBF is a creation of former state Democratic Chairman Chuck Smith, who is listed with the Secretary of State as the group's treasurer, and has been funded primarily by out-of-state gambling interests and trial lawyers.

Today's electioneering communication disclosure shows numerous $1,000 donations, including 3 from 3 different women who are all listed as homemakers with an address of 40 Fountain Plaza, Buffalo, New York. Boston Bruins (NHL) Executive Vice President Charles Jacbos also lists this address. My research shows this is the address of the law firm of Bond, Schoeneck & King, PLLC, which is listed in the Martindale-Hubbell directory as focusing on employment law. Another donor to WVBF was Herbert Tyner, President of the Hazel Park Harness Raceway in Michigan.

Because of the urgency of disseminating this information, details about other donors to WVBF is unavailable at this time.

So apparently, West Virginia is for sale as long as the buyer is an out-of-state plaintiff's lawyer or gambling operator.

State Supreme Court Blocks Starcher from Becoming Chief Justice

2006-10-31T01:19:00.000-05:00

This morning's Charleston Gazette reports that the state Supreme Court voted 3-2 last week to interrupt its 25-year-old tradition of annually rotating among its members the position of chief justice and retain Chief Justice Robin Davis in her current position next year.

Davis, the Court's most senior member, has been a justice since 1996 and would have been replaced next year by controversial Justice Larry Starcher, a former chief justice, had the existing rotation plan been preserved. The justices voted unanimously to resume the annual rotation of the chief justice in 2008, when former Chief Justice Elliott "Spike" Maynard will again become the chief justice.

Starcher has been a lingering source of controversy on the bench in recent years. In 2004, Starcher heckled Greenbrier County Circuit Judge Jim Rowe at a debate between Rowe and former Justice Warren McGraw. McGraw narrowly defeated Judge Rowe in the Democratic primary but lost to Justice Brent Benjamin in the general election following a very heated campaign and the Rant at Racine. Judge Rowe remains a circuit judge in Greenbrier County and is subject to administrative oversight by the chief justice.

Justice Starcher's unprecedented, flagrant violation of the canons of judicial ethics in this incident and his comments to the New York Times that Justice Benjamin "was bought by Don Blankenship" may have been contributing factors in the Court's decision to block Starcher's scheduled turn as chief justice in 2007.

Voting in the majority were Chief Justice Davis, Justice Maynard, and Justice Benjamin; dissenting were Justice Starcher and Justice Joe Albright.

I'm sure my law professors are not happy. Too bad.

8 Days before Election, Governor to Announce Tax Reform Plan

2006-10-29T23:32:00.000-05:00

Tomorrow morning, Governor Joe Manchin will unveil his proposal for reforming West Virginia’s tax system. Given the timing of tomorrow’s announcement, one thing is certain: this plan will be long on politics and very short on meaningful policy.

Moreover, news reports over the weekend have indicated the governor will call the Legislature into special session immediately after the election and before new legislators may be sworn in. The state constitution (W.Va. Const. Art. IV, §7) provides that the term of office of the Legislature begins on December 1 in even-numbered years. Usually, legislators are sworn in on the first day of the regular session in January; however, if the Legislature is in session at any time between December 1 and the regular sessions, the swearing-in is held earlier.

While rare, lame-duck special sessions of the West Virginia Legislature are not without precedent. Twice, the Legislature has met in special session during the lame-duck period: November 20-28, 1916. and November 27, 1964. The 1916 special session is of special note because outgoing governor Henry Hatfield (R) convened a Republican-controlled Legislature after the election of Democratic Governor John Cornwell and a Democratic House of Delegates. The 1964 session was a one-day session following the election of a Democratic governor, Hulett Smith, to replace a fellow Democrat, Wally Barron, and an election of a Legislature more heavily Democratic than its predecessor. On several other occasions, newly-elected legislatures were convened after the December 1 beginning of the term of office but before the regular session on the second Wednesday of January.

The timing of tomorrow’s announcement, coupled with the governor’s planned mini-tour of the state to promote his plan, strikes almost every political observer as a pre-election political maneuver designed to benefit members of the Ruling Party. I see it as a desperate ploy to distract attention from the fact that a lifetime of one party-rule in the Legislature has produced only a lifetime of listlessness for our state. As I wrote last week, Open for Business remains a slogan on the road signs West Virginia expatriates see when they return home to visit their parents and grandparents a few times a year because our next-to-last ranking in state business climates has caused most noncaptive businesses (meaning those businesses that can choose where to locate as opposed to captive industries like coal, oil, gas, timber, and other extractive industries that have no such choice) to avoid West Virginia.

If my hectic schedule at law school permits, I will try to write more tomorrow about the substance of the governor’s proposal and whether its politics meet my current expectations.

Let's really make West Virginia "Open for Business" by putting our state "Under New Management"

2006-10-23T00:00:00.000-04:00

In January, Governor Joe Manchin began his campaign to make West Virginia open for business by erecting new "West Virginia: Open for Business" welcome signs along our highways at the state line.

Most West Virginians are not pleased, preferring a return to the "Wild, Wonderful West Virginia" that has prevailed since Arch Moore was Governor. An online petition for reverting to the old signs currently has over 20,000 signatures and triggered a phone call from the governor to the petition's sponsor, fellow WVU student Logan Wheatcraft, presumably an attempt to persuade him to drop his effort.

A road sign proclaiming West Virginia to be open for business will not change the fact that West Virginia is not open for business. Forbes magazine just rated West Virginia 49th (meaning next to last for those of you in Rio Linda) in its annual ranking of "The Best States for Business." Neighboring Virginia, which does not need road signs to tell incoming motorists they're open for business, is number one.

In just over two weeks, West Virginians can turn "West Virginia: Open for Business" from an empty slogan on road signs too visually cluttered to read while driving at highway speeds to reality by putting the West Virginia Legislature under new management and unseating a corrupt congressman whose efforts to bring federal funds to northern West Virginia have predominately benefited a network of 5 nonprofit organizations established by this congressman, whose officers and directors are longtime friends, associates, and real estate investment partners of the congressman.

Lest you think I've been drinking too much of the GOP Kool-Aid, I predict most West Virginians love our Big Daddy (see post below from Oct. 19 click here to open video of speech in new window click here for Raese radio ad) enough to reelect him by almost a party-line vote. Thanks to his new TV ads featuring Governor Manchin, Joe's MoJo should rub off enough to guarantee an easy ride, paving the way for John Raese to follow in the steps of two-time losing North Carolina U.S. Senate candidate Erskine "Irksome" Bowles and seek the open presidency of West Virginia University. Our next best hope for new blood in our U.S. Senate delegation lies with SMC '08.

The people of northern West Virginia should elect Chris Wakim to Congress. Incumbent Congressman Alan Mollohan is neck-deep in scandal surrounding shady land deals in which he partnered with and/or received loans from the officers and directors of several nonprofit organizations to which he has steered over $250 million of federal earmarks over the last 5 years and filed false personal financial disclosure statements with the House of Representatives. In that time, Mollohan's net worth has skyrocketed from just a few hundred thousand dollars in 2000 to between $6 million and $11 million today. Dividing the increase in his net worth by the total amount of earmarks to these organizations shows that Mollohan's net worth has climbed by an amount equal to almost 4% of the total earmarks. Longtime West Virginia political observers may see some significance in that figure.

Polling shows this to be a very tight race, with both candidates now in the 40s. Wakim has recently pulled ahead of Mollohan in cash on hand, although that may change as Mollohan just sold a piece of property in Tucker County on which he made a profit of almost $250,000. The TV ad war has been intense, with both candidates calling each other crooked liars. Wakim has hit Mollohan hard on the earmarks and Mollohan, seeming to forget his party's joinder at the hip with gambling interests, has attacked Wakim over his operation of "gray" poker machines at his bar before video poker was legalized in 2001.

Now, we get to the races that promise us our best opportunity to bring real, meaningful, positive change to our state: the races for the state Senate and House of Delegates. Seventeen of the 34 state senators and all 100 delegates will be elected in two weeks. With enough exceptions to count on one hand, the Ruling Party has consistently supported policies that have held West Virginia back and run counter to the values of most West Virginians.

Whether the issue is eliminating the abominable tax on food, closing loopholes in our laws that let minor girls have secret abortions without notifying their parents or let convicted drunk drivers keep their driver's licenses, following the lead of more than 20 other states and amending our state constitution to prevent activist judges in the future from redefining marriage a la Massachusetts, or protecting women and children from sexual predators, the Ruling Party has been wrong, wrong, wrong, and wrong (until they flip-flopped for a change).

Ruling Party leaders like retiring House Speaker Bob Kiss caterwaul about needing to reduce business taxes first, yet never allow any legislation to reduce job-killing taxes like our business franchise tax or high corporate income taxes to see the light of day. As I pointed our in several columns last year (see sidebar to the right), the Ruling Party's leadership wants no part in reducing the state's intrusiveness into our wallets or truly unleashing the kidn of real economic growth our state woudl have if the Legislature passed a bill enacting in duplicate the Code of Virginia with substitutions of "West Virginia" for "Virginia" in all petinent places.

With the exception of a few independent thinkers like Delegates Eustace Frederick, D-Mercer; Tim Miley, D-Harrison; and Tom Louisos, D-Fayette, who was sadly defeated in the primary election, the current members of the Legislature in the Ruling Party have uniformly followed the dictates of their leadership and failed to move West Virginia forward. West Virginia can take a great leap forward by electing Republican majorities to both houses of the Legislature on November 7.

For the sake of the kids, let's finally make West Virginia open for business by putting our state under new management.

Senator Byrd's "Big Daddy" Speech

2006-10-19T00:46:00.000-04:00

Click here to open it in a new window.

Manchin Endangers Every West Virginian with Decision to Relax Rules on DUI Hearings

2006-10-12T12:48:00.000-04:00

Today's Charleston Gazette reported that the DMV, at the direction of Governor Manchin, has reversed course and is now granting administrative hearings to hear appeals of driver's license revocations of people who were convicted of DUI after pleading no contest.

This decision comes after the Legislature almost passed HB 4308 during this year's legislative session, but thankfully failed to give the bill the final passage it needed to go to the governor's desk. HB 4308 would have amended the DUI license revocation statute to allow those convicted of DUI after pleading no contest to have administrative hearings before the DMV to appeal their license revocations and potentially keep their driver's licenses. The most frequent cause of convicted drunk drivers prevailing at these hearings is the failure of the arresting officer to appear.

This issue is among several targeted by Massey Energy CEO Don Blankenship in his ...And for the Sake of the Kids campaign against numerous incumbent state legislators. Until the governor intervened, the DMV had been following its policy of automatically revoking driver's licenses of drunk drivers who were convicted after no contest pleas in the wake of a 2004 state Supreme Court decision upholding the practice. The 2004 ruling was a hard-fought win and has now been negated by the governor's intervention.

Allow me to take a few minutes to refresh you of the facts of this issue.

Under West Virginia law, when a person is arrested for DUI, the defendant is subject to both criminal proceedings in court and administrative proceedings through the DMV. The criminal proceedings will determine guilt under the criminal statute in which the burden of proof is for the prosecution to prove their case beyond a reasonable doubt. If convicted, the defendant will go to jail and pay a fine. The DMV administrative process will determine whether the defendant's driver's license will be revoked; here, however, the burden of proof is lower: a preponderance of the evidence (the side whose case is even slightly more likely than the other's will win) rather than proof beyond a reasonable doubt.

Since at least 1981, this two-track system has existed in West Virginia. The Legislature created this system because, in the past, many drunk drivers had been able to keep their driver's licenses by plea bargaining the DUI charges and keeping their driver's licenses in the absence of a DUI conviction. Following standards of due process protections that have passed judicial muster, the Legislature established the administrative license revocation system that permits a license to be revoked for DUI without the need for a criminal conviction. Today, there are about 2.5 times as many license revocations for DUI in West Virginia as there are DUI convictions.

A defendant in a DUI case may request a hearing to challenge the revocation unless he or she has been convicted of the criminal charge. The Legislature wisely decided to include this provision in the administrative revocation law because a criminal conviction requires the same facts to be proven in a venue with a tougher burden of proof. However, this difference in the burden of proof means a person may be acquitted of a criminal charge of DUI but still lose his or her driver's license at the DMV hearing.

Here is where we arrive at the controversy over how defendants who plead no contest to the criminal charge and found guilty by the court are treated. A well-established principle of American law (and the laws of every other country that follows the English legal tradition) is that when a person pleads no contest to a criminal charge, that plea cannot be used as an admission of the defendant's conduct in any other proceeding, including a civil case (such as a DMV license revocation hearing). However, when the no contest plea is entered, the judge has a duty to decide whether the defendant is guilty or not guilty of the crime charged. In almost all cases--since the no contest plea is usually only entered when the defendant knows he is guilty and has no chance of prevailing--the judge finds the defendant guilty.

In 2004, the state Supreme Court found that when the Legislature enacted the two-track system for revoking driver's licenses for DUI, the statute's definition of conviction encompassed convictions entered by a court following no contest pleas. When the Legislature adopted this definition, it relied upon the judge's finding of guilt and not the defendant's no contest plea as the basis for binding the court's adjudication of guilt upon the DMV's administrative process. Therefore, we are not dealing with a breach of centuries of legal tradition regarding the effect of no contest pleas to criminal charges.

Now, since West Virginia's system of driver's license revocations for DUI obviously involves far more cases of people losing their licenses without a conviction than no revocations following no contest plea-based convictions, what is the problem? Well, just as the system can be abused to drop valid criminal charges of DUI for no good reason, so too can the system be abused to keep a few convicted drunk drivers who pleaded no contest on the roads.

A dirty little secret few are willing to admit is that in certain cases, especially involving powerful and/or wealthy defendants and/or their lawyers, arrangements can be made to plead no contest, allow the prosecutors to credit themselves with a conviction, and arrange to "lose" or "misplace" the arresting cop's subpoena to the DMV hearing. When the cop fails to appear, the DMV must dismiss the revocation action and the defendant gets to keep his driver's license. In a few cases, hearings may be rescheduled, but this is not likely in the wake of a state Supreme Court decision this year requiring the DMV to pay the defendant's costs associated with the rescheduled hearing if the DMV chooses to proceed with the revocation action.

09-11-01, We Must Never Forget

2006-09-11T01:03:00.000-04:00

Today I repost in its entirety my post from this day one year ago below the line. As I write the brief comments I offer today, I feel the same feeling as I did on that day 5 years ago; I am engulfed by the same "eerie chill" about which I wrote a year ago.

In addition to my post from last year, I commend for your reading the article by Peggy Noonan.

Audio part 1

Audio Part 2

Audio Part 3--This part is not contained in the text below.

It was a sunny September morning. In one sense, it seems like it was a lifetime ago; in another, it's hard to believe four years have already passed. September 11, 2001, saw the arrival on U.S. soil the long-brewing war between civilized free societies and a radical Islamofascism seeking to return the world to the Dark Ages.

There are certain events in our lives that are burned so deeply into our memories that we will never forget where we were or what we were doing. I was on my way to class that day, comparative politics and political theory. I had stayed up late the night before to finish a short paper for the comparative politics class. I had only enough time for a quick shower before I left my apartment, so no breakfast or quick check of the morning news.

I got in the car, started my usual 15 minute drive to campus, and turned on the radio. It was 9:49 AM. Instead of the usual music, I heard the very somber voice of Peter Jennings broadcasting. Instantly, before hearing what exactly was happening, I knew something very, very terrible had happened. Within those 15 minutes, I would learn that jets had crashed into the Pentagon, both towers of the World Trade Center and somewhere in Somerset County, Pennsylvania, not far from Morgantown. Instantly, I knew: America was under attack and the world in which we live will change forever.

Normally, the only eerie thoughts accompanying my morning commutes to class were those I had as I walked by the ruins of the house at 723 College Avenue--directly across the street from my dorm room the prior year--that was torched a few weeks before along with one of its occupants and the Fire Marshal's Arson Hotline posters posted along the street. However, that day a chill pulsated from head to toe and stood straight every hair on my body--a chill that returns every time I think of what happened that day.

At 11:30 my second and final class of the day, political theory began. Dr. Whisker walked into the room and broke the news that the Twin Towers had both collapsed. The class had a discussion about moments that define a generation. Then we left early. Getting ahead of the curve, I stopped and topped off my gas tank on the way home, fearing what thankfully did not follow.

The images of that day were burned into our minds forever, though they have largely disappeared from the mainstream media as if they've been placed under seal. We're reminded daily of the 1,800 or so brave American soldiers who have given the ultimate sacrifice in the Iraqi theater of the War on Terror that we officially entered that day. The Pentagon, the World Trade Center, and that field in Somerset County--where over 3,000 civilians became the first casualties on U.S. soil--have all disappeared from our televisions and most newspapers.

On September 11, 2001, we finally saw that we were at war--a war that began long ago but which we saw only as a series of crimes rather than a war. For a time, we were sure the politics would be cast aside for the national interest. From many on the other side of aisle, we heard: Thank God George W. Bush is our President. We were determined to engage the enemy on their soil and defeat them so the likes of what happened on that sunny September morning four years ago would never again visit American soil. The terrorists can be effective only when they have a safe haven and plentiful support. The war we now fight ensures those evildoers who wish to wage their war on our way of life spend their time on the run rather than in comfort planning their next attacks from within a country like Taliban Afghanistan. While our attackers on that day were al Qaeda terrorists who received their safe haven from the Taliban, our war against these forces of evil must extend to every international terrorist group who wishes us ill and those who give them aid & comfort.

We will always remember and must never forget what we saw and what we felt. The lack of a subsequent terrorist attack on U.S. soil has not been by accident. We must remain vigilant and must keep taking the war to those who seek to wage war on us. As Winston Churchill said in England's darkest hours of World War II, "Never give in. Never give in. Never, never, never, never--in nothing, great or small, large or petty--never give in, except to convictions of honor and good sense. Never yield to force. Never yield to the apparently overwhelming might of the enemy."

Poll Shows Wakim Within Striking Distance

2006-09-08T18:28:00.000-04:00

A new poll in the congressional race between embattled Congressman Alan Mollohan, D-Fairmont, and Delegate Chris Wakim, R-Wheeling, shows Wakim within striking distance, trailing by just 10 points, 52-42. Additional data in the polling results show that among likely voters who are firmly committed to a candidate, Wakim & Mollohan are in a virtual dead heat, with Mollohan leading this group by only 4 points, 46-42.

Detailed polling results are available here (PDF). Additional polling by Constituent Dynamics is available here.

Does Mollohan Have a Protege?

2006-09-08T18:25:00.000-04:00

New York TV station WNBC reports today that federal prosecutors in New Jersey have opened a criminal probe of the financial relationship between U.S. Senator Bob Menendez, D-NJ, and a nonprofit organization to which he steered millions of dollars of federal funds. Does this sound familiar to anyone?

Menendez, a former congressman who was appointed to the Senate earlier this year by Governor Jon Corzine, who previously held the Senate seat until he bought the governorship last year, is locked in a tight battle for reelection this fall with state Senator Tom Kean, Jr., son of former New Jersey Governor Tom Kean. Recent polls on this race have been trending in favor of Kean; click here for polling data on the NJ Senate race.

UPDATE: With hat tip to Don Surber, Senator Menendez argues in his defense that his arrangement with North Hudson Community Action had received the blessing of the House ethics committee--at the same time Congressman Mollohan was the top Democrat on the ethics committee, the only House committee evenly divided between the two parties.

Mollohan Goes Negative in Early TV Ads

2006-08-27T01:33:00.000-04:00

The TV ad war officially began this week in the race for congressman from the first congressional district.

Embattled Congressman Alan Mollohan, D-Fairmont, began his campaign with a negative attack ad against Delegate Chris Wakim, R-Wheeling, alleging Wakim to be an illegal gambling operator and a dishonest campaigner. An ad by a n independent organization (whose name I will list here when I see the ad again) highlighted Mollohan's extensive earmarks and financial relations with a network of 5 nonprofits. As of this morning, I have not yet seen an official Wakim TV ad.

That Mollohan, a 12-term incumbent, would open his TV campaign with a negative attack on his opponent speaks volumes about his own assessment of his chances in November. While incumbents ordinarily begin their advertising with reminders of their votes and accomplishments in office, Mollohan is woefully short on any accomplishments other than the earmarks whose propriety have been called into question. While no polls on this race have been made public, a poll early this summer by West Virginia Media showed that over 2/3 of respondents said they believed Mollohan was somewhat or very likely to face criminal charges as a result of the ongoing probe of his earmarks and personal finances by the National Legal and Policy Center and the Justice Department.

Added to the RedState.org Blog Project

2006-08-23T18:00:00.000-04:00

This page has become a part of the RedState.org Blog Project, a directory of right-of-center state and local political blogs.

To those who found this page from the RSBP, welcome! I primarily cover state and major local political events in West Virginia when I am not buried to my eyeballs in law school readings. I try to post a few times each week, and more often if required by the news of the day. While tremendous anxiety persists about the national political scene this fall, West Virginia Republicans are excited and very optimistic about our chances of continuing the progress we have made at the state level to begin realigning West Virginia from a solidly Democratic state to a Republican-leaning state.

In 2000, West Virginia shocked the country and gave George W. Bush the 5 electoral votes that put him in the White House--5 electoral votes that, if received by Al Gore, would have made Florida irrelevant and elected the first Republican, Congresswoman Shelley Moore Capito, to Congress in a generation.

In 2002, we reelected Congresswoman Shelley Moore Capito by a 20-point margin over self-financing multimillionaire trial lawyer Jim Humphreys in a rematch of the 2000. Additionally, we gained 7 seats in the House of Delegates and 4 in the state Senate, defeating the chairmen of the Senate's two most powerful committees.

In 2004, we carried the state for President Bush by a 13-point margin (and carried all 3 congressional districts and 46 of the 55 counties, including 9 of the state's 10 most populous counties), elected 3 more Republican state senators (giving us the largest number of Republican senators, 13 of 34, at any time since the Democrats took control of the Senate in 1932), elected a Republican, Betty Ireland, as Secretary of State, and defeated the first Democratic incumbent for a statewide office in more than 80 years as Brent Benjamin defeated controversial state Supreme Court Justice Warren McGraw.

