Mt. Vernon Democratic Straw Poll Results: Beyer, Chatman, Hope... (UPDATE: Photos, Video)

I just got back from the Mt. Vernon Democratic Committee's annual Mardi Gras party and straw poll. The party was great, as always; lots more to come on that tomorrow. For now, here are the results from the straw poll.1. Don Beyer: 105 votes 2. Lavern Chatman: 83 votes 3. Patrick Hope: 81 votes 4. Mark Sickles: 51 votes 5. Adam Ebbin: 42 votes 6. Charniele Herring: 15 votes 7. Alfonso Lopez: 11 votes 7. Bill Euille: 11 votes 9. Mark Levine: 7 votes 9. Derek Hyra: 7 votes 11. Bruce Shuttleworth (not present): 3 votes P.S. Note that my predictions for the straw poll were 1) Don Beyer (correct); 2) Lavern Chatman (correct); 3) Adam Ebbin (he actually finished 5th); 4) Mark Sickles (correct); 5) Bill Euille (he actually finished 7th); 6) Charniele Herring (correct); 6) Patrick Hope (he actually finished 3rd); 6) Alfonso Lopez (he actually finished 7th); 9) Derek Hyra (correct); 10) Mark Levine (he actually finished tied for 9th); and 11) Bruce Shuttleworth (correct). Not too shabby, if I do say so myself. :) The big difference was that Patrick Hope finished significantly higher than I had expected. Other than that, it was pretty much as forecast...

Where ethics and utility profits intersect, a stain spreads across the "Virginia Way"

by Ivy Main

(For an explanation regarding why subsidizing nuclear power is such a dumb idea, see here. For an explanation of why we should be focusing on energy efficiency instead, see here. - promoted by lowkell) The Virginia General Assembly has punted on ethics reform, preparing to pass watered-down legislation that does very nearly nothing. At the same time, legislators are about to pass just passed a law that will cost Dominion Power's customers more than half a billion dollars as a down payment on a nuclear plant that hasn't been approved and isn't likely to be built.These are not separate issues. Virginia has had an ethics problem since long before Bob McDonnell met Jonnie Williams. As many people have noted, the real scandal is how hard it is to break our ethics laws. So long as you fill out a form disclosing the gift, it's legal for politicians to accept anything of value from anyone, to use for any purpose. By this standard, McDonnell's biggest failure was one of imagination. The legislation that appears likely come out of the General Assembly merely puts a $250 cap on the price tag of any one gift, with no limit on the number of lesser gifts and no limit on the value of so-called "intangible" gifts like all-expense-paid vacations. The mocking of this bill has already begun. Conveniently, the bill deals with a tiny side stream of tainted cash compared to the river of money flowing from corporations and ladled out by lobbyists. Corporations don't usually give out Rolexes and golf clubs. Instead, they give campaign contributions. Here again, Virginia law places no limits on the amount of money a politician can take from any donor. Five thousand or seventy-five thousand, as long as your campaign reports the gift, you can put it in your wallet. And here's the interesting part: you don't have to spend the money on your campaign. If gerrymandering has delivered you a safe district, you can use your war chest to help out another member of your party-or you can buy groceries with it. The distinction between campaign money and personal money is merely rhetorical. A spokeswoman for the State Board of Elections was quoted in the Washington Post saying, "If they wanted to use the money to send their kids to college, they could probably do that."

In an eye-popping editorial, the Post ripped into one Virginia delegate who charged his campaign more than $30,000 in travel and meals, and another $9600 in cellphone charges, in the course of just 18 months.As with taking the money, the only rule in spending campaign funds is that you file timely paperwork showing what you spent it on; the reports are not even audited. The theory originally may have been that the threat of public disclosure would keep a gentleman from taking money from unsavory persons. If you took it anyway, the voters would learn of it and throw you out. How quaintly respectful of the energy and capabilities of voters! How pre-gerrymandering. And how pre-corporation. The smartest companies today spread the wealth around: more to the legislators in charge of the important committees, less where they just need floor votes. The largesse is bipartisan, making everyone happy but the voters. Certainly, a legislator who accepts thousands of dollars from a lobbyist would be churlish to criticize the company writing the check. So what do you call someone who pays for his meals out of the check he gets from a company? How about, "an employee"? Environmental groups and good-government advocates have long decried the influence of corporate money in Virginia politics. In their 2012 report, Dirty Money, Dirty Power, the Sierra Club, Appalachian Voices, and Chesapeake Climate Action Network documented the rising tide of utility and coal company contributions to Virginia politicians, coinciding with a series of votes enriching these special interests. Dominion Power has consistently led the "dirty money" pack. As the single largest donor of campaign funds aside from the Republican and Democratic parties themselves, its influence in Richmond is widely acknowledged, even taken for granted.  Most legislators will not bother to introduce a bill that Dominion opposes, even if they like it themselves. Critics joke that the General Assembly is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Dominion Resources. According to Dirty Money, Dirty Power, Dominion's contributions to elected officials totaled $5.2 million from 2004 to 2011. The Virginia Public Access Project shows another $1.4 million in 2012 and 2013. The contributions overall somewhat favor Republicans, but often the contributions are so even-handed as to be comical, like the $20,000 each to Mark Herring and Mark Obenshain in the Attorney General's race last fall. These contributions are not about supporting a preferred candidate; they are about buying influence. Note that much of the donations don't go directly to General Assembly members but to the parties' PACs, which then dole out the money. This gives Dominion extra influence with party leaders-again, on both sides. The result has been spectacularly successful for Dominion, which rarely fails to get its way. Bills it opposes die in subcommittee (witness this year's bills to expand net metering). Bills it wants succeed. That brings us to this year's money bills. As you may have read, Dominion has been "over-earning," collecting more money from ratepayers than allowed by law. In the ordinary course of things, this would result in both a rebate to customers and a resetting of rates going forward to produce less revenue for the utility. For Dominion, the solution is a bill that lets the company charge ratepayers for expenses it isn't entitled to pass along under current law. (Indeed, in a nice touch, the bill actually requires Dominion to pass along these expenses.) Presto: it's no longer earning too much, owes no rebate, and doesn't have to cut rates. In return, the ratepayers get the satisfaction of assuming the sunk costs of a new nuclear reactor that will probably never be built, plus whatever more money the utility spends on it going forward. I believe the technical parlance for this is "blank check." "But we must have nuclear," our legislators murmur as they sign our names on the check. Um, why? Nuclear energy today can't compete economically. Just last year Duke Energy gave up on two nuclear plants it had been building, after billing ratepayers close to a billion dollars in construction costs. (BloombergBusinessweek headlined its article on the subject, "Duke Kills Florida Nuclear Project, Keeps Customers' Money.") Dominion itself understands the wretched economics of nuclear perfectly well; its parent company, Dominion Resources, just closed an existing nuclear plant in Kewaunee, Wisconsin, because it couldn't produce power cheaply enough to attract customers. And that's from a plant that's paid for; energy from new plants is now more expensive than natural gas, wind, and even some solar. Memo to Democrats: when the cheaper alternative is renewable energy, no self-respecting progressive signs on to nuclear. The steadily falling price of wind energy, and more recently, solar energy, help explain why nuclear is on its way out nationwide. The only nuclear plants under construction in the U.S. today are over budget and reliant on billions of dollars in federal loan guarantees. Memo to Republicans: no self-respecting, Solyndra-bashing conservative signs on to nuclear. The State Corporation Commission also understands the economic picture, and it has been skeptical of Dominion's nuclear ambitions. On top of that, there are serious concerns whether a third reactor at North Anna could even get a license from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission in the wake of the earthquake that shut the existing units for four months in 2011. (For a good short history of the North Anna reactors, including the fine Dominion paid in 1975 for hiding the existence of the fault line, see this fine article in the local Fluvanna Review: http://www.fluvannareview.com/... So there's a pretty good chance that Virginia ratepayers will find themselves following in the path of Duke Energy's customers, with many hundreds of millions of dollars thrown down a rathole and nothing to show for it. The elected officials voting for this boondoggle, on the other hand, will have plenty to show for it, unfettered by rules of ethics.