West Virginia Ranks 49th Again

2006-08-18T16:37:00.000-04:00

To the shock of no one, a national ranking of state business climates by Forbes magazine finds that West Virginia is the 49th best state for business. Only Louisiana ranked worse; Mississippi ranked 48th. Neighboring Virginia ranked number one; the rankings of other surrounding states included Maryland at 11, Kentucky at 33, Ohio at 34, and Pennsylvania at 41.

The Forbes index rated states on business costs, labor, regulatory environment, economic climate, growth prospects, and quality of life. West Virginia ranked dead last in the growth prospects subranking.

Sadly, the fact West Virginia remains not open for business, notwithstanding the message of the governor's beautiful new road signs, has been long evident to residents of most border counties who often commute to neighboring states for work, shopping, and entertainment.

Back from the Beach; Back to School

2006-08-15T17:59:00.000-04:00

It seems like just yesterday, I was leaving for a quick beach weekend before law school starts. Well, I guess it was really almost yesterday. Now I'm back and about to start law school next week--actually, the 3-day orientation session for first-year law students starts tomorrow.

Although I was only gone for 3 days, there was plenty of the good, the bad, and the ugly.

The good: While it was a rather short trip, I did get a chance to unwind & relax at Nags Head and Virginia Beach, as well as just get out of Dodge for a while. Temperatures on the coast held at a nice 80 degrees all day each day I was there and the rain stayed away.

The bad: In one word, traffic. Mapquest said my trip would take just over 6 hours. While I usually take only 80% of the time it estimates, I figured that just by having to drive a bit slower in Virginia, I might take a bit longer. My drive took over 8 hours. Almost every highway I drove in Virginia was clogged, from I-81 near Winchester to I-66 between I-81 and Manassas to I-95 from Woodbridge to Richmond to I-64 from Richmond to the beach. The only relief would be found on US 522 northwest of Winchester, the PW Parkway between I-66 and I-95 in Prince William County.

While one of the things I love about my ancestral (and maybe future personal) home of the Commonwealth of Virginia is their lower taxes, the extension of this policy to gas taxes and road funding has resulted in no major widening of most of Virginia's interstates since they were built over 40 years ago; some small progress is being made in the most congested parts of Northern Virginia and the Hampton Roads area, but it, like the existing traffic, has been moving at a snail's pace. I can understand how Virginia Republicans have lost almost two-thirds of the 12 seats they gained in the House of Delegates 5 years ago--all of which have come from those two traffic-clogged urban regions. If I had to deal with it daily, I too would be ready to bite the bullet and take another dime of gas taxes to unclog Virginia's major highways.

Receiving a honorable mention on the bad side are (1) almost being denied check-in at my hotel, (2) the fire alarm while I was in the shower, (3) the near-disaster I had with some personal electronics while at the beach, and (4) the brevity of this trip. When I got to my hotel Friday night (after making reservations only the night before), I found that someone else had checked in under that reservation. After managing to work into my conversation with the desk clerk that I was a law student, this problem was quickly resolved. The next morning, the fire alarm went off while I was in the shower; I was not amused to say the least. When I got to Nags Head, I decided to just take a very long walk in the surf; within a few minutes, after most waves coming just above ankle-high, one came to my waist and soaked the cell phone, Ipod, camera, et al, in my pockets; everything would eventually dry and survive except the memory card in the camera. Of course, my greatest lament was that I did not get the 4 or so days I originally planned to do & see all I wanted to and instead had just two days to do everything because of some things that came up last week that I had to handle before leaving.

The ugly: I-95. While I covered traffic in the above section, I-95 wins the gold medal. Since I traveled it in the afternoon, I got to wait and wait and wait just south of Woodbridge as the 2 reversible HOV lanes (northbound to Washington in the morning; southbound in the evening) ended and merged with the 3 regular lanes. When traffic did finally unclog itself south of Fredericksburg, someone apparently did not notice--or at least I hope that's what happened--as one vehicle in the center lane was going about 70 as everyone else in every lane was approaching 80; when I passed this vehicle, I looked over and noticed the driver working on some spreadsheet with both hands and steering with his knees. However, I was glad to see that at least he was not talking on his cell phone; that could have caused an accident.

I did get to take a few pictures at the Chesapeake Bay Bridge-Tunnels with another camera after the little mishap at the beach:

Ships passing over the Thimble Shoal Channel Tunnel 4 miles north of Virginia Beach, looking northeast.

The north shore of Virginia Beach, 4 miles to the south.

The Thimble Shoal Channel, facing north. The northern portal of the Thimble Shoal Channel Tunnel lies one mile to the north.

Another view.

The fishing pier at the Thimble Shoal overlook, looking southwest.

From the same location, looking at the water's edge of this man-made island.

This photo was taken at the overlook at the north end of the CBBT in Northampton County about 30 minutes before sunset.

Looking south from the same location; the northern leg of the CBBT is in the far background.

Returning south, I arrived at the Thimble Shoal overlook just in time to capture this sunset photo; unfortunately, the auto-focus on the camera didn't work properly for this one.

Just a few seconds later, the last light of day slips below the horizon.

At the Thimble Shoal overlook is this map of the CBBT. While the bridges carry 4-lane traffic, US 13 narrows to 2 lanes in each tunnel.

Looking north into the southern portal of the Thimble Shoal Channel Tunnel.

Looking south from the same location.

Mollohan Raises Only $20,000 at Charleston Fundraiser

2006-08-06T01:47:00.000-04:00

The reelection campaign of embattled Congressman Alan Mollohan, D-Fairmont, could not have found worse news than this morning's report in Phil Kabler's political column in the Charleston Gazette that a recent fundraiser for Mollohan at the home of former state Democratic Chairman Pat Maroney raised only about $20,000.

Yes folks, that's twenty thousand dollars. I did not make a typo.

Among those in attendance at the fundraiser were Maroney, former state senators Jim Humphreys and Oshel Craigo, West Virginia Democratic National Committeewoman Marie Prezioso (sister of state Senator Roman Prezioso, D-Fairmont), former state Democratic Chairman Chuck Smith, Kanawha County Commission President Kent Carper, Charleston City Councilman Harry Deitzler (who is a partner in Carper's law firm), and former West Virginia Trial Lawyers Association President Marvin Masters.

Most incumbent state senators would not want news of raising only $20,000 at a Charleston fundraiser reported in the news, much less a United States congressman. The Gazette would surely have withheld this news if the Mollohan campaign had requested it. Having done this on the heels of last week's ridiculous, baseless charges of Delegate Chris Wakim, R-Wheeling, falsifying his resume, it's clear the Mollohan campaign is floundering and has lower odds of recovery than Fidel Castro.

Mollohan Goes Negative, Launches Desperate Attack on Wakim

2006-08-02T19:43:00.000-04:00

More than three months before the general election, embattled Congressman Alan Mollohan, D-Fairmont, yesterday launched a baseless attack on the character and integrity of his opponent, Delegate Chris Wakim, R-Wheeling.

Yesterday, Congressman Mollohan alleged that Wakim severely embellished his military and academic credentials on his resume. Mollohan alleged that Wakim was not truly a veteran of the first Gulf War and misstated the master's degree he earned from Harvard University.

In his response, Wakim noted that his claim of Persian Gulf War veteran status is correct based on federal law governing veteran classifications, that he truthfully stated the nature of his master's degree and that Mollohan is simply trying to fabricate a smoke screen to divert attention from his mushrooming scandals involving Mollohan obtaaining hundreds of millions of dollars of federal earmarks for a network of nonprofit groups founded by Mollohan and whose officers and directors are generous Mollohan campaign contributors and investment partners.

Mollohan's attacks are simply without merit. Delegate Wakim has consistently represented his military and academic credentials as clearly and accurately as possible. Most interesting to note is that while serving our nation in the military following his graduation from West Point, Wakim earned a master's degree from Harvard. Wakim's worst grade at Harvard was a B- in contemporary moral issues. I would dare not speculate how Beach House Al would fare in a course on contemporary moral issues. Maybe he would get lucky and not have a segment on financial relationships between congressmen and the recipients of federal funds earmarked by the congressman.

McKinney for Chairman

2006-07-27T17:19:00.000-04:00

This Saturday, the West Virginia Republican State Executive Committee will meet at the Charleston Marriott. The primary business to be conducted at this meeting will be the seating of members elected at the primary election in May and the election of a new chairman to replace departing Chairman Rob Capehart.

The race for chairman features two major candidates: Mark Scott and Dr. Doug McKinney. Scott is an Elkins insurance agent and Randolph County Republican Chairman. McKinney is a Clarksburg physician, has been an elected member of the state committee for the last 4 years, ran for Governor in 2004, and is a past president of the West Virginia State Medical Association.

Dr. McKinney is the better of the two candidates to lead our party to the majority in the Legislature and our federal delegation. He has experience with fundraising, lobbying, and campaigning. As the president of the State Medical Association, Dr. McKinney led the successful fight to defeat liberal trial lawyers like former Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Bill Wooton and enact substantial medical malpractice liability reform.

Dr. McKinney has suffered two major attacks during this campaign: one from West Virginians for Life concerning reservations McKinney publicly aired about the informed consent bill in his capacity as WVSMA President and the second from individuals critical of some campaign contributions McKinney made prior to his election to the state committee.

Gary Abernathy has already tackled both of these issues on his blog (Links: abortion contributions). I encourage you to read those two posts and hope you will agree with my position that these two attacks are without merit.

Finally, I hope everyone, including those who may have strayed, will adhere in this race to Ronald Reagan's 11th Commandment and not speak ill of their fellow Republican, especially on the public stage. West Virginia Republicans need to emerge 100% united (okay, maybe 110% united since we're facing a Ruling Party that has up to 110% voter registration in some counties) Saturday afternoon and focus our full attention on victory in November.

Dean Compares GOP Congresswoman to Stalin, Calls for End to Divisiveness

2006-07-26T22:41:00.000-04:00

DNC Chairbeing Howard Dean today told a Democratic rally in West Palm Beach, Florida, that U.S. Senate candidate and current Congresswoman Katherine Harris is a crook and compared her to Soviet dictator Stalin and then told a gathering of local business leaders that we need to bring an end to divisiveness in politics.

Someone forgot to take all his meds this morning. Or is he simply being as two-faced as any other Democratic leader who tells everyone what they want to hear?

Manchin Sets 3:30 Kickoff for Friends of Coal Bowl

2006-07-26T22:31:00.000-04:00

Don Surber says the kickoff the September 2 match between WVU and Marshall, officially the Friends of Coal Bowl, was set at 3:30 PM to acccommodate Governor Manchin.

On behalf of my fellow Mountaineers, can we restore the traditional 3:30 kickoff that prevailed until Mace Hardesty instituted noon kickoffs as the norm?

Bob Graham Trial Day 1: XXX-citing

2006-07-24T22:08:00.000-04:00

Today marked Day 1 of the federal corruption trial of disgraced Wyoming County senior center director Bob Graham, and what a day it was!

The Charleston Daily Mail reported that federal prosecutors led off with a quite titillating revelation that Graham spent much of the $200,000 unused sick leave he cashed out between 2002 and 2004 at a popular strip club. Assistant U.S. Attorney Hunter Smith said, "He needed money badly...He had begun spending tens of thousands of dollars at Southern Exposure in Princeton and on his relationship with dancers there." Among the expenditures were payments made by Graham for breast implants for an unnamed stripper.

At least we now know why he elected a bench trial (trial by the judge instead of a jury). A jury would have already convicted him by now.

Mollohan Votes Against Same-Sex Marriage Ban

2006-07-20T11:47:00.000-04:00

Embattled Congressman Alan Mollohan, D-Fairmont, yesterday dug his political hole a bit deeper when he became the only member of West Virginia's U.S. House delegation to vote against House Joint Resolution 88, proposing a constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriage nationwide. Representatives Shelley Moore Capito, R-Charleston, and Nick Rahall, D-Beckley, voted for HJR 88.

HJR 88 would add the following two sentences to the Constitution:

Marriage in the United States shall consist only of the union of a man and a woman. Neither this Constitution, nor the constitution of any State, shall be construed to require that marriage or the legal incidents thereof be conferred upon any union other than the union of a man and a woman.

While HJR 88 received 236 Yea votes, it fell 51 votes short of the 2/3 vote required to pass a constitutional amendment. A similar resolution, SJR 1, failed in the Senate last month. Both resolutions would have done the following two things: (1) limit marriage to between a man and a woman nationwide and (2) prevent courts, but not state legislatures, from mandating the creation or recognition of "civil union"-type relationships that effectively confer all the legal benefits of marriage to same-sex couples without the name "marriage."

With his vote, Congressman Mollohan joined liberals like House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi to keep the door open for activist judges to miraculously "discover" a constitutional right for same-sex couples to marry or receive the legal benefits of marriage under a different name. While most people will recall the 2004 decision of the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court declaring a right to same-sex marriage that existed under their state constitution (written in 1780), we must also remember that four years earlier, the Vermont Supreme Court found that while same-sex couples there did not necessarily have the right to be formally married, they were entitled to some form of legal recognition that conferred to them all the benefits of marriage under Vermont law. Thus, the Vermont civil unions were established.

Mollohan's challenger, Delegate Chris Wakim, R-Wheeling, supports protecting the traditional definition of marriage and supported an amendment to the West Virginia constitution to this end as a member of the House of Delegates. After yesterday's vote, Wakim said:

Alan Mollohan is totally out of touch with what we believe and care about here in West Virginia. A marriage can only be a union between a man and a woman. Congress had a chance yesterday to make sure that was the law of the land. Alan Mollohan voted against traditional marriage. If voters want their representative to make it possible for Larry to marry Harry, they ought to vote for Alan Mollohan. If they want to keep marriage limited to the union between a man and a woman, then I hope they'll consider voting for me. Instead of spending all his time finding ways to funnel tax dollars into his own pockets, Alan Mollohan ought to spend a few hours with the people who live here. He might discover we do not want the law to make gay marriages a possibility. He might even discover representing what his constituents want is a good idea.

Mollohan is currently the subject of a Justice Department probe into hundreds of millions of dollars of federal earmarks he directed to a network of nonprofits controlled by Mollohan friends and associates and the substantial increase in his personal net worth in the last 6 years resulting from lucrative real estate investments in which he partnered with several officers and directors of these nonprofits.

Don't Buy Another Vote

2006-07-15T23:21:00.000-04:00

A couple of weeks ago, I purchased Don't Buy Another Vote: I Won't Pay for a Landslide by Allen Loughry II. Touted as a virtual encyclopedia of political corruption in West Virginia, Don't Buy Another Vote chronicles virtually every major case of political corruption in our state's history and recommends a variety of solutions to reduce the prevalence of corruption in our state's politics in the future.

As a younger West Virginian who was not around for the JFK campaign, the Barron Administration, or the Logan Five and too young to remember the Moore Administration, Judge Ned Grubb, or the falls from power of Senate presidents Dan Tonkovich and Larry Tucker and Majority Leader Si Boettner, Don't Buy Another Vote was an excellent education in our state's history even for a Golden Horseshoe winner.

The Don to Reemerge on WV Political Scene; Launches Campaign Targeting Over 30 Incumbent Legislators for Defeat in General Election

2006-07-14T23:55:00.000-04:00

Massey Energy CEO Don Blankenship will soon begin a major campaign to seek the defeat of numerous incumbent Democratic legislators in this year's general election.

In an interview today on Talkline with Hoppy Kercheval and a TV interview taped to run tomorrow and Sunday, Blankenship outlines his intent to spend several million dollars to defeat about 30 incumbent legislators whose voting records he says are out of touch with the people of West Virginia. On issues ranging from eliminating the food tax to protecting the traditional definition of marriage as being between a man and a woman, Blankenship says Democratic incumbents have disregarded the wishes and values of their constituents.

TV stations owned by West Virginia Media (WTRF 7 in Wheeling, WBOY 12 in Clarksburg, WOWK 13 in Charleston, and WVNS 59 in Beckley) will carry an interview with Blankenship on the weekly news program Decision Makers at 9 AM Saturday with a repeat at 8 AM Sunday. Information about this week's program can be found by clicking here.

Washington, DC Declares "Crime Emergency"

2006-07-12T00:56:00.000-04:00

Yesterday, Washington, DC, our nation's capital (and also our nation's murder capital for many years), proclaimed a "crime emergency" in the city after 13 murders in the first 11 days of this month. This was enough to make my head spin.

Where have these Keystone Cops been for the last 30 years? Did they miss the once-annual headlines proclaiming the city the nation's murder capital while onetime Mayor for Life (and current City Council member) Marion Barry was taking crack of the streets one rock at a time? Barry, as you may recall, is the genius who once said that Washington, DC is a relatively safe town, "except for all the killings."

Washington, DC is a city where you or I cannot legally own a gun even in our own homes and the only means of security is iron bars over the windows and a prayer that should something happen, the 911 call will be answered before the guy who just kicked open the front door gets upstairs.

I suggest that the latest individuals to realize that there's a crime problem in our nation's capital consider importing Virginia's gun and crime laws. They may surprise themselves at what they could do with a nice old wooden chair for the criminals and legal gun ownership for law-abiding citizens who now face the same chances as a sitting duck when a burglar enters at night or a mugger appears from the shadows.

This Can Be Yours

2006-05-11T12:08:00.000-04:00

The Charleston Daily Mail reports this morning that Congressman Alan Mollohan has put his beachfront mansion on Bald Head Island, NC on the market. It can be yours for just $3.7 million. Similar properties are currently listing for as much as $4.5 million.

Is Beach House Al worried that his voters sense a problem with him making millions of dollars on real estate investments with a former staffer who now heads one of several nonprofits Mollohan personally founded and to which he has earmarked over $150 million of federal funds? He says he's just selling the beach house now because it has been a good investment (and it has been: Mollohan, who had a net worth of only about $100,000 in 2000, would make a $1.4 million gain if the beach house sells for its asking price). Neither the Morgantown Ramada inn nor Mollohan's Washington condominiums are yet listed for sale.

UPDATE

Click here to view the online listing for this house.

Don Surber has an interesting article on this. Aside from the questions he raises, we must also ask: Does Beach House Al need the cash for his campaign or for forthcoming legal bills that will likely accrue as the investigation of his finances proceeds?

Will Mollohan Continue Overseeing DOJ Budget While Under Investigation?

2006-05-01T09:22:00.000-04:00

While Congressman Alan Mollohan, D-Fairmont, has relinquished his post as the ranking Democrat on the House Committee on Standards of Official Conduct during the ongoing criminal probe of his personal finances and over $150 million of federal earmarks he has obtained for a network of nonprofits led by close friends, associates & personal business partners, virtually unnoticed is the fact he is still the ranking Democrat on the Appropriations subcommittee that directly controls the budget of the Department of Justice.

According to Mollohan's congressional web site, "he is 'Ranking Minority Member' -- the top Democrat -- on the Subcommittee on Science, State, Justice, Commerce and Related Agencies. The subcommittee funds the departments of State, Justice and Commerce, as well as the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), the National Science Foundation (NSF) and the U.S. Small Business Administration (SBA), among others."

Although Mollohan is in the minority party, the Appropriations Committees of both houses of Congress have long operated in a very bipartisan fashion regardless of the party in power. Indeed, one of the dirtiest secrets of Capitol Hill has been that there are really three parties in Congress: the Republicans, the Democrats, and the Appropriators. As a ranking minority member of the subcommittee that controls the DOJ budget, Mollohan wields considerable power over the entire federal law enforcement apparatus at the same time he has become the central focus of a mushrooming corruption probe.

To protect the integrity of the appropriations process and the administration of justice, should not Congressman Mollohan step aside as the ranking Democrat on this subcommittee, if not his seat on the subcommittee altogether, until the investigation runs its course?

Questions as NRA Endorses McCabe

2006-04-28T23:22:00.000-04:00

The Political Victory Fund of the National Rifle Association (of which I am a life member) recently released its grades and endorsements of West Virginia legislative candidates. A few surprises can always be found, but none was more shocking than what I saw in the 17th Senate District.

In the 17th, the NRA endorsed Senator Brooks McCabe, D-Kanawha, over former Delegate Ann Calvert, R-Kanawha. This occurred even though Calvert won an "A" rating and is a tremendously viable candidate and McCabe won a "B" rating this year after being F-rated in 2002 when the NRA endorsed his opponent, then first-time candidate Patrick Lane, who was subsequently elected to the House of Delegates in 2004.

Brooks McCabe is one of two anti-gun senators in the West Virginia Senate; the other is fellow Kanawha County Senator Dan Foster, who was elected in 2004. Approximately 7 years ago, the Legislature passed a state preemption law that prohibited counties and municipalities imposing local gun control laws. This followed Charleston enacting a one handgun per month purchase limit and serious consideration of a similar proposal in Huntington.

The NRA's 2006 West Virginia legislative candidate ratings & endorsements can be found here.

The NRA's 2002 West Virginia legislative candidate ratings & endorsements can be found here.

Cheney Headlines Wakim Fundraiser; Mollohan Kicked off House Ethics Committee

2006-04-21T20:29:00.000-04:00

The momentum is rapidly building behind the congressional campaign of Delegate Chris Wakim, R-Wheeling, in his bid to unseat 12-term Congressman Alan Mollohan, D-Fairmont.

Today, Wakim held a fundraiser in Morgantown with Vice President Dick Cheney. Sources in attendance say the event raised at least $140,000 and maybe as much as $200,000 for Wakim's campaign. This post will be updated to reflect more accurate information as it becomes available.

While the fundraiser was occurring, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-San Francisco, announced that Congressman Mollohan was stepping down from the House Committee on Standards of Official Conduct (aka the House Ethics Committee) just a day after Mollohan insisted he would remain in his post. This was clearly a forced move. Mollohan probably received a nice little phone call from "Bill" from Chappaqua, New York, encouraging him to step aside before they throw him under the bus.

Both Mollohan and Wakim are unopposed in their respective primary elections on May 9.