Gov. McAuliffe Should Veto Dominion "Global Warming Starts Here" VA Power Corporate Welfare Bill

This morning, Vice Chair of the Virginia Chapter of the Sierra Club Ivy Main wrote scathingly about a just-passed bill "that will cost Dominion Power's customers more than half a billion dollars as a down payment on a nuclear plant that hasn't been approved and isn't likely to be built."As Main notes in her article, "environmental groups and good-government advocates have long decried the influence of corporate money in Virginia politics," including a "rising tide of utility and coal company contributions to Virginia politicians, coinciding with a series of votes enriching these special interests." Dominion Virginia Power is, by almost any standard, at the head of this tawdry list, having spent over $6 million since 2004 to essentially purchase Virginia's political system for the benefit of...well, not you and me, that's for sure. The result, as Main points out, "has been spectacularly successful for Dominion, which rarely fails to get its way" on anything it wants. That includes this latest monstrosity of a bill, which "lets the company charge ratepayers for expenses it isn't entitled to pass along under current law," with ratepayers (that's you and me) getting "the satisfaction of assuming the sunk costs of a new nuclear reactor that will probably never be built, plus whatever more money the utility spends on it going forward." Great deal, huh? Making matters even worse, if that's possible, is that this corporate welfare is going towards a really bad company (dirty energy Dominion) and a power source - nuclear - which is extremely expensive, thus can't compete economically and must rely on enormous government subsidies. Which is why there hasn't been ground broken on a new nuclear power plant in the U.S. since 1974. That's right, 40 years ago, when disco was all the rage, Gerald Ford was taking over from Tricky Dicky, the Soviet Union was still going strong, and the Vietnam War was winding down. This power source is just outrageously expensive, not even close to competitive at this point with other alternatives - including solar, wind, energy efficiency, you name it pretty much. I've written about this subject extensively over the years (and worked for 17+ years at the U.S. Energy Information Administration as an energy economist), but it bears repeating: nuclear power is at the bottom of the energy heap in terms of cost-effective energy solutions (it trails energy efficiency, wind, solar, geothermal, natural gas...pretty much everything. So, why on earth did a bunch of Democrats - including strong progressives and environmentalists - vote for this corporate welfare bill to help subsidize Dominion's costly nuclear boondoggle? I asked around, and got a few responses.

*Virginia environmental groups inexplicably didn't raise the red flag on this bill, with the Virginia League of Conservation Voters actually marking this one down in the "monitor" (not "oppose," as it should have been) category. Huh? *Virginia's part-time legislators are forced to deal with thousands of bills in a few weeks each year, meaning that they "go by in the blink of an eye," with "no time to sit and study bills" - including highly technical, complicated ones like this. That's why "ethics reform" should include a complete re-think about how we run our government here in Virginia. Right now, it's pretty much government of the lobbyists, for the corporations, by the super-wealthy people. *I heard from multiple sources that this nuclear bailout bill somehow got linked to another bill dealing with wind power, and that apparently confused the heck out of legislators (clever, clever, Dominion lobbyists!). *There's an almost total lack of expertise on energy issues among Virginia legislators, leaving Dominion's expert lobbyists to happily write the legislation, tell legislators how to vote, and generally game out the best strategy for getting what they want. *To sum it all up, as one person told me: "there wasn't a concerted effort by the environmental groups, and the progressive lawmakers, particularly in the Senate, are not accountants" (or energy experts)...A total f@#@ up by the environmental movement, progressives, etc. This is perhaps the worst legislation to pass this year."Great, huh? I know I'm feeling inspired and idealistic today, how about you? Nope, didn't think so. The last hope? Gov. McAuliffe should veto the "worst legislation to pass this year." But will he? After what we just saw in the Virginia General Assembly, and having seen the same type of thing for so many years now, I'm most definitely not optimistic.

Dwight Jones Coronated As DPVA Chair

by Dan Sullivan

Sensing a rising tide of sentiment against the prospect of Mayor Jones' candidacy for DPVA chair, it seems the "powers that be" have chosen to short-circuit the process. This further solidifies the argument that Jones is no more than a strawman for whomever feeds his self-perceived competence.While this certainly will save the Central Committee substantial time and effort at the meeting on March 15, if true, the announcement will come as a pre-emptive strike that is not so surprising, yet will serve to allay any illusion that the DPVA functions for the benefit of its members. And it will be good news for the Republican Party of Virginia, despite themselves, because it would guarantee that the DPVA will lack the focus required to maintain control of the State Senate beyond 2015. The best part of this ham-handed move is that it alienates the party members who reside in districts that are currently held by Republicans; as in the grassroots members who the DPVA needs the most to accomplish any gains anywhere. While a competent, experienced, incumbent Executive Director would be able to manipulate a marionette Chair with one hand, it will probably require both hands just to keep the ship steady in the heavy rolls that can be anticipated with the staff changes that have already taken place. Advice to the powers that be: don't ask for unanimous consent or acclamation at the Central Committee. It doesn't exist. Update: The revised version from the RTD.

Will Wonders Never Cease? Top VA Repubs Call for Fitzsimmonds to Resign Over Misogynistic Remark

Amazing. Virginia House of Delegates Speaker William Howell and two of his lieutenants are calling on the state Republican Party's treasurer to resign over his use of a slang term for female genitalia in a Facebook discussion about a female GOP legislator."The comments made recently by Bob FitzSimmonds are offensive and have no place in mainstream society or our political discourse," reads a statement issued by Howell, Majority Leader Kirk Cox of Colonial Heights and Fairfax County Del. Tim Hugo. "These comments are not representative of the House Republican Caucus or the Republican Party of Virginia," continued the statement issued Thursday. "They do not reflect our values or principles and they are deeply inconsistent with the tone and tenor we believe is appropriate for public debate." Of course, Fitzsimmonds is just one of many, many Virginia Republicans who have made misogynistic and otherwise bigoted (e.g., homophobic) remarks. For instance, Sen. Stephen Martin (R) earlier this week called women "the child's host (some refer to them as mothers)," while raging against pro-choice advocates as "very sick people." When are Republicans going to denounce HIM or call on HIM to resign?!?Let's also not forget that House Speaker Howell himself had this little incident, in which he demeaned ProgressVA head Anna Scholl as  apparently not being smart enough to understand anything but "little enough words." Finally, we haven't even mentioned the actual policies Republicans push with regards to women's health and reproductive freedom, most of which seem to be aimed at wildly unhelpful things like defunding Planned Parenthood, requiring intrusive and medically unnecessary ultrasounds, selectively harassing women's health clinics, and keeping poor women and their kids from gaining access to high-quality and affordable health care. Hence, the "war on women" phrase, which Republicans get so indignant about, probably because they know they have no substantive response to it, and also because it kills them politically. And yes, they richly deserve to be hurt politically for this extremist, anti-women lunacy. P.S. The sad thing is, Fitzsimmonds' comments (and Martin's, and Howell's towards Anna Scholl, and so many others) actually ARE "representative of the House Republican Caucus or the Republican Party of Virginia" and actually DO "reflect {their} values or principles." UPDATE: RPV Chair Pat Mullins, who has never seemed bothered by all sorts of offensive remarks (e.g., by Ken Cuccinelli, EW Jackson, Mark Obenshain, etc, etc, etc.) has commented and revealed the REAL reason why top Republicans are calling for Fitzsimmonds to resign -- because his remarks "give the media and Democrats an excuse to talk about anything other than the impact of their disastrous policies on our Commonwealth and country." Hahahahaha.