Sighting

2006-04-16T22:55:00.000-04:00

If this is indicative of the way the Ruling Party's legislative candidates are spending their money, we have little to fear in November:

While traveling toward Charleston on US 119 today, I saw a billboard for House of Delegates candidate Nancy Peoples Guthrie, who I take is a big lib--probably a socialist given her campaign advertising of being "a progressive leader"--vying for one of the 7 Democratic nominations in the 30th District. There would be nothing wrong with this billboard had I not seen it in Boone County more than 10 miles outside the district.

The 30th House district is a monster, a 7-member district encompassing almost 130,000 of Kanawha County's residents. Even the incumbents fail to attain the ideal fundraising target of $1 per constituent that I think is necessary to run a high-visibility campaign.

West Virginia to Have Nation's Lowest State Income Tax Exemption

2006-04-12T22:13:00.000-04:00

In their zeal for every dollar they can extract from our pockets, West Virginia's Ruling Party knows no bounds. We have one of the nation's highest corporate income tax rates and highly regressive taxes on food and income below the federal poverty level

Today, West Virginia has become the state with the lowest dollar threshold for paying state income taxes, at $8,000 (via personal exemptions) to $10,000 (if the income qualifies as earned income) for a family of four. Alabama, which has long taxed families of four beginning with an annual income of just $4,600, today raised its minimum threshold for paying state income taxes to $12,500 beginning next year.

I will let you know in this space whether the Ruling Party schedules any festivals to celebrate West Virginia's attainment of this distinction.

Reports the AP:

MONTGOMERY, Ala. (AP) -- Alabama's dubious distinction as the only state to levy income taxes on a family of four making less than $10,000 came to an end under a bill signed Wednesday by the governor.
Under tax-cutting legislation that will take effect in January, the threshold at which such families will start paying income taxes will rise from $4,600 a year to $12,500.
"For decades, Alabamians have labored under the nation's most unfair tax system,'' Gov. Bob Riley said. "Well, in Alabama today, that unfair system ends.''
The GOP governor worked with the Democrat-dominated legislature and Alabama Arise, a church-funded lobbying group for the poor, to get the tax break passed after years of seeing similar bills fail.
The nonprofit Center on Budget and Policy Priorities reported in February that Alabama had the lowest threshold for levying income taxes on a family of four.
The legislation will move Alabama to the fourth-lowest threshold, behind West Virginia at $10,000, Montana at $10,800 and Hawaii at $11,500, according to 2005 tax figures.

For years, Republican legislators have tried to reduce the tax burden West Virginians face in a variety of areas, including our now lowest-in-the-nation state income tax exemption. Bills to this end never see the light of day.

During this year's regular legislative session, 18 of the 21 Senate Democrats and Senator Karen Facemeyer, R-Jackson, introduced SB 674, a bill that would have given all personal income taxpayers a single exemption of $12,500 for single individuals and $25,000 for a married couple, up from the current exemption of $2,000 times the number of exemptions on the person's federal income tax return with a special $10,000 low earned income exclusion for certain low-income taxpayers.

Unfortunately, none of SB 674's sponsors were really serious about passing it. On Monday, February 27, a week after SB 674 was introduced and the last day on which the bill could have been brought to the floor in its house of origin without suspending rules, the Senate rejected discharging SB 674 from the Finance Committee by a nonrecorded vote of 22-10. SB 674's chief sponsor, Senator Billy Wayne Bailey, D-Wyoming even said that he was not serious about passing the bill and introduced it just to start a conversation about the subject.

Why Cynthia McKinney Slugged the Capitol Cop

2006-04-01T14:45:00.000-05:00

Earlier this week, Congresswoman Cynthia McKinney, D-Ga., got into her 5th documented altercation with U.S. Capitol Police as she struck a Capitol Police officer when he tried to stop her after she bypassed the metal detector at the entrance to the Longworth House Office Building without wearing the Member of Congress lapel pin that congressmen are supposed to wear.

While the McKinney camp had previously cited claims of racism, her real reason for refusing to wear the identifying lapel pin was given today.

Today, Congresswoman McKinney revealed that she has refused to wear her congressional lapel pin because of a massive conspiracy among Republican insiders to spy on the conversations and even unspoken thoughts of ever member of the House of Representatives.

In 1996, then House Majority Whip Tom DeLay held a secret series of meetings with G. Gordon Liddy, Jack Abramoff, then Halliburton CEO Dick Cheney, and the ghost of J. Edgar Hoover, to develop a high-tech Member of Congress lapel pin that would include a secret microphone, spy camera, and telepathic mind-reader that could see, hear, and transmit every sight and sound seen or heard by each Member of Congress and the unspoken thoughts of each Member.

Within the year, Halliburton developed one regular Member of Congress lapel pin for DeLay and 434 special pins for the other members that included the new spy technology. To collect and analyze the intelligence, the group established the Center for Advanced Telepathic Studies. CATS was endowed by $10 million donated by a variety of Indian casinos represented by Mr. Abramoff. CATS established its headquarters at a posh beachside mansion in Miami, Florida, and from there, spied on every member of the House of Representatives except DeLay who wore his or her congressional lapel pin. Cheney, Liddy, and Hoover's ghost supervised the espionage activities from undisclosed locations.

In 2001, the CATS operation rose to a new level as Cheney became Vice President and DeLay rose to House Majority Leader. Between 1996 and 2001, CATS acquired a comprehensive knowledge of inner workings of the minds of almost every member of the House of Representatives. With Cheney in the White House and DeLay effectively in charge of the House, CATS was poised to take over the world.

In the days after 9-11, as Congresswoman McKinney was uncovering evidence that the Jews knew about the attack in advance, she made an even more startling find. Although McKinney had not yet begun to publicly discuss her findings, she discovered that DeLay and the White House had become aware of her work.

To prevent McKinney from heroically revealing the pre-9/11 coverup, CATS sprang into action. In no time, CATS was in action, portraying the coverup conspiracy as nonsense and McKinney as a lunatic for believing in it. CATS succeeded: DeLay secretly recruited a Democrat, state court judge Denise Majette, to run against McKinney in the 2002 primary election. CATS and their underground network of supporters bankrolled the Majette campaign and succeeded in hoodwinking McKinney's Democratic constituents into defeating her in the 2002 primary election.

However, this victory would be short-lived: in 2004, Majette unsuccessfully sought election to the U.S. Senate, leaving an opening for McKinney to return to the halls of Congress and resume her quest to reveal the truth. In January 2005, McKinney triumphantly returned to Capitol Hill, determined more than ever to expose both the 9/11 coverup and the massive CATS conspiracy.

To stop McKinney, CATS was determined to regain access to her thoughts. They were determined to make her wear her special lapel pin once and for all. To that end, Jack Abramoff called in a favor with his good friend Bob Ney, then the Chairman of the House Administration Committee, and got Capitol Police to begin harassing McKinney every time she failed to wear her special lapel pin.

So, folks, that's why when Cynthia McKinney tried to enter the Longworth building this week without her lapel pin, she had no choice other than to attack the cop.

Have a happy April Fool's Day!

The 1st Annual Senate Awards

2006-03-29T00:31:00.000-05:00

It's been a long 13 days since I've had something meaningful to post, so I'll let you see the 1st Annual Senate Awards courtesy of Will Stewart.

Comments:

Unger will not be returning for an encore next year.
Kessler will have the good fortune of not having to face his constituency this year but will most certainly find a smaller supporting cast as those of many of his colleagues vote their displeasure with this year's performance.
If, as I predict, the voters of this state make their displeasure known on November 7, Governor Joe will be without the mother of all rubber stamps and will instead have to make real decisions as to whether to sign or veto (and be overridden on) real, substantive bills to do things like abolish the food tax and impose tough, mandatory prison sentences for all rapists and child molesters.
The remaining members of the Ruling Party will find in their first year in the minority that their minority status will not prevent votes on their bills: we will gladly entertain next year's incarnation of SB 674. 18 of the 21 Democratic senators cosponsored this bill but all voted against discharging it from the Finance Committee--whose chairman, Walt Helmick, D-Pocahontas, was among the bill's cosponsors--after Helmick refused to consider the bill in his committee.

No Show Joe Misses Every Vote, Still Draws Full Legislative Salary

2006-03-16T14:15:00.000-05:00

Delegate Joe C. Ferrell, D-Logan, scored a new record this year by missing all 669 roll call votes in the House of Delegates. Despite his failure to appear for even one day of work, he still drew his entire $15,000 annual salary for being in the Legislature, reports Hoppy Kercheval.

Having run against No Show Joe for the House of Delegates in the 19th District in 2002 and 2004, I am intensely familiar with the infinite reasons he should not be in the Legislature.

While I do not have available such statistics for prior years, Ferrell has long been a leader in absenteeism among legislators. Ferrell is usually present at the Legislature only when legislation relating to alcohol, tobacco, or gambling is being considered. Ferrell, who is an unindicted coconspirator in the Lincoln County election fraud case and is not seeking reelection this year, refused to resign his seat in the Legislature despite his apparent inability to continue representing his constituency in Boone, Lincoln, Logan, and Putnam counties. When I attacked No Show Joe's chronic absenteeism in the closing weeks of the 2004 campaign, he responded by running a blatantly false radio ad claiming an almost perfect legislative attendance record that could not be supported by any official records of the House of Delegates.

Ferrell is a crook. In 1992, he got a sweetheart plea bargain from federal prosecutors in which he was allowed to plead guilty to a misdemeanor, testify against notorious Logan County Circuit Judge Ned Grubb, and made a nonbinding declaration that he had no intention of ever seeking public office again. Among many, many other crimes, he admitted to paying Judge Grubb $58,000 over the course of three elections to buy his way onto a "slate" of candidates for whom votes would be bought using funds supplied by Ferrell and other members of the slate. In 1998, he got back in the saddle and has since been in the House of Delegates.

UPDATE: After this story was originally reported, No Show Joe apparently called the Clerk of the House of Delegates to inquire about returning his salary. He'll be able to afford it, since he's not seeking reelection and won't be spending an even larger sum of money for vote-buying.

Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Jeff Kessler, Friend of Child Molesters and Drunk Drivers, Digs Deeper Grave for Ruling Party

2006-03-13T23:59:00.000-05:00

Just as their Washington counterparts never miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity, West Virginia's Democratic legislators found a way to rescue defeat of SB 205, the sex offender bill, from the jaws of victory. Not wanting to be blamed for a filibuster, Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Jeff Kessler, D-Marshall, decided to not consume the final 4 minutes of the night with his bloviating but instead let his colleagues cast yet another politically suicidal vote that could have been avoided if only Kessler had elected to talk for 4 more minutes.

A lot can be said of the Ruling Party by the two issues that most animated Senator Kessler: defeating a bill to crack down on child molesters and rapists that had been amended by the House to weaken a version adopted last week by the Senate on a 28-5 vote and reopening a dangerous loophole that allows convicted drunk drivers to avoid a driver's license revocation by pleading no contest and hoping to prevail at a DMV administrative hearing after the same facts have already been adjudicated by a court of law using a tougher burden of proof than required in the administrative proceeding.

While many now know of the Senate's surprise action on Saturday night to kill SB 205 with 4 minutes remaining in the session, the story behind the story is absolutely galling.

Today, I spoke to Delegate Patrick Lane, R-Kanawha, one of the leaders in shepherding SB 205 through the House of Delegates. Senator Kessler double-crossed Lane and everyone else who had worked for weeks to shape this very important piece of legislation. I am absolutely convinced that Kessler would have found an excuse to oppose whatever the final version of SB 205 had been, as he had invented a new excuse for opposing the bill on almost every hour of every day of the session.

On Wednesday, March 1, the Senate adopted the GOP substitute and passed SB 205. On Tuesday, March 7, Delegate Lane held a meeting with staff counsel from the Judiciary and Finance committees of both the Senate and the House of Delegates in Senator Kessler's office. The Senate bill was stripped of most of the new criminal penalties and the only sex offenses receiving higher penalties were sexual assault or sexual abuse of a child 12 or younger. Over the next 2 days, several drafts of the rewritten bill were exchanged among the participants for refinement into a final product. NOTE: The full text of this version is still not available online.

On Friday, March 9, the House Judiciary Committee adopted the compromise bill and sent the bill to the House floor. At 11:58 A.M. on Saturday, March 11, the House of Delegates passed the bill. That afternoon, Governor Manchin met with Senate President Earl Ray Tomblin, D-Logan, and Senate Majority Leader Truman Chafin, D-Mingo, to discuss the bill.

Saturday evening, Delegate Lane spent a significant amount of time in the Senate tracking SB 205. At about 10 P.M., Senator Kessler informed Lane of his objection to a provision of the bill that could have subjected a minor to the mandatory 25 years to life prison sentence for a "consensual" sex act with a 12 year-old and that any such act should be treated under the lesser offense of third-degree sexual assault; Lane suggested amending the bill to obviate this issue, as he did on Tuesday when Kessler suggested this ground for objection and then retracted it after Lane then proposed the amendment. Then, at about 11 P.M., Kessler informed Lane that he had other grounds for objections and that he now thought the bill to be so fatally flawed that he would push to kill the bill for the session.

At about 11:45, the Senate finally reported the House amendment to SB 205, whereupon Senate Majority Leader Truman Chafin, D-Mingo, moved that the Senate refuse to concur with the House amendments and insist on its position--a position far tougher than the House bill--knowing that acceptance of this motion would ensure death for SB 205. Senator Kessler spoke for several minutes, asserting his objections to a bill to which he had earlier agreed and which objections were aired and previously satisfied. Senate Minority Leader Vic Sprouse, R-Kanawha, then spoke in defense of the bill and reminded senators that the bill the Senate previously passed was far tougher and that agreeing to Senator Chafin's motion would kill the bill. At 11:56 P.M., the Senate voted 23-11 to agree to Chafin's motion; the bill was dead.

It is my position that key legislative leaders engaged in dirty dealing and an extraordinary level of bad faith by their own standards. The Senate voted 28-5 on March 1 to adopt a very strong substitute measure for SB 205. Delegate Lane and other proponents of the bill met in the office of Senator Kessler with representative staff of every committee with jurisdiction over the bill and exchanged several drafts over a period of several days to refine the bill into a final version that both houses could agree upon. At 11:56 P.M. on Saturday, March 11, the Senate had no substantive reason to oppose a weaker bill than the one they passed 10 days earlier unless the Senate had actually favored a stronger bill--which was not the case.

Governor Manchin has been speaking from both sides of his mouth on SB 205. Like John Kerry, Manchin was apparently for this bill before he was against it. Manchin agreed to the compromise formed by the discussions led by Delegate Lane and lobbied the House for the bill. Then, after the meeting with senators Tomblin & Chafin and a later encounter with Senator Kessler, the Governor lobbied senators against the bill. While his lack of experience as a coal miner or coal operator did not prevent him from demanding & receiving whirlwind approval of his mine safety bill in January following the Sago & Aracoma mine disasters, Manchin said he--not being an attorney or criminal justice specialist--would have to defer to Kessler, a former prosecutor. If Manchin really wanted this bill to pass, the Senate Democrats would have voted for it and it would have passed--just as they follow his orders every time he publicly demands toe performance of a certain action.

If Senator Kessler and the rest of the leadership of the Ruling Party really wanted to work in good faith to correct SB 205 to obviate any objectionable provisions and then enact it into law, they had at least 3 options even in the final hours of the session:

In the Senate, amend the House amendment to the bill, pass the bill again, and have the House concur. As almost 12 hours elapsed between the passage of the bill in the House & the Senate's action to kill the bill, more than enough time existed for any level of revision necessary.
Pass the bill, let the Governor veto it & return it to the Legislature, and then amend the bill and pass it again. Under Article VI, Section 51 and Article VII, Section 14 of the state constitution, when the Legislature is in an extended session to consider the budget--as they are this week, actions upon bills vetoed by the Governor may be considered. They could have then passed a corrected bill, which could have then been signed into law.
Pass the bill, allow it to become law, and then immediately convene a special session of the Legislature to pass the necessary corrections. As no special motion had been made to fix a different effective date for the bill, it would have taken effect 90 days from passage, ensuring more than enough time to pass a corrective measure without scuttling the whole bill.

There was one glimmer of good news Saturday night: HB 4308, the DUI no contest bill, failed to pass. Just as Senator Kessler was quite animated & passionate about defeating a bill to guarantee mandatory prison sentences for rapists & molesters of young children, he was equally determined to give drunk drivers who plead no contest to the criminal charges an extra opportunity to avoid a revocation of their driver's licenses. The Senate passed the bill with an amendment on a 21-13 vote on Saturday and most people assumed it was a done deal. However, the House of Delegates then proposed an additional amendment to the bill; the Senate never acted upon the further amendment by the House and the bill subsequently died due to the inaction. A bill does not pass until both houses agree on precisely the same language with no exceptions; this did not happen to HB 4308.

Ruling Party Kills Sex Offender Bill, Almost Reopens DUI No Contest Loophole

2006-03-12T02:30:00.000-05:00

The 2006 regular legislative session just adjourned and West Virginians will find much to have been desired from their leaders.

The night ended with a dramatic vote in the state Senate that killed SB 205, the sex offender bill. Last week, the Senate voted 28-5 to adopt a Republican substitute that instituted mandatory prison sentences for all rapists and child molesters. After initial hesitation, the House of Delegates agreed to almost everything in the Senate bill. After several minutes of debate, the Senate voted 23-11 at 11:56 P.M. to reject the House amendment to SB 205 and the bill thus died.

Three Democratic senators joined most of the Republicans to oppose the motion of Senate Majority Leader Truman Chafin, D-Mingo, to refuse to concur to the House amendment to SB 205. Unfortunately, five Republicans also broke ranks; however, the motion would have still carried even if party discipline had held. The three Democratic senators who voted the right way were Evan Jenkins, D-Cabell, Shirley Love, D-Fayette, and Randy White, D-Webster. The five Republican crossovers were Frank Deem, R-Wood, Karen Facemeyer, R-Jackson, Charles Lanham, R-Mason, Andy McKenzie, R-Ohio, and John Yoder, R-Jefferson.

Earlier in the evening, the Senate amended and passed HB 4308, reopening a dangerous loophole in our DUI law that would have allowed drunk drivers to plead no contest to the criminal case and be able to contest the revocation of their driver's license before an administrative hearing at the DMV. Current law says that a conviction bars a hearing since the same facts supporting the administrative action were proven under a tougher burden of proof in a criminal case. HB 4308 appears to have died after the House further amended the bill and the Senate failed to concur before adjournment.

With the Senate's flip-flopping on protecting the women and children of West Virginia from sexual predators, Republicans now have a golden opportunity to take control of both houses of the Legislature in November. Tonight's action merely caps a session in which the Ruling Party has also rejected abolishing or even further reducing the food tax; amending the state constitution to protect the definition of marriage from assault by activist judges; closing a loophole in the law requiring a minor to notify her parents before obtaining an abortion that allows any doctor other than the abortionist to issue a waiver with no independent judicial oversight; or reducing state income taxed by raising the personal exemptions for all taxpayers.

48 Hours Remaining in Last Regular Legislative Session Under Ruling Party's Reign

2006-03-09T23:56:00.000-05:00

In just over 48 hours, the 2006 regular session of the West Virginia Legislature will come to an end. While many political observers are marking the retirements of both House Speaker Bob Kiss, D-Raleigh, and House Minority Leader Charles Trump, R-Morgan, history will record the final fall of the gavel at midnight Saturday as the end of an era of 74 years of one-party rule.

At this hour, only three major bills of statewide significance remain alive: the budget bill; HB 4048, the eminent domain bill; and SB 205, the sex offender bill. The budget bill is obvious. The other two bills' fates are very uncertain. Earlier this year, the House of Delegates passed HB 4048 and created very strong protections for private property owners against eminent domain abuse. The Senate has watered down HB 4048 and should yield to the House version. SB 205 was completely rewritten and passed by the Senate last week and is now languishing in the House of Delegates.

After the Senate adopted a Republican substitute for SB 205, the Governor sprung into action and has been working feverishly to either defeat this bill or gut it, enact it, and claim the women and children of West Virginia have been adequately protected from sexual predators when they really will not. Earlier this year, when legislation similar to SB 205 as passed by the Senate was submitted for review, the estimated fiscal impact was only a few million dollars per year, according to Delegate Patrick Lane, R-Kanawha. Less than two days after the bill passed the Senate, this estimate ballooned to over $90 million and then to $162 million by last weekend. Earlier today, Will Stewart and Gary Abernathy reported on a Democratic strategy memo that calls for the gutting or defeat of SB 205 for purely partisan reasons--namely that Governor Joe's empty shell has been replaced with real substance thanks to a concerted effort by Senate Republicans.

Many, many other bills that should have been acted upon were ignored or rejected by the Ruling Party. Members of the Ruling Party overwhelmingly opposed any further reductions or elimination of the food tax; amending the state constitution to protect the definition of marriage; and closing a loophole in our state's law requiring unemancipated minors to notify their parents prior to having an abortion that makes the current law meaningless. Then, 18 of the 21 Democratic state senators introduced a bill to increase the personal exemptions from the state income tax and then voted against the bill when Republican senators endorsed the bill and brought it to a vote. A plan to give school teachers a 3% pay raise was blocked in the Senate after the Governor and the WVEA intervened to remove from the agenda of the Senate Education Committee a WVFT plan that has previously garnered the support of almost al senators.

On November 7, I predict West Virginia voters will take the opportunity presented and elect Republican majorities to both houses of the Legislature. 74 years of one-party rule have wrecked our economy as the rest of the country leaves us in the dust. With their votes in favor of same-sex marriage, keeping the food tax, and keeping child rapists and molesters eligible for probation with no mandatory prison sentences, the Ruling Party has shown that when the time for choosing comes, their actions seem far more at home in San Francisco or Massachusetts than in West Virginia.

House Kills Parental Notification Bill

2006-03-07T12:32:00.000-05:00

The House of Delegates voted 62-37 against discharging SB 519 from committee, effectively killing this bill. SB 519 would reform the law requiring parental notification before a minor may have an abortion and close a critical loophole in the law that allows waivers of this law with no judicial oversight.