First Major 8th CD Straw Poll Coming Up in Mt. Vernon: Expected Order of Finish

One of my fondest memories of the 2006 Jim Webb for Senate campaign was Webb's shocking upset of Harris Miller at Gerry Connolly's St. Patrick's Day "Fete" and straw poll. In addition to being a great deal of fun, that one might actually be an example of a straw poll that: a) made a difference in the race; and b) fairly accurately predicted the results (Webb won the straw poll 58%-42% and went on to win Fairfax County 61%-39%). But Webb's straw poll victory in 2006 was probably more the exception than the rule, as I wrote about here.Having said all that, two Democratic 8th CD straw polls are coming up soon - the Mt. Vernon Democrats' event on Saturday evening, March 1, and Rep. Connolly's St. Patrick's Day "fete" on...yep,  you guessed it, St. Patrick's Day! :)  Here are my expectations for the candidates at the Mt. Vernon straw poll (note: last year, Aneesh Chopra and Mark Herring won this poll, with Justin Fairfax doing very well). Obviously, there's a lot of uncertainty in straw polls, so this post is more to get a conversation started than anything else. Still, these are my best guesses. What are yours? TOP TIER 1. Don Beyer: The event is being held at Don Beyer Volvo in Mt. Vernon (note that this fundraiser has been held at that location for years, and is not being specifically held there this year for any reason, such as to benefit Don Beyer). My understanding is that Beyer has been very helpful to the Mt. Vernon Democratic Committee for years, so obviously he knows a ton of people there. Plus, Beyer should have the highest name ID, given that he was Lt. Governor of Virginia and the Democratic nominee for Governor in 1997. That's a pretty big "home-field advantage" as far as I can tell. Beyer should certainly be a favorite to win this thing or come very close to winning it. 2. Lavern Chatman: She has deep ties to Alexandria, including the fact that she attended Mt. Vernon High School. Mt. Vernon/US1 also has a large African American population, so an African-American candidate like Chatman certainly could perform well at the Mt. Vernon straw poll - obviously, if she can get her people out. Also, Chatman also has Mt. Vernon native (and former House of Delegates candidate) Jack Dobbyn, who was the Master of Ceremonies at last year's Mt. Vernon Democratic Committee Mardi Gras party and straw poll, as her finance director. Finally, I've been told that Chatman has boatloads of money, so she certainly can afford to help supporters attend this event. She really should finish in the top 2 at this event. 3. Sen. Adam Ebbin: His State Senate district takes in a good chunk of Mt. Vernon (my understanding is that the Mt. Vernon precincts vote fairly heavily in primaries), and he is well known in the Mt. Vernon area. In 2011, Ebbin won the Mt. Vernon straw poll in the 30th District State Senate Democratic primary. Although he's busy in Richmond, where the General Assembly remains in session for a couple more weeks, Ebbin should do well (e.g., top 2 or 3 candidates) in this straw poll. 4. Del. Mark Sickles: His district includes parts of Mt. Vernon, and he also has been endorsed by Sen. Toddy Puller, who represents parts of Mt. Vernon. Sickles should also be a favorite to do quite well (top 3 or 4) in this straw poll, with the only caveat that he's busy in Richmond right now, with the General Assembly in session. It will also be interesting to see if Sickles' support for car title lenders will hurt him in Mt. Vernon, where anti-car-title-loan sentiment is strong. {UPDATE: Del. Sickles called me to argue that he isn't any different than a number of Democrats, including some running against him, on bills like this one (96-2 vote on "SB 606 Motor vehicle title loans; establishes requirements, penalties." - Ebbin, Herring and Hope all voted for it). On the other hand, on this bill ("SB 1367 Motor vehicle title loans; loans to nonresidents"), Sickles voted yes, while Ebbin, Herring and Hope voted no. To read more about that bill, see Rosalind Helderman's article here. In general, I think it's fair to say that Del. Sickles believes these types of loans are necessary because there aren't viable alternatives for a lot of people, so we need to regulate the industry as long as it exists. I'd argue that the government needs to provide viable alternatives so that godawful industries like this aren't needed and go out of business. The question is whether or not Sickles is substantively different from his opponents on car title lending and/or payday lending. Clearly, he voted differently than his Democratic opponents on SB1367, so I guess in the end it comes down to what you think of SB1367. I hope this issue is thoroughly debated in coming months.}

There's More... :: (26 Comments, 506 words in story)

MIDDLE TIER 5. Mayor Bill Euille: He's been Mayor of Alexandria for over a decade, so you'd think he'd have support (or be able to convince his supporters to drive) a few miles south in Mt. Vernon. Euille should at least do decently in this straw poll. 6. Del. Charniele Herring: She's from Alexandria, although not Mt. Vernon, but she's had a chance as DPVA Chair (and as a major campaign surrogate for Terry McAuliffe) to get a lot better known all throughout Virginia the past 14 months or so. Currently, she's tied up in Richmond as the General Assembly is in session. Still, she should do pretty well in this straw poll. If not, it's probably a sign that her campaign has not really gotten going yet. 6. Del. Patrick Hope: Represents North Arlington in the House of Delegates, with no ties to Mt. Vernon as far as I'm aware. Also, as with Del. Lopez, Hope is tied up in Richmond to a large degree until session ends in a couple weeks (although obviously he has a campaign team that isn't in Richmond and can focus on this event and others). Overall, I wouldn't expect Hope to finish towards the top of this straw poll, but demonstrating an ability to motivate 100 or so supporters to make the drive to Mt. Vernon would really show something positive here about his organization. 6. Del. Alfonso Lopez: Represents South Arlington in the House of Delegates, with no specific ties to Mt. Vernon as far as I'm aware. On the other hand, this is an opportunity for Lopez to show he can seriously compete in one of the most heavily Latino areas of the 8th CD. As with the other General Assembly members on this list, Lopez is still tied up in Richmond for the most part, so one question is how much time his campaign has put into preparing for this.[NOTE: That was not a mistake; I put the last three candidates in a 3-way tie for 6th place...] BOTTOM TIER 9. Derek Hyra: He's from Alexandria, but I'm not sure he's very well known there. Also, he just announced his candidacy, so it would be surprising if he'd be able to get organized for this straw poll. I'd expect him to finish towards the bottom in this one. 10. Mark Levine: He might be known somewhat through his hosting of a popular political show at Fairfax County Public Access TV, but other than that, I'm not sure Levine has any ties to Mt. Vernon or much name recognition. I'd expect him to finish towards the bottom of this particular straw poll, unless he pays to bring in a (large) bunch of supporters. 11. Bruce Shuttleworth: From Arlington, with no ties that I'm aware of to Mt. Vernon. Also, I doubt many people in that part of the district know who Shuttleworth is. He should finish at or near the bottom, unless he pays to bring in a (large) bunch of supporters.