While 50 of the 68 House Democrats carried a West Virginians for Life endorsement in 2004, only 5 of them kept their word on this bill, one of the most popular pieces of legislation on the pro-life agenda. All 32 Republicans and the following 5 Democrats voted for discharge:

Eustace Frederick, D-Mercer
Tom Louisos, D-Fayette
Tim Miley, D-Harrison
Sally Susman, D-Raleigh
Ken Tucker, D-Marshall

House Showdown Over Parental Notification for Minors' Abortions Tomorrow

2006-03-06T23:46:00.000-05:00

Tomorrow, the House of Delegates will vote on discharging SB 519, closing a loophole in the state's law requiring parental notification before a minor has an abortion, from the House Judiciary Committee. The Beckley Register-Herald reports that in anticipation of this vote, West Virginians for Life has announced that any vote against discharge will forfeit a delegate's endorsement in this year's elections.

After a string of recent legislative successes, West Virginians for Life, the state's largest nonpartisan, grassroots, pro-life organization, has been stonewalled in the House of Delegates on closing the loophole in the parental notification law. The loophole in question allows a doctor other than the abortionist to issue a "physician waiver" of the parental notification requirement upon the doctor's judgment the minor can make the decision for herself, with no oversight or review. SB 519 proposes to follow the model of almost every other state with a parental involvement law and require a court to conduct a confidential hearing and rule on whether to issue the waiver.

House Democrats have apparently been unable to bring any abortion bills to a vote due to jockeying between the major factions of their caucus over party leadership following the retirement of Speaker Bob Kiss. While pro-abortion delegates are a minority even in that caucus, they are apparently trying to use the contest for their support to suppress action on pro-life bills this year.

SB 519 is the second bill the Senate has had to spring into action and pass after the House originally agreed to act first and then dropped the ball. Also on Wednesday, the Senate rewrote and passed SB 205, the sex offender bill, after its House counterpart, HB 4039, also ran aground in the lower body.

The Senate voted 29-5 on Wednesday to suspend the constitutional rule requiring the bill to be read on 3 separate days and then voted 32-2 to pass SB 519, after the House of Delegates balked and failed to pass HB 4411, the House version of the bill, after a prior agreement among legislative leaders to originate the bill in the House. Senators Dan Foster, D-Kanawha, Charles Lanham, R-Mason, Brooks McCabe, D-Kanawha, Bill Sharpe, D-Lewis, and John Yoder, R-Jefferson, voted against the rules suspension and Senators Foster and McCabe voted against passing the bill.

Dems Hopeless

2006-03-06T15:53:00.000-05:00

The Onion almost crossed the line from satire to reality with this one. Enjoy!

I've Been Accepted!

2006-03-04T17:22:00.000-05:00

Today has been a great day for me.

Today, I learned that I have been accepted to the WVU College of Law, Class of 2009.

Letter to the Editor Re: Sex Offender Bill

2006-03-04T15:19:00.000-05:00

Tuesday, after the Senate Judiciary Committee had voted to gut SB 205, the sex offender bill, I wrote a letter to the editor (scroll to bottom of page after link opens) of the Morgantown Dominion-Post condemning West Virginia's apparent inaction on cracking down on rapists and child molesters.

Wednesday, the full Senate unexpectedly adopted an amendment by Senate Minority Leader Vic Sprouse, R-Kanawha, that substituted a tougher GOP bill for the gutted bill that had emerged from committee. While 8 members of the committee voted to gut the bill, only 3 voted against the Sprouse amendment on the floor; 2 other senators who are not members of the Judiciary Committee, Billy Wayne Bailey, D-Wyoming, and Brooks McCabe, D-Kanawha, supported the committee's gutted bill.

Thursday, my letter ran in the paper at the same time the passage of a tough sex offender bill by the Senate was being reported. It sure seemed like I had misjudged the prognosis of this bill.

Friday, however, many of my fears began to materialize. The Manchin Administration and Democratic legislative leaders are now apoplectically whining and moaning about this bill's potential annual cost to the state of $91 million to $162 million to house the extra prison population ($91.5 million) and house & treat sexually violent predators who are subject to civil commitment ($61.9 million). The Ruling Party cannot see this issue for what it is: an issue of right and wrong and protecting the women and children of West Virginia from rapists and child molesters who are currently eligible for probation and no jail time under current law.

Ruling Party Leaders Launch Full-Court Press to Sink Senate GOP Sex Offender Bill

2006-03-04T14:53:00.000-05:00

What started as a trickle yesterday has become a torrent. Leaders of the Ruling Party from both the legislative leadership and the Manchin Administration have declared war on the current version of SB 205 and are now trying to pull all the stops to sink any bill that is little more than a couple of dozen pages that seek to make people think a problem is being addressed when it is not.

Yesterday, Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Jeff Kessler, D-Marshall and supporter of keeping child rapists eligible for probation, launched the opening public salvo of a last-ditch effort to torpedo the bill by bemoaning its potential annual cost to the state of up to $162 million. Later in the day, a variety of officials from the Manchin Administration joined the public hand-wringing over the potential of mandatory prison sentences for all child molesters and rapists.

Articles circulating in all of today's newspapers, including the Beckley Register-Herald. the Charleston Gazette, and the Huntington Herald-Dispatch, paint the image of certain financial ruin for the state should our prison system consume another $100 million annually of a $3.3 billion general revenue budget.

Those of you who think the West Virginia Legislature is filled with conservative Democrats--and thus it's really not that important that we elect a Republican majority--need to think about whether these people are representing your views. Do we want to continue policies that allow convicted child molesters and rapists to get probation or do we want to follow the lead of Florida and many other states that are adopting 25-year mandatory minimum sentences for any adult who sexually assaults or sexually abuses a child 12 or younger and similarly appropriate sentences for other degrees of sexual assault and sexual abuse?

I submit to you that $100 million annually is quite a bargain for the protection we would receive. Pedophiles who molest and rape young children permanently scar these kids and reoffend more than any other group of criminals. Current law allows accused child rapists to plead their cases (i.e., sexual assault in the first degree) down to lesser charges (i.e., sexual abuse in the first degree) and serve short prison sentences, if any at all.

When Florida passed the Jessica Lunsford Act last year, Florida legislators imposed a 25-year mandatory minimum prison sentence for any adult who sexually assaults or sexually abuses a child younger than 12, followed by mandatory lifetime supervised release with constant GPS monitoring & tracking and a mandatory sentence of life without parole for a second offense of committing any sexual offense against a child younger than 12. The Florida supervised release program is in addition to--and not in lieu of--the mandatory prison sentence.

The debate we are now having over the punishments for felony sexual offenses is critical as it reflects basic, guiding principles of our legislators. What is the first priority of government to the people? Is it not to protect the lives, liberty, and security of the people from foreign enemies and domestic criminals, especially violent criminals who would rape and molest little children? What are we saying about our state and our society if, because of purported financial considerations, we cannot see fit to impose tough, mandatory prison sentences on convicted rapists and child molesters? If these criminals do not deserve tough prison sentences, who does?

Manchin Seeks to Block Senate GOP Sex Offender Bill

2006-03-03T13:56:00.000-05:00

Just two days following the state Senate's 28-5 vote to adopt a Republican substitute for the Governor's sex offender bill, SB 205 (click on "SB205 SUB1 eng.htm" on the bill summary page), it appears Governor Manchin is trying to have the bill gutted in the House of Delegates.

Senate Minority Leader Vic Sprouse, R-Kanawha, said today that the Governor's office and the Division of Corrections were already protesting the bill, citing the potential explosion in the state inmate population if the bill becomes law.

Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Jeff Kessler, D-Marshall and one of 5 senators who voted against the Sprouse amendment, told Senate members Friday that he has received a fiscal note from the Division of Corrections and it says the increased prison sentences in SB 205 would cost the state $91.5 million extra a year. Kessler says an additional state prison would also have to be built.

Senator Sprouse says he doesn't believe those financial numbers. "That is a bogus number that's being thrown out there because the governor does not want this bill to pass." Sprouse says there's nothing more important or a higher priority than locking up violent sexual predators for the rest of their lives. "These aren't people who steal a car; these are people who rape and molest four and five-year-olds."

Sprouse says state residents would be willing to have more of their tax dollars go to the Division of Correction to house those type of criminals. Sprouse urged senators not to change their minds. "Don't get weak kneed on this thing. You are on the right side of this issue. You are on the people's side of this issue."

Let's talk both about the financial aspects of this bill and the moral aspects.

The moral aspect of this bill should be self-evident: a person who would rape or molest a young child--the 25-year mandatory minimum sentence proposed only involves victims 12 or younger, while lesser penalties will continue to apply to the statutory rape of older, but still underage, children--is someone who, depending on your viewpoint, is either morally depraved and evil or suffers from a severe disease or mental abnormality. In either case, most sane people would want such people locked away and prevented from victimizing more people--in this case very young children who are scarred for life by pedophiles who rape or molest them. We don't have to ask for a fiscal note to know that SB 205, after adoption of the Sprouse amendment, is simply the right thing to do.

Some people may think that even protecting innocent little boys and girls from sexual predators is subject to monetary considerations. To help you understand some of these financial figures, consider this. In fiscal year 2005, the entire state budget was over $8 billion according to the state's Comprehensive Annual Financial Report. About $3.2 billion of that came from federal funds. About $3.3 billion of that came from the state General Revenue Fund--all the taxes and fees imposed and collected by the state. The remainder was from earmarked special revenue funds.

The Department of Military Affairs and Public Safety got just over $609 million of the 2005 state budget. The DMAPS is a large agency--consisting of the Army National Guard, the Division of Corrections, the Division of Criminal Justice Services, the Division of Juvenile Services, the Division of Veteran Affairs, the Fire Marshal, the Division of Homeland Security and Emergency Management, the Regional Jail and Correctional Facility Authority, and the State Police. In 2005, $90 million of DMAPS spending was for armory construction and homeland security projects--and we simply must remember that post-9/11, "homeland security" has become a sacred cow turned into a vehicle for pork projects and extravagances that would never fly under another banner. Another $225 million of DMAPS spending was for a special contribution to eliminate the unfunded liability of the Public Safety Death, Disability, and Retirement Fund (State Police Plan A). About half the DMAPS spending was thus for ongoing operations, bringing the real department budget closer to 2004's $330 million.

In a state with an $8 Billion state budget ($3.3 billion general revenue), Senator Kessler and, at least privately, Governor Manchin don't think spending an extra $91.5 million each year to imprison pedophiles and sexually violent predators who rape and molest young children or who randomly attack & rape women of all ages is a worthy priority of state government. They sure have some strange priorities. Subscribers to traditional philosophies of government have generally held that the very first priority a government has to its people is to protect their lives from enemy attack and the criminal element and then likewise protect their liberty, safety, and security from these threats.

It's up to the House of Delegates--where a much weaker bill ran aground earlier this week and died after being re-referred to committee--to pass SB 205 and not weaken it. It's also up to leaders of both houses to get this bill on the Governor's desk early enough to prevent him from vetoing the bill after the Legislature adjourns--and thus preventing them from overriding it without starting the legislative process anew next year.

Senate Dems Reverse Course, Pass GOP Sex Offender Bill

2006-03-01T22:37:00.000-05:00

Just days after effectively gutting in committee a bill, SB 205, to strengthen West Virginia's sex offender laws, the Senate reversed course today and adopted a tougher measure proposed by Senate Republicans. On a 28-5 vote, the Senate substituted the language of SB 276, the Protect Our Children Act, into SB 205.

Senators Billy Wayne Bailey, D-Wyoming; Dan Foster and Brooks McCabe, both D-Kanawha; Jon Blair Hunter, D-Monongalia; and Jeff Kessler, D-Marshall, voted against the Sprouse amendment. Following the vote on the Sprouse amendment, the Senate unanimously passed SB 205 as amended.

This bill now goes to the House of Delegates, where a bill (HB 4039) identical to the original version of SB 205 died this week after being recommitted to the House Finance Committee following the committee's reporting of the bill with no recommendation.

Today's action marks only a beginning, as there are still 10 days left in this legislative session and plenty of opportunities to either make additional improvements to this bill or undermine it as it passes through the House of Delegates.

While West Virginia Democratic Legislators Gut Sex Offender Legislation, Their Virginia Counterparts Do the Right Thing

2006-02-28T14:22:00.000-05:00

While West Virginia's Ruling Party continues gutting a pair of already weak bills (HB 4039 and SB 205) purporting to protect the citizenry from sex offenders, their counterparts in the Commonwealth of Virginia are on track to unanimously pass multiple bills to provide the children of Virginia airtight protection from sex offenders.

After unanimous passage by the Virginia House of Delegates, HB 846 is on its way to unanimous passage in the Virginia Senate. VA HB 846 establishes a 25-year mandatory minimum sentence for the very first offense of sexual assault of a child younger than 12 years old. Ditto for HB 984, HB 1038, HB 1333, and HB 1359, all of which include provisions defeated in West Virginia's House and Senate Judiciary Committees.

Let me repeat this for my friends in the West Virginia Democratic Party: there is no shame in being tough on child molesters and rapists. Not one member of the Virginia General Assembly has voted against or voted to gut any of these measures in the Old Dominion. Surely, you can find a way of following their lead and maybe--maybe--saving your sorry keister from a shellacking in November.

Showdown in the Senate: Fireworks to Erupt Over Sex Offenders: Part II

2006-02-28T12:38:00.000-05:00

As I previously wrote, the Senate Judiciary Committee yesterday passed a committee substitute for Senate Bill 205, the Governor's sex offender bill. While we knew the committee had rejected a GOP alternative, not until the committee substitute was printed online this morning did I discover that the committee had actually gutted a bill that was already an empty shell going into the committee.

Unlike the House Judiciary Committee's committee substitute for HB 4039, SB 205 as it stands now (bill text of Judiciary Committee substitute) will have no civil commitment law for sexually violent predators and now has no new criminal penalties for any sex offenses until after (1) a person has been convicted of a sexually violent offense, (2) that person is found by the court to be a sexually violent predator or a pedophile, and (3) the person, after all this, then goes out and commits either sexual assault in the first or second degree or sexual abuse in the first degree. There is no mandatory GPS tracking of sex offenders on postrelease supervision and absolutely no mandatory prison sentences whatsoever, even for the proposed tougher penalties for sexually violent predators or pedophiles who reoffend. This is outrageous!

The Ruling Party in this state has no intention of passing a meaningful bill to protect everyone from all types of felony sex offenders. Of the members of the Senate Judiciary Committee, only the Republicans and Senator Randy White, D-Webster, supported a meaningful bill.

Senate GOP Calls Bailey's Bluff

2006-02-28T00:26:00.000-05:00

Last week, Senate Majority Whip Billy Wayne Bailey, D-Wyoming, introduced SB 674, dramatically increasing the personal exemptions from the state income tax. Bailey was joined by 17 of the other 20 Democratic senators and Senator Karen Facemeyer, R-Jackson. The other Republican senators knew Bailey was not serious.

Bailey said he wanted to increase the personal exemptions from the state income tax rather than abolish the food tax because the income tax cut would help the working poor more. All state income taxpayers would have benefited from SB 674, as the proposed exclusions of $25,000 for a married couple or $12,500 for a single person would be subtracted from every taxpayer's adjusted gross income regardless of their total income.

However, sensing that Bailey had no real intention of actually passing this bill, Republican senators called Bailey's bluff. A motion to discharge the bill from committee was defeated in a nonrecorded vote in which all Democrats and 3 Republicans opposed discharging the bill from the Senate Finance Committee--whose Chairman, Senator Walt Helmick, D-Pocahontas, was one of the bill's cosponsors.

The West Virginia Legislature sure seems to work in very strange ways. In how many other legislative chambers do a majority of the members of a chamber cosponsor a bill and then vote against it and say they really didn't mean to act on the bill at all and just wanted to make some people think they wanted to achieve the objective of the sham bill?

Showdown in the Senate: Fireworks to Erupt Tomorrow Over Sex Offenders

2006-02-27T23:12:00.000-05:00

Following an 8-7 vote today in the West Virginia Senate Judiciary Committee to reject a GOP alternative to Governor Manchin's sex offender bill, SB 205, the full Senate will likely vote on the same proposal tomorrow.

SB 205 is the Senate version of HB 4039, the pathetically weak excuse of a bill I dissected earlier on this page. SB 205 is very narrowly drafted and only applies to "sexually violent predators," who are legally defined as people convicted of a sexually violent offense or found not guilty by reason of mental illness, mental retardation or addiction and who have a "mental abnormality or personality disorder'' that makes them likely to commit more sexually violent crimes.

SB 276, the Protect Our Children Act, sponsored by Senator Clark Barnes, R-Randolph, all other Republican senators, and 3 Democratic senators, would substantially increase the penalties for a wide variety of felony sexual offenses and impose better tracking & monitoring of convicted sex offenders than the Governor's bill. Today, Senator Russ Weeks, R-Raleigh, proposed to incorporate this bill into the current bill. The committee rejected that motion on an 8-7 vote.

The urgency of Senate action on this issue increased today as HB 4039 ran aground in the House. The House Finance Committee reported this bill "without recommendation," indicating that the committee neither approved of the bill nor wanted to block a floor vote on the bill. The full House then recommitted the bill to the Finance Committee. As on the parental notification for minors' abortion, the Senate has been called to action after the House dropped the ball.

Why West Virginia legislators cannot get their act together and pass Jessica's Law is just beyond me. What is so difficult about passing a 25 years to life mandatory prison sentence for adults who sexually assault or sexually abuse children under the age of 12? Our legislators have long had a strange phobia of any bills that would tend to increase the state's prison population. They refuse to build any new prisons and refuse to repeal the law forbidding the housing of state inmates in out-of-state prisons.

The first obligation of government to the people is to protect us from our foreign enemies and domestic crime. In state government, that means criminal justice. In 2004, the state's general revenue budget exceeded $3 billion. Of that, about $330 million was spent on the Department of Military Affairs and Public Safety. This department includes the National Guard, the State Police, the Division of Corrections, Regional Jails, and other related agencies. The first priority of government seems to be consistently treated as one of the last by West Virginia's Ruling Party.

Tomorrow's Senate vote become more dramatic as the AP reports this evening of a public statement by governor's counsel Carte Goodwin publicly defending the current bill as the administration's desired approach. Goodwin said the bill was narrowly tailored to address sexually violent predators and that this was the area where the Governor desires to act at this time.

Those of you who have been watching the nationwide debate over sexual offenders and Jessica's Law probably already know that "sexually violent predators" comprise a very small percentage of all sexual offenders who are convicted of sexually violent offenses. The vast majority of sex offenders, including pedophiles who prey upon young children, do not fall into the legal definition of a sexually violent predator.

West Virginia needs a comprehensive approach to toughening its sex offender laws, not the empty shell proposed by the Governor and seemingly rubber-stamped by the Ruling Party legislators. Tomorrow, the Senate will have a chance to act. On November 7, the voters will render their verdict.

O, Happy Day! VA to Raise Speed Limit to 70 on I-85

2006-02-27T22:47:00.000-05:00

It has been a long time coming, but the Commonwealth of Virginia is about to join the rest of Red State America on July 1, when the first 70 mph signs appear in the Old Dominion since 1973.

On an 80-20 vote, the Virginia House of Delegates approved Senate Bill 53, which will raise the speed limit from 65 to 70 on I-85 between Petersburg and North Carolina. The bill now goes to Governor Tim Kaine for his signature. Here's an interesting historical note: in 1973, Governor Kaine's father-in-law, then Governor Linwood Holton, signed a bill raising Virginia's interstate speed limit from 65 to 70. Unfortunately, that change was short-lived.

Hopefully, after seeing that I-85 will not run red with blood, the Virginia General Assembly will see fit next year to make more roads eligible for a 70 mph speed limit. Another needed reform will be to amend the reckless driving law. Under Virginia law, driving 20 mph or more over the speed limit or over 80 mph regardless of the speed limit constitutes an automatic charge of reckless driving, punishable by up to a year in jail, a fine of $2,500, a driver's license suspension, and half the points against a Virginia driver's license to trigger another driver's license suspension. The "or over 80 mph regardless of the speed limit" clause should be stricken from this law.

House Judiciary Committee Passes Worthless Sex Offender Bill

2006-02-26T23:17:00.000-05:00

Recently, the House Judiciary Committee passed a committee substitute for HB 4039, the Governor's sex offender bill. To say this bill is worthless would not be a stretch. While the committee did add a civil commitment law for the most serious sexual predators, the remainder of the bill is an empty shell.

To the credit of the Judiciary Committee, they did propose a civil commitment law for "sexually violent predators," a very small number of the most serious sex offenders who are legally deemed to be near uncontrollable. As in other states, the proposed civil commitment law would allow for the indefinite commitment to a secure mental hospital of the most dangerous threats to our communities until a court orders otherwise. However, this only applies to a handful of cases.

Now, the weakness of this bill. There are no shortage of deficiencies in this bill, as I will enumerate, going through the text of the bill from beginning to end (click here for the full text of the House Judiciary Committee Substitute). The following list is merely the most serious deficiencies in the bill:

Even though some prison sentences for violations of the Sex Offender Registration Act are increased, none of these sentences would be mandatory--NONE!
Proposed §15-12-11 would duplicate a provision of Florida's Jessica Lunsford Act that creates a separate crime for a person who helps a fugitive sex offender being sought by the police. In Florida, this crime is a felony; under this bill, iwould beba misdemeanorrr. This crime must be made a felony given the danger to our communities created in such cases.
Proposed §18A-3-12 would require certain school service personnel and other individuals who would have access to children in schools to undergo a partial background check. Such individuals should be fingerprinted and subjected to a full criminal background check. Additionally §18A-3-10 should be amended to repeal the grandfather clause for fingerprinting and full criminal background checks of teachers and administrators in public schools. Only those who received their initial teaching license after January 1, 2002, are subject to fingerprinting and a background check.
Going down to Chapter 61, Article 8B, the penalties are only increased for two crimes: first-degree sexual assault and first-degree sexual abuse. Even here, the proposed prison sentences are NOT MANDATORY. While an initial glance might indicate to you that the proposed sentences (i.e., 25-60 years for first-degree sexual assault) are tough, judges can still suspend sentences and place a person on probation under current law if the crime is not punishable by a life sentence. Prison sentences for all sexually violent offenses--and not just first-degree sexual assault or first-degree sexual abuse--must be made mandatory.
Over a dozen other sex crimes, including forced prostitution and child pornography, are not even addressed in this bill. I cannot even count the number of loopholes this omission will create to bypass what this bill proposes.
The proposed penalty for sexual abuse--molestation without actual sexual intercourse or intrusion--is only 2-10 years when a victim is less than 12 years old. Under Florida's Jessica's Law, the 25-year mandatory minimum sentence for sex crimes against children under 12 years old applies to both sexual assault and sexual abuse. Many, many cases of child sexual abuse involve only sexual abuse without sexual assault.
§62-12-2: Even though the probation eligibility statute is included in this bill, there is no change in eligibility for probation nor any provision that would deny probation even in cases of the most serious offenses.
Most of this bill's deficiencies are those things completely omitted from the bill. The first is eligibility for "good time" credits (WV Code §28-5-27) whereby convicts in prison can reduce their sentences for good behavior. Under current law, a convict is entitled to a mandatory 50% sentence reduction for consistent good behavior while in prison. Under the federal system and most state laws, good time credits can only reduce a sentence by 15%.
There are no provisions whatsoever for reforming the bail system for sex offenders. Bail is set by magistrates--almost none of whom are lawyers--except when a crime is punishable by life imprisonment. Under current law, a circuit judge sets bail in cases punishable by life imprisonment. These sex offenses are too serious not to be subjected to the more formal bail proceedings of a circuit court and the judgment of a more educated circuit judge. Additionally, the law should changed to require more stringent bail conditions when accused sex offenders do make bail. A person charged with a sexually violent offense should, if he or she even gets bail at all, be subject to a very high bail, electronic monitoring while out on bail, and other conditions that are appropriate given cases like the Groene murders in Idaho a few months ago.
There are no sex offender parole reforms. Under current parole law, a convict qualifies for parole upon completing the minimum range of an indeterminate (i.e., 15-35 years) sentence or 1/4 of a determinate (fixed term) sentence, and the convict is permanently discharged from further supervision 5 years from initial parole. Coupled with the liberal "good time" credit law, even sex offenders are almost automatically guaranteed release from prison after serving little more than the minimum sentence. While the bill strengthens the sex offender postrelease supervision law, postrelease supervision does not begin until parole is over.

These are just the most glaring deficiencies in the current bill. I have written and submitted to some of the House Republicans for their consideration a 300-page substitute amendment for this bill that closes these and many other loopholes or simple deficiencies in the bill that would truly address the problem of our state's weak sex offender laws.

House Dems Hand GOP Another Issue: Staton Pronounces Bill to Close Abortion Parental Notification Loophole "Dead"

2006-02-24T17:20:00.000-05:00

Reversing course from the last three years, the House of Delegates will not act on this year's top priority bill for West Virginians for Life.

House Majority Leader Rick Staton, D-Wyoming, today said the votes do not exist in the House to pass HB 4411. HB 4411 would close a gaping loophole in the state law requiring notification of at least one parent of an unemancipated minor who seeks an abortion prior to the procedure.

Under current law, a second doctor can interview a minor and issue a "physician waiver" that completely waives the parental notification requirement. Most states with parental notification or consent laws require a waiver to be granted by a court after a closed hearing in which a judge interviews an unemancipated minor to determine whether a waiver should be granted and to protect the minor from any abuse she may be suffering. HB 4411 would require parental notification waivers to be granted by a family court judge.

There may still be some hope of keeping this legislation alive via SB 120, the Senate version of this legislation. SB 120 has 19 sponsors, including the chairmen of both committees to which it has been referred.

In recent years, over 80% of House members and 94% of senators have voted for pro-life bills on the West Virginians for Life legislative agenda. This year, however, the Ruling Party has veered to the far left, rejecting bills to curb abortion, protect the traditional definition of marriage, reduce taxes, and many other important priorities of the mainstream of West Virginia.

I am sure Delegate Staton takes great pride in defeating this bill. He has long been a supporter of unfettered abortion on demand, along with such House leaders as Judiciary Committee Chairman Jon Amores, D-Kanawha, Legislative Rule-Making Review Committee Chair Virginia Mahan, D-Summers, Constitutional Revision Committee (which, by the way, has not had a meeting since January 2005) Vice Chair Carrie Webster, D-Kanawha, and Finance Committee Vice Chairman John Doyle, D-Jefferson.

Unions Pay Homeless People to Man Picket Lines; Union Members All Have Good Jobs, Too Busy to Picket

2006-02-24T01:33:00.000-05:00

Several weeks ago, national media outlets reported of a growing phenomenon of labor unions that, thanks to their success in providing their members steady, good-paying jobs, there are few members available to man picket lines around various construction jobs. To solve this problem, unions began hiring homeless people to man the picket lines.

This practice has arrived in West Virginia courtesy of the Mid-Atlantic Regional Council of Carpenters and their desire to unionize the construction of a new office for a Charleston doctor. The source of this news is no less than the Charleston Gazette, which revealed this story today only because they ran a picture of the pickets yesterday, identifying them erroneously as union members.

The Gazette reports that the Carpenters union pays each homeless picket $8 per hour, but without health insurance or other benefits unions believe should be provided by every employer to its employees. The Gazette reported:

“We’re helping them get on their feet,” he said. “It just doesn’t make sense for us to get people off the jobs who are already working when we can help the community.”
The men signed contracts prohibiting them from speaking with the press, Harmon said.
Unlike carpenters and other craftsman, there are no local standards for banner holders, said Scott Brewer, service representative for the council’s Charleston local.
“[Eight dollars an hour] is well above minimum wage. It’s not a hard job. I believe we’re setting a good standard for banner holders,” said Brewer, who did not hire the men and did not know where they came from. “I would guess they are making more money than they have been.”

So, the Carpenters union protests the use of a non-union construction company to build a new doctor's office, yet they seem to have found such an abundance of work for their working members that they only people they could find to man picket lines are homeless people. Conveniently enough, even at just $8 per hour without benefits, these workers have been forced to sign confidentiality agreements.

Senate Dems Lie and Deceive: Introduce Income Tax Cut to Generate Favorable Headlines, Have No Intent of Actually Enacting It

2006-02-21T23:59:00.000-05:00

In the face of growing cries for tax relief from overtaxed West Virginians, 18 Democratic state senators--including Senate Finance Committee Chairman Walt Helmick, D-Pocahontas--and Senator Karen Facemeyer, R-Jackson, introduced yesterday SB 674, dramatically raising the state income tax exemption for every taxpayer to $25,000 for a married couple and $12,500 for singles.

Given West Virginia's status as one of a handful of states that levies its state income tax upon people below the poverty level, one would think this bill is welcome news. In fact it is not: it is a bag of lies and deceit intended only to fool the constituents of these senators into believing their senators now support tax relief. Even though the Finance Committee chairman is a cosponsor, I predict this bill will not be acted upon.

For years, as part of an overall strategy of reducing West Virginia's excessive tax burden (we rank 3rd in state taxes per dollar of per capita income), Republican legislators have proposed both raising the personal exemption (now $2,000 times the number of exemptions one claims on his or her federal tax return) and the $10,000 low earned income exclusion. We have proposed eliminating the food tax, eliminating the business franchise tax, reducing personal income tax rates, reducing the corporate income tax rate, and many others.

Just as they have no intent of passing any of the joint resolutions proposing a constitutional amendment protecting the definition of marriage as being between a man and a woman, members of the Ruling Party have no intent to pass their own bill that would seem to satisfy a desire for which the people have been clamoring. Whether it's protecting marriage, reducing taxes, protecting private property rights, protecting children from sexual predators, or virtually any other important priority of the people of West Virginia, the Ruling Party has grown so arrogant in its 80 years of power that they feel immune from any need to represent their constituents.

This November, West Virginians will have the chance to elect a new majority to the Legislature that represents our values and our concerns. We will reduce the excessive tax burden that hampers working families and keeps businesses from locating in West Virginia. We will defend the basic institutions of society and protect from the assault of activist judges the traditional definition of marriage as the union of a man and a woman that has prevailed for 6,000 years. We will enact tough, mandatory prison sentences for pedophiles who prey upon young children.

On November 8, 2006, it will be morning again in West Virginia.

Legislative Dems: No to Abolishing the Food Tax, Yes to Same-Sex Marriage, No to Reforming Eminent Domain, Yes to 67% Legislator Pay Raise

2006-02-20T21:36:00.000-05:00

That's today's news from the Legislature.

The House of Delegates rejected a motion to discharge the bill abolishing the food tax from the Finance Committee, allowing Chairman Harold Michael, D-Hardy, to sit on the bill and kill it. Delegate Tom Louisos, D-Fayette, was the only Democrat to join 30 of the Republicans. House Finance Committee Chairman Harold Michael, D-Hardy, has no plans to place this bill on his committee's agenda. As the deadline for all bills to pass their house of origin is March 1, committee action must be completed by February 27 unless the necessary 4/5 vote to suspend the constitutional rule requiring bills to be read on 3 separate days is obtained.

A reliable source from within the state Senate says Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Jeff Kessler, D-Marshall, plans to sit on SJR 12, the Marriage Protection Amendment, and obstruct its passage. This comes on the same day that Will Stewart revealed that HJR 106 sponsor Delegate John Pino, D-Fayette, admitted that his resolution was a sham and that he had no real intent of ever getting the thing passed and sent to the voters. Your Democratic legislators in West Virginia now want a future state Supreme Court to have an open door to force upon this state same-sex marriage just as their counterparts in Massachusetts did two years ago. If Pino's name sounds familiar on this site, that's because I recently wrote about his proposal to tax bottled water.

But Jeff Kessler is not using just SJR 12 as a seat cushion.

SB 85, by Senator Don Caruth, R-Mercer, simplifying the concealed handgun license reciprocity process, was introduced on the first day of the session but has yet to be placed on the committee's agenda. Chairman Kessler was endorsed in 2004 by the NRA, yet he has not permitted this very important bill for gun owners to see the light of day. Sitting on a bill like this should cost him his "A+" rating and NRA endorsement in 2008. Of the states that have a CHL reciprocity law or otherwise recognize any licenses issued by other states, West Virginia ranks last in the number of other states whose licenses are currently honored: 2, KY and VA.
SB 205, the Governor's empty shell of a bill to toughen the state's sex offender laws, was also introduced at the beginning of the session, but has yet to receive a hearing in committee.
SB 276, the Protect Our Children Act, sponsored by Senator Clark Barnes, R-Randolph, and 15 other senators, would truly toughen the state's sex offender laws. This bill was introduced on January 25.

Although HB 4048, the eminent domain reform bill, has not made it to the Senate Judiciary Committee yet, this bill seems a likely candidate for supplementing Kessler's seat cushion. HB 4048 was referred to the Senate Economic Development Committee, followed by the Government Organization Committee, then the Judiciary Committee. The House passed HB 4048 early in the session with strong bipartisan support, providing private property owners virtually unlimited protection from the use of eminent domain to force them to sell their property to any other private owner, even in cases of "economic development," "urban renewal," or the oft-abused "blight abatement."

If you think a desire to avoid controversial issues in an election year is driving all this inaction, please take a seat before reading further. Today, Senate leaders announced they would push forward with SB 421, raising legislators' annual salaries from $15,000 to $20,000 this year and $25,000 in 2008. I personally have no problems with this bill; indeed, the sponsors of this bill are numerous on both sides of the aisle. While some (like Delegate Joe C. Ferrell, D-Logan, who has yet to attend a single House session this year) are not deserving, many legislators work long hours during sessions and serve their constituents on a year-round basis when the Legislature is not in session and they're not being paid.

However, how stupid are the leaders of the Ruling Party to put this bill on the agenda at the same time they say "we have no money" to eliminate the food tax or cut any other taxes; don't want to ruffle any feathers by passing a constitutional amendment forever banning same-sex marriage; and seems to have neither the time nor the desire to tackle the many other problems facing our state?

I almost feel like calling some of my friends on the other side of the aisle and warning them of the future that awaits them this summer and fall given the current course of events. Did none of these people watch the 2004 state Supreme Court race? Did they not see how one of the state's most enduring political figures was reduced to a maniacal tirade two months before the election that sealed his defeat to a first-time candidate for office? Do they not think these actions today--and the House vote last week against the Marriage Protection Amendment--will be the subject of numerous TV ads, direct mail pieces, and other advertising. Warren McGraw was driven to his Labor Day Meltdown after being exposed over the Tony Arbaugh case--in which he let a serial child molester who got probation in a plea deal and then violated probation get another chance and participate in a program that could have ultimately had him employed as a janitor in a school. But most legislators now face same-sex marriage, no action on the food tax, and a massive legislator pay raise as issues in their races.

With State Running 9-Figure Budget Surplus, Fayette Delegates Seek to Tax Bottled Water

2006-02-18T18:35:00.000-05:00

A tax on water. We in West Virginia have long known that someday, someone would propose this tax. This week, Delegates David Perry and John Pino, both D-Fayette, have proposed taxing bottled water to support expanded academic offerings at WVU-Tech in Montgomery.

Thanks to the nation's third highest state tax burden per dollar of per capita income, our state treasury is running a surplus of hundreds of millions of dollars this year. Yet, to support a local program, these two delegates seek to tax one of the most basic necessities of life. In a state where far too many people still do not have public water service and must purchase bottled water for personal consumption by necessity, we now face a proposed tax on bottled water.

To stymie calls for tax relief, leaders of the Ruling Party have put an equal damper on new spending programs. So now, left with no access to surplus funds and few things left to tax, some of our legislators want to tax the water we drink.

Senate to Come to the Rescue, Save House Dems from Marriage Vote Fallout

2006-02-17T15:47:00.000-05:00

Two days after the House of Delegates effectively killed House Joint Resolution 106, the House version of a proposed constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage and forbidding the courts from requiring the Legislature to establish civil unions, the Senate has come to the rescue of their colleagues in the other body.

Senate Joint Resolution 12, sponsored by Senator Roman Prezioso, D-Marion, and 22 other senators, may far a much better chance of passing the Senate than the House version does of passing the House. SJR 12 has been referred to both the Judiciary and Finance committees--unusual for a proposal not affecting fiscal policy.

The number of sponsors alone constitutes the required 2/3 of the Senate to pass a constitutional amendment, if the amendment reaches the floor for a vote. Senate Finance Committee Chairman Walt Helmick, D-Pocahontas, is among the cosponsors, but Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Jeff Kessler, D-Marshall, is not. Unless the Democratic senators are more willing to buck their leadership than their colleague sin the other body, Kessler now wields sole control over whether this amendment will see the light of day in the Senate.

If the Senate does pass SJR 12, it will still be up tot he same House of Delegates committees and their chairmen to decide whether the people of this state will have the opportunity to vote on prohibiting any court in the future from following the lead of their counterparts in Massachusetts and mandating same-sex marriage or those in Vermont who ordered the creation of a "civil union" system that conveys marriage in everything but name to same-sex couples.

House Dems Collectively Commit Career Suicide: Near Party-Line Vote in WV House Defeats Defense of Marriage Amendment

2006-02-15T16:31:00.000-05:00

The West Virginia House of Delegates today voted against discharging from committee a proposed constitutional amendment protecting the definition of marriage; 35 members voted for discharge, 63 against. House Constitutional Revision Committee Chairman Joe Talbott, D-Webster, will not permit the proposed amendment to receive a hearing. Indeed, Talbott has refused to hold a single meeting of this committee since January 2005.

House Majority Leader Rick Staton, D-Wyoming, said this measure was just election-year pandering by Republicans and that the state statute defining marriage as between a man and a woman negates the need for a constitutional amendment. Huh? A lawyer of 20 years' experience should know that nothing short of a constitutional amendment can protect a statute from being overturned at some point in the future by activist judges--as was done 2 years ago in Massachusetts.

Are the Dems oblivious to reality? They have just handed control of the House of Delegates after the November election to the GOP on a silver platter unless they reverse course in the next month.

The AP is now reporting:

Gay marriage amendment push fails
CHARLESTON, W.Va. (AP) -- The House of Delegates rejected a bid Wednesday to advance a proposed constitutional amendment that targets same-sex marriage, which is banned under a 2000 state law.
With two absent, a largely party-line vote of 35-63 defeated an attempt to have the necessary resolution bypass the House's Constitutional Revision Committee.
Supporters argued that the state Supreme Court could someday overturn the law that defines marriage as being between a man and a woman. Four gay and lesbian couples challenged the law in 2004. The justices rejected their petition on a 3-2 vote.
"Courts throughout the country are attacking statutory enactments on the definition of marriage,'' said Delegate Tim Armstead, R-Kanawha, who led the effort. "It's very important that we do this.''
Three states -- Massachusetts, Hawaii and Vermont -- have seen their high courts order equal treatment for same-sex couples. Hawaii has since amended its constitution to ban gay marriage, while Vermont created civil unions that are not recognized in most other states.
Armstead and other House GOP members of the constitutional committee said they chose the motion because so far this session, the panel has failed to meet. One of 10 minor committees that typically only meet on Wednesdays, the committee had canceled that morning's meeting.
Its chairman, Delegate Joe Talbott, called the move to discharge House Joint Resolution 106 from his committee "largely symbolic.''
"To imply that what's already the law in West Virginia is not sufficient, to me is questionable,'' said Talbott, D-Webster.
Other Democrats suggested the move smacked of election-year politics. All 100 House seats are on the ballot this year.
"There are any number of issues that this house fails to take up that would mean more to the voters in the state,'' said Delegate Carrie Webster, D-Kanawha. "This is simply, with no disrespect meant, political pandering... Let's call it what it is, and let's call it a day.''
That prompted some Republicans to counter that their constituents have clamored for such an amendment.
"If it is pandering, then I'm happy to be pandering to people in West Virginia and people in my district,'' said Delegate Craig Blair, R-Berkeley. "We're doing exactly what the people would expect of us.''
But one of the resolution's co-sponsors was among those urging the discharge motion's defeat.
"I'm extremely sad with the motion that's been made,'' said Delegate John Pino, D-Fayette. "I'm sorry with the time that's been taken up on this.''
With Delegate Robert Schadler, R-Mineral, absent, all 31 Republicans present voted for the motion. They were joined by Democratic delegates Eustace Frederick of Mercer County, Tom Louisos of Fayette County, Tim Miley of Harrison County and Dale Stephens of Cabell County.

Say hello to a Republican majority in January 2007.

Liberals Go for the Kill Over Cheney Hunting Accident, Incensed that Small-Town TX Newspaper Gets the Story Before the WH Press Corps

2006-02-14T23:08:00.000-05:00

We've all heard by now of Vice President Dick Cheney's tragic hunting accident on Saturday. As of this writing, the victim, Harry Whittington, continues to have a favorable prognosis for recovery.

First, the liberals were upset that this story was not immediately called in to the media even before the ambulance was called. Then, a reporter for a local newspaper in Texas got the story first. The mighty White House press corps was scooped on the story of the VP's hunting accident by a local reporter in TEXAS--TEXAS!!! Can you imagine how much disdain the Washington media have for Texas? Why, who does this scumbag down in Texas thing she is to scoop us on the big story of the week? Does she not know we're the White House press corps and all news relative to the President and VP must first go through us?

NBC White House correspondent David Gregory needs to cool his heels before he has a stroke or goes mental. He just cannot control himself at these daily press briefings. He blew a gasket when Scott McClellan told him this story is not all about David Gregory but instead about the Vice President and his injured friend.

Having been raised in West By God Virginia, it's clear some basic rules of gun and hunting safety were not followed on Saturday. However, since I was not there, I will not join the speculation into the exact course of events or apportionment of blame. Any hunter, gun owner, or someone who knows a hunter or gun owner knows that you never shoot until you're absolutely certain of what your target is and what lies beyond your target. We also know that when you're hunting with someone, you should make sure they always know your position and announce your movements before moving about.

Now, of course, the press thinks they've got Dick Cheney nailed. They think they've now got the goods and that the VP should be impeached and imprisoned for not having the proper state hunting stamp for quail. Cheney had a valid Texas hunting license and--because of an error by one of his assistants--two federal migratory bird stamps instead of a federal migratory bird stamp and a TX state quail stamp. Yes sir, the VP's paperwork error will finally get him. Riiight.

Just remember, would you rather have Dick Cheney as your hunting partner or Ted Kennedy as your chauffeur?

Senator Shirley Love: Oops! Should Have Read My Own Bill

2006-02-10T23:42:00.000-05:00

Proving the infinite wisdom of always reading any bill before introducing it in the Legislature or voting on the passage of the bill, state Senator Shirley Love, D-Fayette, admitted today he had failed to understand his own bill (SB 437) to create several new series of state license plates.

The most controversial aspect of this bill was a provision to replace the state's "scenic" license plate with a plate showing the New River bridge in Fayetteville with Governor Manchin's new "Open for Business" slogan. After just about everyone in West Virginia ridiculed this idea, Love decided to read his own bill and finally admitted that he really meant to create the "Open for Business" plate as an additional optional plate rather than a replacement for the popular scenic plate--at least that's his current story.

Now, I will be one of the first to tell you the legislative bill drafters often poorly write the introductory versions of bills. But how did someone mistake Senator Love's original idea if that was indeed what he had proposed to the bill drafters? Why did Senator Love not bother to read his own bill before signing his name to it & introducing it, knowing the seemingly less significant issues like this are always the ones that most easily irritate average voters?

Reading the original version of this bill as introduced, even the bill title should have been enough to tell the senator what the bill would do. Reading the full text of the bill, there should have been no mistake that the original version of the bill changed the scenic plate design and did not create a new plate as Senator Love claims.

Now, Senator Love has had SB 437 amended in committee to preserve the current scenic license plate design and create the New River bridge/"Open for Business" license plate as a separate, optional plate. We are still left to wonder what were his true original intentions, given the long delay between the onset of the controversy and Senator Love's action to correct the bill. After all, why did it take nearly two weeks to discover this "error?"

House of Delegates Votes to Ban Photo Radar, Red Light Cameras

2006-02-10T18:58:00.000-05:00

The West Virginia House of Delegates today passed HB 4004, preempting the use of photo enforcement of traffic laws, on a vote of 88-3. Delegates Mitch Carmichael, R-Jackson, Tom Louisos, D-Fayette, and Charles Trump, R-Morgan, opposed the bill.

While neither photo radar nor red light cameras are used in West Virginia, supporters of the bill want to prevent towns eyeing motorists' wallets from following the lead of several cities in Ohio and Maryland that have recently begun using these devices. Try imagining photo radar in Summersville--Yikes! Last year, the Virginia General Assembly allowed a red light camera enabling law to sunset and will likely not reauthorize the program.

GOP Legislators Seek Tax Reforms Now

2006-02-09T00:46:00.000-05:00

While the Ruling Party spends this regular legislative session marking time and hopelessly trying to figure out how to retain their control of the Legislature in this year's elections, Republican legislators who are within striking distance of winning majorities in both houses are seeking to have real issues addressed during the 30 days remaining in this year's legislative session.

Today's case in point is the issue of taxes, as reported by the Beckley Register-Herald.

Republican legislators in both houses have offered over a dozen bills to cut state taxes and/or totally reform the state tax code. Bills have been offered in both houses to implement the comprehensive tax reform proposed in 1999 by Governor Underwood's Commission on Fair Taxation; to abolish the food tax; to abolish the business franchise tax; to reduce corporate income taxes; to reduce personal income taxes.

A bill to abolish the hated "motor vehicle privilege tax" that charges 5% of a car's value not only at the time a car is first bought as a new car but every time it is sold, transferred, or brought into West Virginia from another state, and replaced with the one-time occurrence of the sales tax at the time of initial purchase without the current multiple taxation, will soon be offered. This tax is especially odious because the same piece of personal property is repeatedly taxed although virtually every other class of personal property is subjected to a sales tax only once--at the time it is first purchased by the initial consumer.

House of Delegates Votes to Reopen DUI Loophole

2006-02-08T23:59:00.000-05:00

With no shame and dissent from not even a majority of the Republicans, the House of Delegates voted on Monday to pass HB 4308, which would reopen a loophole in West Virginia's DUI law that the state Supreme Court closed last year. Click here and scroll to the bottom of the page for the vote.

This bill would allow a person who pleads no contest to a DUI in criminal court to contest the revocation of his or her driver's license at an administrative hearing before the DMV. The administrative hearing is a civil matter and carries a lower burden of proof than the criminal case. Under current law, a conviction for a DUI is binding upon the DMV and there may be no hearing, as the same facts have already been proven in a court of law. The DMV may, however, revoke a person's license for DUI at a civil administrative hearing based upon a preponderance of the evidence--rather than proof beyond a reasonable doubt--even in the absence of a conviction on the criminal charges.

Allowing a person who has been convicted of a DUI via a no contest plea both stands the law on its head (the underlying facts in support of the license revocation have already been proven in another venue under a tougher burden of proof) and will endanger public safety by allowing drunk drivers who know how to play the system to remain behind the wheel. The best DUI defense lawyers know how to make the proper arrangements for the arresting officer to not appear at an administrative hearing, which results in a default ruling for their client.

Prosecutors want convictions in court; many DUI defendants just want to keep their driver's license. Thus, a symbiotic relationship forms, perverting our legal system and neutering the most substantial penalty for a drunk driver not facing a felony charge--the loss of a driver's license and a mandatory 6-month jail sentence if he or she drives while his or her driver's license is revoked for DUI. Subpoenas to appear at hearings go undelivered, an unplanned vacation day is offered to the officer after a few well-placed phone calls, or an officer is sent on an out-of-town assignment without notice to the DMV. In any of those cases, the defendant--even one who has pleaded no contest to the criminal charge, if HB 4308 passes--wins and keeps his or her driver's license as if he or she were not guilty.

Unfortunately, this bill will probably also pass the Senate.

WVGOP Holds Winter Conference, Candidate Training

2006-02-04T23:59:00.000-05:00

I spent yesterday evening and today at the Charleston Embassy Suites, where the state Republican Party held its winter conference and candidate training seminar.

Yesterday evening, the party held a reception where over 50 candidates and dozens of activists (like me) and supporters mingled and discussed the current legislative session and upcoming campaign. The vast majority of our federal and legislative candidates were in attendance. (Pics)

Today, Republican candidates attended the party's first candidate training seminar of the year. This was an informative and exciting event, following the successful programs during the 2002 and 2004 campaigns that have resulted in more than a doubling of the number of Republicans in the state Senate and an identical gain of 7 seats in the House of Delegates.

While the members of next year's legislative majority were learning the nuts and bolts of successful campaigning from their forebears, the Republican state committee held its winter meeting nearby. The highlights of this meeting included the presentation of positive financial reports for the state party and the committee's unanimous adoption of a proposal to hold a Republican state convention in January or February of 2008 to select most of our delegates to the Republican National Convention.

With the state committee's action, the West Virginia GOP will leap to the front of the presidential nominating process. Under the adopted plan, nearly 1200 delegates from across the state--elected by the various county executive committees--will gather in Charleston to determine which presidential candidate will the state's at-large (statewide) delegates to the national convention, winner-take-all. Three delegates will still be elected from each congressional district at the May primary election.

I really cannot overstate the importance of West Virginia taking a lead role in the selection of the next Republican presidential nominee. Those of you who like to cure your insomnia by watching C-SPAN at night have all seen numerous presidential contenders address numerous local party events in Iowa and New Hampshire. The WVGOP will now receive the same exposure from these leaders of our party and give Republicans at all levels a reason to be politically active year-round.

Of course, it's all about the money: Fundraising for the state & county GOP committees and candidates will become far easier as prospective presidential candidates start familiarizing themselves as much with places like Logan, Beckley, and Morgantown, as they have with places like Des Moines, Manchester, and Concord. Let the fun begin!

Governor Ignores Requests from Other States to Establish Concealed Handgun License Reciprocity Agreements

2006-02-02T14:03:00.000-05:00

Back in October, I first wrote about West Virginia having concealed handgun license reciprocity agreements with only 2 states (Story 1 Story 2). Recently, I conducted an e-mail survey of the licensing agencies in other states to determine whether they had attempted to obtain a reciprocity agreement from our governor.

Some states responded to my inquiries; some did not. A few states said they could not currently recognize West Virginia licenses because our laws did not meet varying qualifications for recognition in the other state. However, many states said they had repeatedly contacted West Virginia officials only to hear no response.

Replies from Other States

Typical was the response I got from the Florida Department of Agriculture & Consumer Services:

Sent: Thursday, January 26, 2006 9:49 AM
Good morning, Mr. Mullins:
Yes, as a matter of fact, we have made repeated attempts to establish reciprocity with your state. We first made contact with someone in Governor Underwood's administration after our Legislature created our reciprocity provision in 1999. We made two offers of reciprocity during Governor Wise's tenure in office. Finally, we wrote a letter to Mr. James Spears, the Secretary of the Department of Military Affairs and Public Safety in February of last year offering reciprocity with Florida. We received no response to our offer.
Our reciprocity provision is very straightforward. We will honor the concealed carry licenses issued by another state if the authorities in that state will agree to honor concealed carry licenses issued by the State of Florida. I know that your governor has the authority to enter into reciprocity agreements. We need only an acknowledgment from him to establish such an agreement.
Please let me know if you need any additional information.
Ken Wilkinson
Management Analyst
Department of Agriculture & Consumer Services
Division of Licensing
Post Office Box 6687
Tallahassee, Florida 32314-6687
TEL: 850-245-5665
FAX: 850-245-5655
-----Original Message-----
From: Jim Mullins
Sent: Wednesday, January 25, 2006 6:20 PM
To: DOLWeb Questions/Inquires
Subject: concealed weapons permit reciprocity

To whom it may concern:
I am a resident of West Virginia and have a West Virginia concealed handgun license. Has there been any effort to reach a reciprocity agreement between Florida & West Virginia or any effort to extend unilateral recognition to West Virginia licenses? West Virginia's concealed handgun permit law is contained in Chapter 61, Article 7 of the WV Code and the Governor of West Virginia is vested with the power to enter into reciprocity agreements on behalf of the state. West Virginia law includes completion of a handgun training course & a criminal background check among the required qualifications for obtaining a concealed handgun permit.
Your prompt response would be appreciated.
Sincerely,
James M. Mullins, Jr.

Another response in the same mold came from Colorado, which I sent an e-mail nearly identical to the one I sent Florida. Colorado sent 2 responses, both of which follow:

Sent: Thursday, January 26, 2006 5:59 PM
Mr. Mullins,
Since 2003, the Colorado Bureau of Investigation has contacted the other 49 states on an annual basis in order to verify the current concealed carry reciprocity status with each state. Pursuant to Colorado law, our state does not evaluate the concealed carry programs of other states, as Colorado statute passes the authority and jurisdiction to establish reciprocity to the other states.
Currently, the state of West Virginia does not recognize the validity of Colorado concealed carry permits. Therefore reciprocity cannot be established with West Virginia until they recognize Colorado concealed carry permits as being legal and valid in their state.
As our law passes reciprocity authority to the other states, I would suggest bringing your concerns to the attention of the West Virginia issuing authorities and inquire as to their current reasoning why they do or do not recognize the validity of Colorado concealed carry permits at this time.
Please feel free to contact me if you have any additional questions or concerns regarding this matter.
James G. Spoden
InstaCheck/CCW Unit Supervisor
Colorado Bureau of Investigation
(303) 239-5850
Sent: Friday, January 27, 2006 6:16 PM
Dear Mr. Mullins,
I believe that James Spoden (a supervisor who works for me) responded to a similar email, but just in case I'm mistaken: Colorado law does not authorize anyone to negotiate reciprocity agreements. Instead, our statute contains a provision that states that we will automatically recognize valid permits of other states (issued to person 21 years of age & older) only if the other state recognizes Colorado permits as valid in that state. If and when the state of West Virginia recognizes Colorado permits, we will do the same automatically.
In order to keep law enforcement and the public informed, we send letters yearly to our contacts in the other 49 states to inquire about reciprocity. We have sent letters to the West Virginia Department of Military Affairs and Public Safety, and to the Governor's office in June 2004 and June 2005 (respectively). We have never received any response to our inquiries.
Susan Kitchen
Agent in Charge
Colorado Bureau of Investigation
(303) 239-4235

Louisiana simply said, "We tried contacting someone but got no reply."

Manchin Does Not Respond

On November 5, 2005, I wrote a letter to West Virginia Governor Joe Manchin to call his attention to the need for him to contact the appropriate officials in other states and enter into reciprocity agreements with those states so West Virginia concealed handgun licenses will be honored in those states and vice versa. After about 2 months, there was no response.

On December 31, 2005, I wrote another letter to the Governor. Given the events of the past month, I might be able to understand why I have heard no response. However, it has now been almost three months since I first wrote to the Governor.

I am simply befuddled at why Governor Manchin or his staff will not address this issue. The governor has been a longtime support of gunowners' rights and was endorsed in 2004 by the NRA over his equally pro-gun Republican opponent. 38 states now have "shall issue" concealed handgun license laws and over 30 provide for some form of reciprocity with other states to reduce the need for a person to obtain a license in each state he or she visits.

Action Needed

The governor has the power to enter into reciprocity agreements with most states that issue concealed handgun licenses. There are 11 states that unilaterally honor West Virginia licenses whose licenses do not receive recognition in West Virginia. With a change in Pennsylvania's laws that will take effect soon, 12 states--including Colorado, Florida, and Louisiana--have provisions in their laws that provide for the automatic recognition of licenses issued by a state that honors that state's license. A few other states have different reciprocity procedures.

The inaction of both the current governor and his predecessor has resulted in West Virginia concealed handgun licensees not receiving recognition of their licenses in over a dozen states whose only condition for recognizing our licenses is that we recognize theirs. This same inaction also means licensees of the 11 states that have graciously extended unilateral recognition to West Virginia licenses cannot legally carry a concealed handgun while visiting West Virginia. For a West Virginian to legally carry a concealed handgun in most states, the only option available is to obtain a nonresident license from Florida, which is honored in over 30 states but costs $117 every 5 years; this is on top of the $90 a 5-year West Virginia license costs.

Absent action by the governor under our current laws, the next solution for this problem is for the Legislature to pass a unilateral recognition law to automatically recognize all other states' licenses without requiring any action on the part of West Virginia officials. Just by enacting a unilateral recognition law, the number of states in which West Virginia concealed handgun licenses are recognized would double.

Once Again, the AP Gets the Story Wrong

2006-01-30T14:32:00.000-05:00

Many West Virginians will find tucked somewhere in today's newspaper the following AP story: "Incumbents not seeking re-election hamper GOP plan." This could hardly be farther from the truth.

While eight Republican legislators are not seeking reelection to their current offices, almost all of these seats are likely to remain safe seats for the GOP. Indeed, the retirement of one legislator--Senator Charles Lanham, RINO-Mason--actually helped our party's chances of keeping the seat. Delegate Mike Hall, R-Putnam, is among the departing legislators, though he will simply be moving to the Senate to replace Lanham after defeating perennial candidate Jim Lees (D) in November.

Other retiring Republicans include Delegate Otis Leggett, R-Pleasants, who is retiring after 20 years in the House at the age of 86; Minority Leader Charles Trump, R-Morgan; and Delegate Vic Roberts, R-Berkeley, who only served one term. These three districts will all heavily favor the GOP. Delegate Chris Wakim, R-Ohio, is leaving after 2 terms to run for Congress; this district is competitive but the GOP has recruited a quality candidate, Scott Reed, to hold Wakim's seat.

In the Senate, Senators Steve Harrison, R-Kanawha, and Sarah Minear, R-Tucker, are also retiring. Seeking Harrison's seat are 2004 Democratic Congressional nominee and former TV anchor Erik Wells and former WVU football player Mark Plants (R). Both parties have fielded several candidates to replace Minear; I favor former Preston County Surveyor Dave Sypolt (R) to win this seat. Sypolt narrowly lost a 2004 Senate race against Senator Jon Hunter, D-Monongalia, and is already very well-known throughout the district.

I am confident that Republicans will not only retain their current seats in the Legislature, but continue to greatly increase our numbers in both houses. Five years ago, the Democrats enjoyed margins of 28-6 in the Senate and 75-25 in the House of Delegates; today, we have reduced those margins to 21-13 in the Senate and 68-32 in the House. We are now just five seats away from taking control of the state Senate, which has been controlled by the Ruling Party for the last 74 years.

Contrary to the gloom & doom presented by the mainstream media, things are looking well for the GOP in West Virginia.

Alternative Theory on Kiss Retirement

2006-01-29T17:11:00.000-05:00

Gary Abernathy seems to think the real reason for House Speaker Bob Kiss's retirement lies in the ongoing scandals surrounding, and the recent federal indictment of, infamous Wyoming County senior center director Bob Graham.

Kiss Retires

2006-01-28T23:59:00.000-05:00

It's official: House Speaker Bob Kiss, D-Raleigh/Kanawha, is retiring from the House of Delegates after 18 years of service, including 10 as Speaker. Tomorrow's Beckley Register-Herald has a long story on Kiss's announcement, clearly indicating he planned to retire and conceal his decision until the close of candidate filing.

Retiring after 10 years as House Speaker, Kiss will tie his predecessor--U.S. District Judge Chuck Chambers--as the longest-serving speaker of the West Virginia House of Delegates. Given the timing of Kiss's announcement, it's clear he did not want to increase the number of candidates filing for the House of Delegates in the 27th District. With his retirement and the departure of Delegate Sally Susman, D-Raleigh and candidate for the state Senate, the GOP now has the opportunity to sweep all 5 seats in this district, where it now has just one seat--that of Delegate Linda Sumner, R-Raleigh.

WV Election Filing Period Comes to a Close

2006-01-28T20:18:00.000-05:00

Tonight is the final night of the candidate filing period for West Virginia's 2006 elections. Candidates must file their certificates of candidacy in person by midnight tonight at the Secretary of State's office if filing to run for a multicounty office or until the close of business at the county clerk's office for a county office or single-county legislative district. Candidates may also file by mail if the envelope has today's postmark. If vacancies remain on the ballot, political party executive committees will be able to choose nominees until the day before the primary election.

Every election year, the final night of filing always produces interesting news. At this hour the question remains, "Will House Speaker Bob Kiss run again?" Kiss, D-Raleigh/Kanawha, has been very tight-lipped on whether he will seek reelection from his Beckley-based district despite his non-legislative job being in Charleston, his family living in Charleston, and--most damaging to his case for being a legal Raleigh County resident--has his children enrolled in a Charleston preschool.

UPDATE: Kiss retires, see above post.

The 2nd Congressional District Democratic primary to select the candidate who Congresswoman Shelley Moore Capito will trounce in November appears to be the ultimate political freak show. The candidates in this race are:

South Charleston Mayor Richie Robb, who will win the backing of Moveon.org and other ultra-left wing groups for his "progressive" ideology, support for abortion, and ardent pacifism.
Former state Democratic Chairman and federal prosecutor Mike Callaghan, who looks exactly like a James Carville clone.
Delegate Mark Hunt, D-Kanawha, who was the financier of an infamous cloning lab operated at the old Nitro High School about 5 years ago by the Raelians and once sought to have his late son cloned.

Moving down to legislative races, the race for the House of Delegates in the infamous 19th District (Boone/Lincoln/Logan/Putnam) appeared to finally be emerging from the longstanding corruption that has resulted in numerous local elected officials and political operatives pleading guilty to a wide variety of federal election fraud-related charges. That was until tonight, when disgraced former Logan County prosecuting Attorney Mark Hobbs, D-Logan, filed. Hobbs was elected county prosecutor in 1992 and served less than 2 years in office. His early departure from office was the result of his law license being suspended for 5 years for bribing the late, infamous former Logan County Circuit Judge Ned Grubb.

Hobbs received immunity from federal prosecutors for his testimony at Grubb's 1992 federal corruption trial. Grubb, who was well-known for "delivering the best justice money could buy," was convicted and died in prison. Among other crimes committed by Judge Grubb, he once told a political rally, in the presence of TV cameras that caught his speech on tape, "If you vote for my friend Oval Adams for sheriff and you come before my court, you'll get mercy. If you don't vote for my friend Oval Adams for sheriff and you come before my court, you'll get justice." Adams did win the election but, like Grubb, also went to federal prison.

This Is How Torture Is Done

2006-01-27T22:11:00.000-05:00

Last night, TV cameras captured former U.S. Attorney General Janet Reno singing (story) along to Aretha Franklin's "Respect" at a party in Miami. There's no way John McCain would ever allow the guests at Club Gitmo to be exposed to repeated showings of this video.

BB&T to Refuse Loans for Economic Development Projects That Abuse Eminent Domain

2006-01-25T15:31:00.000-05:00

The AP is reporting this afternoon that North Carolina-based bank BB&T--which is one of the larger banks in West Virginia--has announced that it will not approve loans to support "economic development" projects that use eminent domain to seize property from private property owners.

"The idea that a citizen's property can be taken by the government solely for private use is extremely misguided, in fact it's just plain wrong,'' John Allison, the bank's chairman and chief executive, said in a statement.
In an interview, BB&T chief credit officer Ken Chalk said the bank expects to lose only a tiny amount of business, but believes it was obligated to take a stance on the issue.
"It's not even a fraction of a percent,'' he said. "The dollar amount is insignificant.''
But he added: "We do business with a large number of consumers and small businesses in our footprint. We are hearing from clients that this is an important philosophical issue.''
Chalk said he knows of no other large U.S. bank with a similar policy.
BB&T, which is headquartered in Winston-Salem, ranks among the nation's top 10 banks by assets. BB&T operates in West Virginia.

Hopefully, other banks will follow suit.

GOP Legislators Lead, Propose Constitutional Amendments to Protect Private Property Rights, Definition of Marriage

2006-01-23T03:08:00.000-05:00

Republican legislators have taken the lead in introducing a pair of proposed amendments to the state constitution to protect private property from eminent domain abuse and protect the definition of marriage from radical activist judges like those on the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court who seek to mandate same-sex marriage by judicial fiat.

Senate Joint Resolution 8, introduced by Senator John Yoder, R-Jefferson, and cosponsored by 21 other senators, would prohibit the taking of private property for private use and require property owners, in cases in which property is taken for a legitimate public use, to be more fully compensated for their loss.

Although 22 senators are sponsoring SJR 8, its passage is by no means guaranteed. The only member of the Senate Democratic leadership to cosponsor this resolution is Senate Majority Leader Truman Chafin, D-Mingo. There is quiet opposition--almost entirely from people who would never make their position on this issue public--to this measure from certain members of the "economic development" elite in this state whose belief in centralized state economic planning rather than the free market and capitalism have made West Virginia dead last. Your senators and delegates need to know you support stronger constitutional protections of your property rights.

House Joint Resolution 102, sponsored by Delegate Cindy Frich, R-Monongalia, would amend the state constitution to protect the traditional definition of marriage as the union of one man and one woman and prevent the state from creating any counterfeit marriage equivalents such as Vermont's civil unions. Cosponsoring HJR 102 are Delegates Bill Anderson (R-Wood), Sam Argento (D-Nicholas), Craig Blair (R-Berkeley), Larry Border (R-Wood), Jeff Eldridge (D-Lincoln), Eustace Frederick (D-Mercer), Patrick Lane (R-Kanawha), Mike Porter (R-Mercer), Debbie Stevens (R-Tucker), and Jeff Tansill (R-Taylor); other delegates may be added as cosponsors later today.

According to the Heritage Foundation, 19 states (including Kentucky and Ohio) have adopted similar constitutional provisions, 4 others already have proposed amendments appearing on the 2006 ballot, and at least 5 other states (including Virginia) are likely to follow suit. Every state that has held a referendum on a marriage amendment has approved protecting the definition of marriage by a wide margin, ranging from 58% support in Oregon to 86% in Mississippi.

Any proposal to amend the state constitution must receive a 2/3 vote of both houses of the Legislature (23 senators and 67 delegates) and is then submitted to the voters at the next general election. Most proposed amendments must travel through multiple committees in both houses of the Legislature before receiving a floor vote.

4th District State Senate Race: Craigo Out, Hall In

2006-01-23T01:07:00.000-05:00

As we enter the final week of West Virginia's 2006 election filing period, the GOP's most vulnerable state Senate seat becomes much more secure with the announcements that former Senate Finance Committee Chairman Oshel Craigo, D-Putnam, will not run and that Delegate Mike Hall, R-Putnam, will enter the race.

This seat is currently held by Senator Charles Lanham, R-Mason, who was appointed just over a year ago to fill the vacancy created by the resignation of former Senator Lisa Smith, R-Putnam, who defeated Craigo in 2002 and was indicted last week on federal tax evasion charges. Lanham had been considered by many to be a Republican in name only and a very weak politician who would have likely not been reelected. Three-time gubernatorial candidate Jim Lees is the only major Democrat to file in this race and will likely be the Democratic nominee.

Delegate Hall's entry in this race shifts the prospects for this Senate seat from tossup to likely Republican retention. Hall, a 6-term delegate representing the portions of Putnam and Mason counties west of the Kanawha River, is well-liked by people across the political spectrum and is well-respected in the Legislature. Prior to his entry in the Senate race, Hall was the ranking Republican on the House Finance Committee and was considering a bid for House Republican leader to succeed retiring Delegate Charles Trump, R-Morgan.

Jim Lees, whose politics have varied from campaign to campaign, is pro-gun control--the most politically suicidal issue one can possibly support in West Virginia; if you doubt this, just ask President Al Gore or President John Kerry. Strike two: Lees is considered hostile to organized labor--the only major Democratic constituency in the 4th Senate District and without whose enthusiastic support a Democratic nominee has little hope of winning in this Republican-leaning senatorial district.

Hunter Defends Wal-Mart Bill, Says He'd Like to Lower 10,000 Employee Threshold to Include Other Companies

2006-01-20T10:39:00.000-05:00

State Senator Jon Hunter, D-Monongalia and the main sponsor of SB 147 (the Wal-Mart Bill), defended the bill this morning during an appearance on Talkline with Hoppy Kercheval. Hunter, one of the Senate's more liberal members, says he had no idea this bill was a pet project of labor unions and that he got the idea for the bill through media reports of the Maryland law. Hunter also said--confirming the worst fears of opponents of the bill--that he would like to lower the trigger threshold of 10,000 employees to force smaller businesses to spend at least 8% of their payrolls on employee health care.

The Wal-Mart Bill is all about a union vendetta against the company because its employees refuse to unionize and Wal-Mart's low-cost pricing strategy is hurting the business of unionized grocery stores that have higher costs of doing business. The unions--primarily the United Food & Commercial Workers--really want to unionize Wal-Mart to capture contributions to fund the union health care & pension funds that are paid by unionized workers at most large grocery stores that have not resisted unionization.

The Wal-Mart Bill requires only a certain level of spending on employer-provided health care relative to payroll. It does not relate to specific levels of benefits. It does not consider Wal-Mart's large number of part-time employees who get their health insurance through other family members. Indeed, the bill does not consider any possibility that Wal-Mart already provides good health insurance options for its employees and that it pays so little relative to its payroll because it has applied to its purchasing of group health insurance the same tactics it has employed to purchasing its merchandise and that save consumers billions of dollars per year at the checkout line. Indeed, I think if the unions were pressed with this possibility, they would argue that if it's true, Wal-Mart is unfairly using its size to get an unfair deal on employee health insurance and is shifting its costs onto those with less purchasing power, and should thus pay more just to be socially responsible.

Today, the union vendetta targets only Wal-Mart. However, do not doubt that if this law is implemented in Maryland, the employee threshold will be reduced and the required level of spending on employee health benefits will be increased. Aside from uniform minimum wage and overtime laws, government should not otherwise regulate the amount or form of employee compensation in any private business. Given the looming crisis with retirement income security, are we going to next require--beginning only with very large employers, of course--employers to generously contribute to employees' defined contribution plans such as 401(k)'s and IRA's, if not mandate defined benefit pension plans?

Regardless of what happens with the Wal-Mart Bill, I believe the unions are orienting all their efforts toward unionizing the company and using legislation to create more favorable conditions for their efforts. My suspicion is the unions are really hoping Wal-Mart will comply with the bill by reducing its part-time payrolls and increasing its full-time payrolls, thus increasing the proportion of Wal-Mart's workforce for whom working at Wal-Mart is their career and thus might be more likely to unionize than a retirees or students working there part-time and do not receive health insurance from Wal-Mart because they are already covered otherwise. I also believe that even if this does not happen, the unions are hoping to reduce Wal-Mart's cost advantages over its unionized competitors and thus reduce the potential for a materialization of the unions' fears of a deunionization of grocery stores that would deprive them of membership and--most importantly--money.

State Central Planning Fails Again: $220 Million "Economic Development Grants" Yield Less than 1,000 Jobs

2006-01-18T10:45:00.000-05:00

The Ruling Party still doesn't get it. Fifteen years after the collapse of the Soviet Union, West Virginia's ruling elites continue to bet the future of our state on the ability of government to centrally plan the economy.

Four years ago--in what was then viewed as a blatant taxpayer giveaway designed to minimize the first round of GOP gains in the Legislature as our campaign to eventually take control began--the Legislature approved the issue of over $200 million in revenue bonds backed by the video poker machines for "economic development grants." These grants were touted as the latest great idea to stimulate our state's anemic economy.

Today, the Charleston Daily Mail reports that just over half of the grants have actually been spent and less than 1,000 new jobs have been created. $134.4 million of state money has produced 884 permanent, full-time jobs--almost half of which are at the Fort Henry Industrial Park in Wheeling, home of Cabela's. Temporary construction jobs created by the grants generated less than one-fifth of the total payrolls predicted by labor unions that supported the grant program.

One has to ask whether these continuing follies by the Legislature and the Ruling Party are the result of economic illiteracy or simple narcissism and illusions of self-grandeur. Is the majority party really so economically illiterate they believe endless government cash infusions into the economy will eventually spark meaningful economic growth or are they so egotistic they could not bear the loss of seeming self-importance should they ever decide to implement the Ronald Reagan model of lower taxes, less regulation, and less government interference in the economy that has made the United States as a whole the world's greatest economy over the last 25 years? I could believe either.

Real, sustained economic growth will come to West Virginia when our public policy shifts to a model of lower taxes, less regulation, less lawsuit abuse, and an efficient government that acknowledges its limited role in the economy and focuses on its core responsibilities to the people. A good first start toward this end would include completely abolishing the food tax and either completely abolishing or implementing a quick scheduled repeal of the business franchise tax during the current legislative session. Step 2 would be for West Virginians to elect a Republican majority to both houses of the Legislature this November.

Pirate DVD & CD Studio Discovered in State Capitol Basement

2006-01-18T00:25:00.000-05:00

This story comes from the Truth is Stranger than Fiction Department. Click here to view the full story in today's Charleston Gazette. Simply amazing!

Will West Virginia's Neighbors Finally Join the 70 mph Club?

2006-01-17T14:05:00.000-05:00

It's been over a decade since Congress repealed the National Maximum Speed Limit and almost 9 years since West Virginia raised its rural interstate speed limit from 65 to 70, yet we remain an island surrounded by states that have yet to follow suit.

Green=80 mph Yellow=75 mph Blue=70 mph Red=65 mph Black=60 mph

Recent events in Kentucky and Virginia--yes, Virginia!--give hope the Bluegrass State and Old Dominion might finally return to the speed limits in effect before 1974. In Kentucky, Gov. Ernie Fletcher has endorsed legislation to copy West Virginia's speed limits of 70 on interstates and 65 on other 4-lane highways. In Virginia, Senate Bill 53, which would raise the speed limit to 70 on I-85 (for now) just passed the Senate Transportation Committee on a 13-1 vote.

UPDATE: Jan. 18: The Virginia Senate passed SB 53 today on a 36-3 vote. The dissenters were senators Creigh Deeds, D-Bath, Linda Puller, D-Fairfax, and Mary Margaret Whipple, D-Arlington. The seat of former Senator Bill Mims, R-Loudon, now a Deputy Attorney General, is vacant.

New West Virginia Welcome Sign

2006-01-13T00:33:00.000-05:00

From the Charleston Daily Mail

The new "Welcome to West Virginia" sign that will soon welcome motorists to our state was unveiled Wednesday night during Governor Manchin's State of the State address.

One has to wonder whether anyone will be able to read this sign while driving at the 75-80 mph prevailing traffic speed of most West Virginia interstates.

Modern DNA Tests Confirm Coleman was GUILTY

2006-01-12T18:08:00.000-05:00

New DNA tests conducted at the direction of outgoing Virginia Governor Mark Warner show executed murderer Roger Coleman is still guilty of the crime for which he was executed 14 years ago, reports the WaPo.

Coleman, a Buchanan County coal miner, was convicted in 1982 and executed in 1992 for the 1981 rape and stabbing of his sister-in-law, 19-year-old Wanda McCoy, at McCoy's home near Grundy. Coleman claimed to be innocent and became in international cause célèbre of death penalty opponents. Death penalty opponents had hoped this new test, using technology not available until recently, would disprove Coleman's guilt and call into question the death penalty in general.

Sadly, the same mainstream media that made itself a platform for the lies of this cold-blooded killer will report this news only in passing, if at all. All this happened because Roger Coleman willfully and intentionally raped and brutally stabbed to death Wanda McCoy, the only victim in this case.

The Pic WV Dems Don't Want You to See

2006-01-11T22:24:00.000-05:00

Gary Abernathy has more on last night's "Democrats United" fundraiser that was subjected to a media blackout before the Charleston Gazette loudly protested.

Kessler Seeks to Loot West Virginia's Largest Private Sector Employer, Singles Out Wal-Mart for Tax Increase

2006-01-11T18:11:00.000-05:00

Signifying that not every member of the Ruling Party's leadership is on board with Governor Manchin's "West Virginia: Open for Business" program, Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Jeff Kessler, D-Marshall, plans to introduce in the regular legislative session that begins today a bill identical to a bill vetoed last year by Maryland Governor Bob Ehrlich to tax Wal-Mart and only Wal-Mart to help fund Medicaid.

Kessler's bill, which has not yet been introduced, would require any private sector employer with more than 10,000 employees in the state to spend an amount equal to at least 8% of its payroll within the state on subsidizing employee health insurance or pay the difference in the form of a special assessment to the state. In West Virginia, there is only one private sector employer with more than 10,000 employees: Wal-Mart. Maryland has four such employers, but Wal-Mart is the only Maryland employer to not meet the 8% threshold.

The unions and their shills argue that because Wal-Mart does not meet the 8% rule, it is shifting employees whom the unions think should be provided employer-paid health insurance (fact; many Wal-Mart employees do have company-sponsored health insurance) into Medicaid and other government-funded health programs. However, this legislation is nothing more than a proposal for the legalized looting of a private business not in favor with certain politicians.

Identical legislation is being promoted by labor unions in many states. Simply put, having failed to convince Wal-Mart employees to unionize, the unions have decided to use the political process to harass the retail giant and loot its corporate coffers. Grocery stores are one of the last private sector industries in this country to remain heavily unionized. Wal-Mart has brought its business model to grocery retailing and its unionized competitors have been unable to maintain their market share. Since the unions can't get Wal-Mart employees to unionize and thus give them a way to leech from the company, they've decided to get their supporters in government to persecute Wal-Mart & raise its costs of doing business.

As in many other industries, labor unions do not want to lose their grip in grocery retailing because long-established arrangements between the unions and business provide for the support of retirees' pensions and postretirement health care benefits through the dues of workers and contributions by both employers and employees to the union pension and health care funds.

I hope our Legislature--and then if not them, then governor Manchin--will be wise enough to keep this bill from ever becoming law. West Virginia does not need to create one additional barrier or speed bump to doing business here. Should this bill be enacted, how long will it be before the law is amended to cover employers of 5,000? 3,000? 1,000? 500? 250? 100? 50? 10? 5? This is one slippery slope that must be avoided regardless of altruistic intentions.

McGraw, Starcher, Albright Make VT Judge Who Gave Child Rapist 60 Days in Jail Look Tough

2006-01-07T17:10:00.000-05:00

Many of you may have heard of Vermont Judge Edward Cashman, who sentenced a serial child rapist to only 60 days in jail and claimed to "no longer believe in punishment." This sentence was imposed in the case of Mark Hulett, who admitted to repeatedly raping a young girl over a 4-year period beginning when she was 7 years old.

Burlington, Vermont TV station WCAX reported:

Vermont Judge Edward Cashman is coming under fire for handing out a light sentence to a child rapist.
The judge says did it because he no longer believes in punishment and he wants to speed the rapist's entry into a rehabilitation program.
Judge Cashman's short sentence for an admitted child molester triggered immediate public and political reaction with some lawmakers saying he should leave the bench.
Judge Edward Cashman's light sentence was the talk of the town. Wednesday he sentenced child rapist Mark Hulett to 60 days in jail. Hulett admitted he raped a little girl countless times when she was between 7 and 10 years old.
Prosecutors said Hulett deserved at least 8 years in prison in part as punishment.
But Judge Cashman said the 60-day sentence guaranteed that Hulett would get into sex offender rehabilitation quickly or face a possible life sentence. He said he had no choice because the Corrections Department classified Hulett as a low risk offender meaning he can't get treatment until he's out of jail.
And more importantly the judge announced that after 25 years on the bench, he no longer believes in punishment.

Any sane person will agree this sentence was outrageous. Prosecutors in this case had requested an 8-20 year sentence. Florida's Jessica Lunsford Act--which is being adopted in a growing number of states--provides a 25 year mandatory minimum sentence for any person 18 years of age or older who engages in any sexual act with a child younger than 12.

While Judge Cashman is the most recent example of judicial leniency toward child molesters, two justices of the West Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals and one of their former colleagues take the cake. In 2004, Justices Larry "Let 'em Loose Larry" Starcher, Joe Albright, and former Justice Warren McGraw (who was defeated in the 2004 election, see below) issued a decision that would make Judge Cashman look tough by comparison.

DEFEATED Justice Warren McGraw having his infamous Labor Day Meltdown (audio of speech & resulting political ads still available--makes the Dean Scream seem sedate)

Justices Larry Starcher & Joe Albright

Tony Dean Arbaugh is a serial child molester from Pendleton County who admitted to sexually assaulting several young children, mostly family members. The West Virginia Supreme Court ruled 3-2 in March 2004 that Arbaugh, who was placed on probation as part of a plea agreement for his crimes, violated just about every condition of the agreement--from not meeting with his probation officer to doing drugs to contacting his victims--and did not deserve to be sent to prison for violating probation and the terms of his plea agreement. That Arbaugh got this kind of leniency from the prosecutors initially was bad enough (though mitigated by Arbaugh himself being a minor); however, the WV Supreme Court then ignoring the probation law's provision providing for revoking probation and requiring the defendant to be sentenced to the original prison sentence in lieu of which probation was originally imposes was outrageous. Even more outrageous was that Arbaugh was placed in a youthful offender rehabilitation program that would have eventually had him employed as a janitor in a school until the school discovered his background.

Fortunately, the voters of West Virginia had an opportunity in the 2004 general election to pass judgment on one of the three justices that ruled in Arbaugh's favor. Justice Warren McGraw--who was already targeted for defeat by a wide variety of business interests for his role in making this state a judicial hellhole--dug his own political grave with the Arbaugh case and sealed his defeat with his infamous Labor Day Meltdown, which became the focus of a pair of the most memorable radio political ads in state history (only the WVGOP ad remains online).

Also see my prior posts, "Starcher Says Judges Are Policymakers" and "West Virginia Sex Offender Laws So-So, Improvements Needed."

Goodness, gracious! It's a Great Night to be a Mountaineer Wherever You May Be

2006-01-03T00:44:00.000-05:00

WVU Mountaineers: 2006 Nokia Sugar Bowl Champions!

WVU 38
UGA 35

Stowers & Weaver Plead Guilty to Federal Election Fraud Charges

2005-12-29T21:31:00.000-05:00

Lincoln County will ring in the new year with a cleaner courthouse thanks to the guilty pleas and resignations of Circuit Clerk Greg Stowers and Assessor Jerry Weaver. Both officials pleaded guilty this week to felony federal election fraud charges.

Stowers, a member of the family that has long controlled Lincoln County politics, and Weaver, who has been the county assessor for the last 25 years, both admitted this week to leading a criminal enterprise to systematically control Lincoln County elections, the distribution of public resources, property tax assessments, and the local justice system. Federal prosecutors have alleged that politicians in both Lincoln and Logan counties have bought votes and rigged elections for years to further these schemes.

In neighboring Logan County, federal prosecutors have already scored guilty pleas to various election fraud-related charges from former County Clerk Glen "Hound Dog" Adkins, former Sheriff Johnny "Big John" Mendez, former Logan Mayor Tom Esposito, former Logan Police Chief Alvin "Chipper" Porter, former UMWA official Perry Harvey, and Mark Hrutkay--the ex-husband of Delegate Lidella Hrutkay, D-Logan, and formerly the state's top Worker's Compensation plaintiffs' lawyer. Former Logan Magistrate Danny Wells was convicted of unrelated racketeering charges in 2003 and is currently serving a 7 1/2 year sentence at the Morgantown federal prison. Delegate Joe C. Ferrell, D-Logan, is believed to have made a yet undisclosed plea bargain with prosecutors and was listed as a likely prosecution witness against Stowers and Weaver in their trial that would have begun next Tuesday.

Because Greg Stowers is considered the kingpin of Lincoln County political corruption, the real question now is, "Whom did Greg Stowers deliver to the feds? Who in the upper echelons of state politics now finds difficulty sleeping at night in the wake of Stowers' plea deal?" While much is still unknown about the details of Stowers' plea bargain, one thing is certain: to get a plea bargain from federal prosecutors, one must have something valuable to offer in return. Since this blog is not a bulletin board for wild gossip and rampant speculation, such thoughts on my part will remain out of print until substantiated by reputable sources.

Let's hope 2006 will be the year of eradicating election fraud in southern West Virginia.

In Case You Missed It

2005-12-25T21:42:00.000-05:00

In today's Sunday Gazette-Mail, Phil Kabler wrote about "some of the 'presents' bestowed on the state in the past year." One noteworthy mention:

"Free democratic elections arrived in Iraq, creating hope the phenomenon might eventually spread to Lincoln and Logan counties as well."

I hope you had a merry Christmas!

President Reminds Us of Iraq's Place in the War on Terror

2005-12-18T23:59:00.000-05:00

Tonight, President Bush gave another major speech on our progress in Iraq. This was probably his best speech since 9-11 and clearly presented the case for our position regarding Iraq's place in the War on Terror.

While we have been incredibly lucky and not suffered a domestic terrorist attack in over 4 years, far too many people have forgotten the nature of the enemy we face. Many on the left and in the mushy middle have gone wobbly on Iraq and lost focus of the role a free and democratic Iraq will have in draining the swamp that bred the hatred that brought us 9-11 and threatens far worse if we surrender or appease.

Despite the ongoing war, almost all Democratic senators and 4 Republicans (Craig, Hagel, Murkowski, and Sununu) are filibustering a renewal of the USA PATRIOT Act--a law without whose enactment right after 9-11 we would have surely suffered innumerable further terrorist attacks as the Gorelick wall would have continued to bar the sharing of information between law enforcement and the military and intelligence services; information learned in grand juries could not have been shared with the military or intelligence services; wiretap orders would have had to specify not only the target person but the specific phone number and location of the phone used even if the target repeatedly changed phones to stay ahead of wiretap orders; and many other reforms that respect our individual liberties but have worked so well over the past 4 years, that will sunset in less than 2 weeks and leave us as vulnerable we were on that sunny September morning when our world changed forever.

Unfortunately, this is not the only major hindrance the war effort is now suffering. Major media outlets freely engage in the exposure of national security secrets that would have earned a quick trip to the gallows for treason in wars past. A veto-proof majority of both houses of Congress have forced the President to cave in to the media's favorite Republican senator and sign a terrorist bill of rights that will place on interrogations of known terrorists from overseas virtually the same limits as domestic police interrogations of criminal suspects. Have we forgotten? Have we? Have four years of no successful domestic terrorist attacks really lulled us into a false sense of security and a belief that we've already won this war against an enemy that professes to seek our annihilation?

Highlights from the speech:

"If you think the terrorists would become peaceful if only America would stop provoking them, then it might make sense to leave them alone. This is not the threat I see."
"My conviction comes down to this: We do not create terrorism by fighting the terrorists. We invite terrorism by ignoring them. And we will defeat the terrorists by capturing and killing them abroad, removing their safe havens, and strengthening new allies like Iraq and Afghanistan in the fight we share."
"Some look at the challenges in Iraq, and conclude that the war is lost, and not worth another dime or another day. I don't believe that. Our military commanders do not believe that. Our troops in the field, who bear the burden and make the sacrifice, do not believe that America has lost. And not even the terrorists believe it. We know from their own communications that they feel a tightening noose -and fear the rise of a democratic Iraq."
"Defeatism may have its partisan uses, but it is not justified by the facts. For every scene of destruction in Iraq, there are more scenes of rebuilding and hope. For every life lost, there are countless more lives reclaimed. And for every terrorist working to stop freedom in Iraq, there are many more Iraqis and Americans working to defeat them. My fellow citizens: Not only can we win the war in Iraq - we are winning the war in Iraq."
"I also want to speak to those of you who did not support my decision to send troops to Iraq: I have heard your disagreement, and I know how deeply it is felt. Yet now there are only two options before our country - victory or defeat. And the need for victory is larger than any president or political party, because the security of our people is in the balance. I do not expect you to support everything I do, but tonight I have a request: Do not give in to despair, and do not give up on this fight for freedom."

Sally Susman Says She Got No Advance Info on the Toll Increase from her Husband

2005-12-15T10:28:00.000-05:00

Delegate Sally Susman, D-Raleigh, was on Hoppy's show this morning discussing the West Virginia Turnpike toll increase. Hoppy questioned her regarding her husband, Alan, being on the Turnpike board. She responded by saying they had no discussions of it until he came home yesterday and told her they raised the tolls and that she was as blindsided by this as the rest of us. Riiiggghhhttt.

Did Alan Susman Have to Sleep on the Couch Last Night?

2005-12-15T01:54:00.000-05:00

That's the very interesting question posed by West Virginians for a Republican Majority after yesterday's unanimous vote by the Parkways, Economic Development, and Tourism Authority to raise tolls on the West Virginia Turnpike by more than 60%.

This question would not normally occur had Susman's wife, Delegate Sally Susman, D-Raleigh and candidate for the state Senate, not publicly excoriated the decision almost as soon as it was announced. Alan Susman, a former state senator and current Raleigh County Democratic Chairman, has been on the Turnpike board since his departure from the state Senate in 1978 and wields tremendous influence over his fellow board members.

Sorry, Sally, you're fooling no one.

Turnpike Raises Tolls, Neglects Toll Plaza Congestion

2005-12-14T22:59:00.000-05:00

Part 1 Part 2

It will be a merry Christmas and very happy New Year for the West Virginia Turnpike, but not so for those who travel it. Today, the West Virginia Parkways, Economic Development, and Tourism Authority raised tolls for each of the 3 mainline toll plazas from $1.25 to $2 for cars and from $4.25 to $7 for tractor-trailers. Rates for commuter passes will remain unchanged.

The West Virginia Turnpike, like most other toll roads, is not financed by gas tax dollars but instead by the tolls paid by users. One exception occurred when federal funds subsidized the $700 million widening of the West Virginia Turnpike from 2 lanes to 4 lanes between 1973 and 1989. The West Virginia Turnpike's last toll increase was in 1981. Cumulative inflation from 1981 to 2005 was 175% while the car toll increase amounted to 60%.

Like any other entity that sells goods or services--in this case use of the toll road--the West Virginia Turnpike should be expected to provide increased value when it raises its price. While part of this toll increase will finance a six-lane widening in Beckley between I-64 at exit 40 and U.S. 19 at exit 48 and a new interchange to serve the Shady Spring area south of Beckley, Turnpike travelers simply will not receive value to match the higher tolls.

Almost everyone who has driven on toll roads has found the single greatest annoyance with tolls to be the toll collection process. In the 65 years since the Pennsylvania Turnpike became America's first superhighway and first modern toll road, toll roads have collected tolls using either a ticket system or a barrier system. In the ticket system, a motorist would obtain a ticket at the onramp and pay a toll at the offramp based upon the entry point. The barrier system--now used in West Virginia and many newer toll roads--collects fixed tolls at various toll plazas along a turnpike.

Toll collection in the 21st century has advanced to electronic toll collection--and in some cases without the need to stop or even slow down--thanks to E-ZPass and similar electronic toll collection systems. E-ZPass is an electronic toll collection system that uses radio transponders mounted inside a car's windshield, overhead sensors to detect transponders and record transactions, and video cameras to record toll scofflaws that debuted in New York in 1993 and is now used by 11 states from Maine to Virginia and Illinois. Most states issue transponders linked to prepaid accounts that are automatically replenished from an account holder's bank account or credit card; the West Virginia Turnpike only issues E-ZPass to commuter pass holders who pay flat rates for unlimited travel on the West Virginia Turnpike. Many toll roads offer discounts to E-ZPass users; last year, the Illinois Tollway doubled cash tolls for cars and left electronic toll rates for cars unchanged.

E-ZPass states

The most exciting aspect of electronic toll collection is open road tolling--reconstruction of toll plazas to include dedicated lanes for E-ZPass (or other electronic toll collection system) users and cash toll plazas to the side, physically separated from the open road tolling lanes--that allows users of the electronic toll collection system to drive through the toll plaza at highway speed and those who pay by cash to safely exit, stop, pay the toll, and then accelerate to highway speed upon leaving the toll plaza and resuming travel. Open road tolling eliminates the bottlenecks at toll plazas. A manual toll lane can process up to 300 to 400 cars per hour; a low-speed electronic toll collection lane within a traditional toll plaza can process up to 1200 cars per hour. However, an open road tolling lane's capacity is not limited by reduced traffic speeds.

Pocahontas Parkway (VA 895) toll plaza near Richmond, Virginia, featuring open road tolling. The Smart Tag system has merged with E-ZPass since this photo was taken.

West Virginia lags far behind other states in promoting electronic toll collection. While people who have E-ZPass transponders from other states can use them on the West Virginia Turnpike, West Virginians cannot unless they buy a commuter pass for $95 per year per toll booth or obtain an E-ZPass from another state. Dedicated E-ZPass only lanes are only available at certain times, eliminating this small bit of convenience for West Virginia's E-ZPass users during peak traffic periods. At 4 toll lanes in each direction, each toll plaza on the West Virginia Turnpike is effectively limited to 1,200 to 1,600 cars per hour despite significantly higher traffic volumes, thus the frequent, long delays at the toll plazas.

If the West Virginia Turnpike wants to provide increased value for its travelers, it should immediately implement an expansion of its E-ZPass program to include not only commuter passes but prepaid, automatically replenished accounts. It should further reconfigure the toll schedule by charging all E-ZPass users one-half the cash tolls. Transponders should be marketed aggressively based on the successful marketing programs of other states. At each Turnpike service plaza and rest area, motorists should be able to open an account and immediately obtain a transponder; the Pennsylvania Turnpike has automatic vending machines at many of its rest areas. In just one year, the Illinois Tollway has doubled electronic toll payment to 75% of all transactions by implementing the 50% toll rates for electronic payment and initiating a systemwide open road tolling conversion. Without any discount program and before it began conversion to open road tolling, the Pennsylvania Turnpike attained 50% E-ZPass usage within 5 years of introducing E-ZPass.

While this expanded E-ZPass program is a first step, the second step toward modernizing West Virginia Turnpike toll collection and eliminating toll plaza congestion is the reconstruction of the toll plazas and development of open road tolling. Due to the present configuration of the toll plazas, all 3 toll plazas will have to be totally rebuilt. New cash toll plazas should be built on each side of the current toll plazas, which would then be removed for the construction of open road tolling lanes that, when complete, would allow the West Virginia Turnpike's E-ZPass users to drive through the toll plaza at 70 miles per hour and those paying cash to exit the highway for the cash plazas. While this second step will require planning and development, the first phase can be implemented in a very short time frame.

As long as we are going to have toll roads--and it appears certain more roads built in the future will be toll roads given public opposition to higher gas taxes to build freeways--the toll roads should make customer service a top priority and provide real value for motorists' money. Let's modernize toll collection on the West Virginia Turnpike and eliminate the long lines at the toll booths.

Adkins, Harvey Plead Guilty to Federal Election Fraud Charges

2005-12-13T12:45:00.000-05:00

Logan County Clerk Glen "Hound Dog" Adkins and former United Mine Workers official Perry Harvey both pleaded guilty today in U.S. District Court in Charleston to federal election fraud charges stemming from the long-running investigation into political corruption in Lincoln and Logan counties.

Adkins, who has been County Clerk since 1987 (and whose predecessor in that office was Joe C. Ferrell, see below), admitted to accepting $500 in 1996 in consideration for his vote for a candidate for county magistrate and for influencing the votes of others in this election.

Harvey pleaded guilty to conspiring to buy votes in 2004 with former Logan mayor Tom Esposito. Esposito--who was featured in a front page Washington Post story a couple of weeks ago and alleged to be a "sham candidate"--temporarily ran for the House of Delegates last year in conjunction with the FBI's probe of vote buying in Logan County. Esposito paid $2,000 supplied by the FBI to Harvey and another man--Ernie Mangus, who has received immunity for his upcoming testimony--early last year before dropping out of the race. Because of a peculiar rule requiring at least one of the four delegates elected from the 19th District to not be from the same county, Esposito contrary to other press accounts, did not have any impact on the outcome of the Democratic primary.

While both Adkins and Harvey each face up to 5 years in federal prison, their guilty pleas indicate they are cooperating with prosecutors and will likely receive minimal jail time or perhaps no jail time. Several weeks ago, it was revealed that Delegate Joe C. Ferrell, D-Logan, agreed to testify against Lincoln County Circuit Clerk Greg Stowers and Lincoln County Assessor Jerry Weaver in their federal election fraud trial next month. While Ferrell's plea bargain is still under wraps, this cat was let out of the bag two months ago when the judge required Stowers to hire a new lawyer because Stowers's previous lawyer, Bob Allen, was also representing Ferrell.

Stay tuned, folks.

Democrats Have a Plan for Iraq: Retreat and Defeat

2005-12-09T13:14:00.000-05:00

Click here to go to the RNC Web video.

Click here for the press release & script.

Charleston User Fee Controversy Highlights Need for Local Tax Options

2005-12-09T01:51:00.000-05:00

Last week, the state Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of Charleston's $1 per week "user fee" charged to all people employed within the city. The fee, imposed by Charleston to pay for street maintenance and hiring additional police officers, followed similar fees in Huntington and Weirton.

I believe this was a legally sound decision but the fee is unwise as a policy matter. In defense of the 3 cities with these fees, the Legislature has strangled West Virginia's county and municipal governments and centralized public finances to a greater degree than any other state.

The decision of local taxing powers lies within the Legislature. Fundamentally, legislative oversight of and restrictions on subjects of local taxation are appropriate to prevent grossly unfair local tax policies--such as unduly shifting the tax burden onto nonresidents who have no vote--but this protection from abuse has itself been abused. The predominant source of local revenues are local property taxes. Virtually any major local project in this state requires significant state and federal aid.

In its quest to claim a false cover of being anti-tax and to create in local officials constituencies dependent upon local legislative delegations for funding local projects, the Legislature has denied county and municipal governments the ability to raise revenue. Thus, local officials constantly try to win & retain the favor of the local legislative delegation and congressman. In essence, incumbent legislators & congressmen have a key constituency in their local governments because of this relationship of dependency.

In West Virginia, the overwhelming majority of local property taxes go to schools and overall levies are constitutionally capped. Municipalities are allowed to impose business & occupation taxes (effectively gross receipts taxes) on local businesses. Per dollar of property taxes paid on property located within municipalities, the municipality gets only 8 cents. The B&O taxes are terribly unfair to businesses and bear no proportionality to profitability or other reasonable basis for taxing a business. Some towns--most notably Summersville--have turned their police departments into lean, mean ticket-writing machines that fleece unlucky motorists. The constitutional cap on levy rates is the only good policy of the bunch.

Unlike many other states, West Virginia counties & municipalities cannot levy income, sales, or other common local taxes. A law passed in 2004 and originally scheduled to take effect this year--since delayed to 2008--would allow a 1% municipal sales tax in municipalities that abolish their B&O taxes. However, even before the delay, every municipality that has a B&O tax reviewed this option and found it unacceptable, though municipalities without B&O taxes are considering the sales tax as a future option.

During its study of West Virginia's tax system in the late 1990's, the Commission on Fair Taxation--chaired by then Tax & Revenue Secretary Rob Capehart, now the Chairman of the West Virginia Republican Party--included local taxation within the scope of its study. The major changes proposed to local taxation included the abolition of personal property taxes, the reallocation of real property taxes from schools (which would be funded from state funds) to the counties & municipalities, and allowing local sales & income taxes. The Commission stated:

Local governments in West Virginia are hamstrung by Constitutional and legal restrictions, which result in counties and cities having less fiscal flexibility than in any other state. The maximum property tax levies are set in the State Constitution and reflect the fears of the Depression when homes, farms and businesses were being sold for back taxes. Unlike boards of education, municipalities and counties must gain a super majority to pass bond issues. Municipalities may impose a B&O tax, which the State repealed for most businesses effective July 1, 1987. But use of this tax drives businesses to locate just outside city boundaries.
Other states allow for their local governments to "piggyback" onto state levies. This can be done by permitting local entities to share a state tax. Under this system, the state collects the taxes for the locality and remits the funds collected after the subtraction of appropriate administrative expenses. Usually the additional rate the local government can use is set in state law and the city or county must use the state base. The piggyback approach reduces local government compliance costs and the uniform use of the tax base likewise keeps state and taxpayer compliance costs down.
The Commission has, therefore, recommended that counties and cities be given the authority to piggyback onto two State taxes -- the progressive income tax and the general excise tax. The Commission recognized that each of these State taxes might have a different appeal to various localities, depending on their location and income base. Municipalities would have the option to use one or both of these two taxes or retain their B&O tax. In all cases, voter approval would be required before either or both of the piggyback taxes could be imposed.
Standing alone, the recommendation of the Commission to eliminate the property tax on tangible personal property could present serious fiscal problems for local governments because it would reduce the local property tax base by more than half in some counties and in many cities. Without an alternative source of revenue, it would be impossible for local governments to maintain current levels of services.
Since the Commission has proposed elimination of the school property tax, that levy authority would be available to cover much of the loss of personal property tax revenues, without there being any increase in overall taxes on real property. The Commission is proposing that local governments be allowed to use up to 90 percent of the school levy on real property. The remaining 10 percent of the abandoned school levy on real property would be used by the State for equalization of education funding. This proposal is further explained in Chapter Three, Section IX of this report.
If the portion of the abandoned school levy on real property did not prove sufficient to replace the lost personal property taxes in a county or city, then the Commission proposes establishing a replacement fund which will consist of 50 percent of the taxes on centrally assessed real property of public service corporations (electric and gas companies, railroads, airlines, water companies, etc.). In addition, this fund would include 2.325 percent of the State's share of the regular severance tax on coal. Since most of the counties which would need replacement money are either heavy coal producing counties or have significant electrical generation plants, the plan returns taxes based on their origin.

I believe the proposal by the Commission on Fair Taxation is a very responsible approach to both state and local taxation. In fact, I would probably go beyond that proposal relative to local taxes and abolish municipal B&O taxes and the "user fees" 3 cities impose on people employed in those cities. They 2 main keys to any expansion of local taxing authority are (1) establishing a fair tax base and (2) establishing effective accountability to voters and taxpayers. West Virginia's counties & municipalities need options other than groveling before the local legislative delegation, hat in hand.

10 Years Ago Today: End of the Road for the National Maximum Speed Limit

2005-12-08T17:47:00.000-05:00

Ten years ago today, the National Maximum Speed Limit--a federal law that limited the top speed limit to 55 miles per hour on all highways from 1974 to 1987 and 65 on rural interstates and 55 on all other highways from 1987 to 1995--came to an end. The then-infant Republican majority in Congress repealed the most ignored federal law since Prohibition and returned to the states the power to set all highway speed limits and determine enforcement levels.

Our thanks for this achievement belong with the National Motorists Association, a national motorists' rights organization founded in 1982 with an initial purpose of repealing the NMSL. Today, the NMA continues its advocacy for "reasonable speed limits, better driver training, improved motorist-to-motorist courtesy, and sensible, easily understood regulations." The NMA issued the following announcement to commemorate this anniversary:

Madison, Wisconsin, December 6, 2005 -- Motorists across the nation can celebrate the Tenth Anniversary of the repeal of the National Maximum Speed Limit (NMSL) by driving at safe, legal speeds well above 55 mph. National legislation repealing the decades-old NMSL was signed into law on December 8, 1995.
The NMSL, a product of the Nixon administration, was implemented in response to the OPEC oil embargo. After the embargo was lifted, a coalition of groups appeared in support of the lower limit as a "life-saving measure." It was because of such arguments that Congress passed legislation making the 55-mph National Maximum Speed Limit permanent in 1975.
The Citizens Coalition for Rational Traffic Laws (CCRTL), which later became the National Motorists Association (NMA), was founded seven years later for the express purpose of repealing the NMSL. As public compliance shrank, Congressional supporters of the NMSL authorized a National Academy of Science study to document the benefits of the national limit. This study radically altered the dynamics of the public's discussion of the limit.
The NMA demanded that costs, as well as benefits, be part of any evaluation of this law. The debate was dragged into the public and political arenas and the support and rationalizations for the 55-mph NMSL started to show serious flaws. Claims of lives saved were proven largely invalid. The fact that non-compliance was much greater than the government was admitting also came to light. Public opinion began to shift, and it became socially and politically acceptable to at least talk about higher speed limits.
During this discourse, the NMA became the clear primary opponent of the NMSL. Our organization encouraged sympathetic members of Congress to help us undo the damage of 55-mph limit. Ultimately, in 1987, despite predictions of thousands of additional highway fatalities, Congress decided to allow states to raise Interstate and expressway speed limits to 65 mph.
By the early 1990s, these doom and gloom scenarios were proven false. All but a few states had opted to raise their speed limits, while fatality rates declined nationwide. Following this limited victory, the NMA continued to push for a full repeal of the NMSL. Through a little serendipity and a lot of hard work, Congress passed and President Clinton signed legislation that included a provision repealing the NMSL in its entirety.
Again, opponents of the repeal claimed that without a national speed limit fatalities would increase by over 6,000 victims in the first year alone. Instead, many states raised limits to 70 or 75 mph, expanded 65-mph speed limits to other roads, and the number of fatalities actually declined. During the past ten years since that time, the fatality rate has continued to decline, despite higher speed limits and higher driving speeds. This clearly demonstrated that the 22-year-long experiment with an arbitrary national speed limit served no positive purpose. It wasted time, resources, and billions of dollars while neither reducing fuel consumption nor improving highway safety.
The National Motorists Association was established in 1982 to represent the interests and rights of North American motorists. It is a grassroots organization that operates at the national level and through a system of state chapters. It continues to advocate safe and reasonable speed limits set in accordance with traffic engineering standards, not arbitrary political whim. The NMA is entirely supported through the contributions of individuals, families, and small businesses.

Since 1995, 31 states have raised their top speed limit to 70, 75 or 80 miles per hour. Over this period, the only reduction came in 1999 when Montana imposed a 75 mph speed limit. North Dakota and Texas have both had multiple rounds of speed limit increases. Colorado and Texas are developing new toll roads (the Front Range Toll Road and the Trans-Texas Corridors) that will feature 85 mph speed limits when constructed over the next decade.

Green=80 mph; Yellow=75 mph; Blue=70 mph; Red=65 mph; Black =60 mph

Overall, however, speed limits are generally where they were 35 years ago despite light years of progress in automobile and highway design. Regardless of posted limits or enforcement practices, prevailing traffic speeds in most parts of the country tend to be 75-80 mph on rural freeways, 65-75 on four-lane highways with uncontrolled access, and 60-65 on primary rural 2-lane highways.

The profession of traffic engineering has determined appropriate methods for speed zoning. The NMA has developed a catalogue of state DOT policies, which most often are not followed. According to the West Virginia Department of Transportation:

"There is a common belief among laymen and even some elected officials that traffic speeds can be lowered by merely posting signs. This is not true. Artificially low speed limits invite violations by responsible drivers. Enforcement of unrealistically low speed limits sets up a Âspeed trapÂ which is poor public relations and causes a loss of respect for traffic law enforcement activities in general.
"The nationally accepted principle, which is followed by the Division of Highways, is to set the posted speed limit at the speed below which 85% of the vehicles travelingling on the road or street, in the absence of factors which may introduce a special hazard. Experience has shown that at least 85% of motorists drive at a speed which is reasonable and prudent, operating their vehicles at a speed which reflects the character of the roadway and the amount of development along it. The other 15% are those who may be subject to enforcement action."

The United States is well behind many countries in freeway speed zoning. Wikipedia shows that Belgium, Finland, Greece, Ireland, the Netherlands, Portugal, Spain and Switzerland post 120 km/h (75 mph) speed limits on their freeways; Austria, Croatia, the Czech Republic, Denmark, France, Hungary, Poland, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, and Turkey are at 130 km/h (80 mph); Italy has adopted a 150 km/h (95 mph) speed limit on its newest Autostradas; and, of course, the Germans can still drive the Autobahn at the speed of their choice and have a fatality rate slightly lower than the U.S. interstate system despite their high speeds.

Roll Call: Mollohan Took $23,000 From Corrupt Defense Contractor That Bribed Former Calif. Congressman

2005-12-08T14:22:00.000-05:00

The Capitol Hill newspaper Roll Call reported today that Congressman Alan Mollohan, D-Fairmont, was the recipient of at least $23,000 donated to PACs and foundations under his control from defense contractor MZM and its affiliates. RedState also has a piece on this.

MZM is the defense contractor that paid $2.4 million in bribes to disgraced former Congressman Randy "Duke" Cunningham. Cunningham, R-Calif., pleaded guilty last week to federal conspiracy and tax evasion charges in connection with the bribes and resigned his seat in Congress.

Mollohan is the ranking Democrat on the House Appropriations Committee's Subcommittee on Science, State, Justice, Commerce and Related Agencies and the ranking Democrat on the House Committee on Standards of Official Conduct--commonly known as the Ethics Committee. In these positions, despite being in the minority party, Mollohan wields considerable influence over the appropriations for 3 Cabinet departments and several independent investigations and the oversight of ethics of House members.

Delegate Chris Wakim, R-Wheeling, has already announced his candidacy for Congress next year, challenging Congressman Mollohan. Wakim is a disabled Gulf War veteran, West Point graduate, and owner of several small businesses in the Wheeling area.

John Kerry: 34 Years Later, New False Allegations of Barbary Against U.S. Troops

2005-12-06T19:04:00.000-05:00

This week, John Kerry--the haughty, French-looking junior senator from Massachusetts who claims few successes beyond marrying wealthy women--lodged war crime accusations against U.S. troops in Iraq bearing little difference from the slandering he delivered his former comrades in 1971.

John Kerry, 1971:

"They told the stories at times they had personally raped, cut off ears, cut off heads, taped wires from portable telephones to human genitals and turned up the power, cut off limbs, blown up bodies, randomly shot at civilians, razed villages in fashion reminiscent of Jengiss [sic] Khan, shot cattle and dogs for fun, poisoned food stocks, and generally ravaged the countryside of South Vietnam..."

All of this was one big pack of lies. Later, John Kerry would admit he never witnessed or had any other firsthand knowledge of any war crimes committed in Vietnam.

John Kerry, 2005:

"I don't agree with that. But I think what we need to do is recognize what we all agree on, which is, you've got to begin to set benchmarks for accomplishment; you've got to begin to transfer authority to the Iraqis, and there is no reason, Bob, that young American soldiers need to be going into the homes of Iraqis in the dead of night, terrorizing kids and children, uh-uh-uh, you know, women, breaking sort of the customs of the -- of -- of -- of -- historical customs, religious customs, whether you like it or not. Iraqis should be doing that. And after all of these two and a half years, with all of the talk of 210,000 people trained, there just is no excuse for not transferring more of that authority."

Thirty-four years have done nothing to John Kerry's truthfulness regarding the conduct of American soldiers in war.