Virginia GOP Sen. Steve Martin Calls Women "the child's host (some refer to them as mothers)"

Another Republican shows his utter contempt for women, referring to them as "the child's host (some refer to them as mothers)."  Note that Sen. Steve Martin (R, of course) has attempted to cover his tracks, changing "the child's host" language to "the bearer of the child." Unfortunately for Martin, there's such a thing as "screen shots," so he can run but he can't hide.  Here's the current language on his page...we'll see how many more times he tries to change it, or delete it or whatever. Also, I can't wait to hear the condemnations from other Virginia Republicans for Martin's appalling misogyny. We're waiting... P.S. Martin also calls pro-choice advocates "really sick people." Steve Martin I received a Valentines Card today with a two tone red heart on the front above the words, "Don't break our hearts." Inside was the following message: "On behalf of women's Heath advocates across Virginia, we are disappointed in your record of voting to restrict access to critical healthcare for women and families. All women deserve access to their full range of reproductive health options - including preventing unintentional pregnancies, raising healthy children, and choosing safe, legal abortion - and your votes only make it more difficult for Virginians to plan and provide for their families. We are watching your actions closely, and hope that you will reconsider your position on this critical issue. Please don't break our hearts. - The Virginia Pro-Choice Coalition"    ~ How very heart warming - all while using ill defined terms. "Raising healthy children" in the context of access to abortions speaks only to the ability to "kill unhealthy children." Do they not see the sickness of that argument? If it's your expectation that I should support such nonsense, I will be breaking your heart. You can count on me to never get in the way of you "preventing" an unintentional pregnancy." I'm not actually sure what that means, because if it's "unintentional" you must have been trying to prevent it. And, I don't expect to be in the room or will I do anything to prevent you from obtaining a contraceptive. However, once a child does exist in your womb, I'm not going to assume a right to kill it just because the bearer of the child (some refer to them as mothers) doesn't want it to remain alive.  We finally get to to the truth at the end of that same line. What they want is access to "safe, legal abortions," any time one might be desired. Okay, then why did you write all the rest of that bologna about raising healthy children (by killing the unhealthy ones), having access to healthcare (which you do), and preventing unwanted pregnancies (don't have unprotected sex)? Such nonsense, supposed adults have written, to celebrate love, on Valentines. These folks are really sick people!

Virginia 10th CD: Democrats Unite Around John Foust; Republicans Splinter Among Extremists

It's fascinating to watch what's been going on in Virginia's 10th Congressional District, where Rep. Frank Wolf is retiring after many, many, many years in office (the last few of which have been focused on the non-scandal of Benghazeeeeeeeeeeeeeee!). As recently as a few weeks ago, it looked like it would be a coronation, essentially, for Republican "attack dog," Del. Barbara Comstock, while Democrats might fight it out in a tough contest between highly popular and respected Fairfax County Board member John Foust and Shenandoah University Professor Karen Schultz. Well, what a difference a few weeks makes! A few items since then.1. Washington Post reporter Ben Pershing tweeted on Wednesday that "In email, Karen Schultz publicly confirms she's not running for #VA10 Dem nod." That makes it extremely likely Foust will be the Democratic nominee, that the party will be united heading into the General Election, and that we'll have our best shot in many years to take back this "swing" ("purple") Congressional district. 2. Meanwhile, on the Republican/Tea Party side, it's gotten a lot more entertaining - popcorn please! - as former 11th CD GOP Congressional nominee Keith Fimian has endorsed Del. Bob Marshall over Barbara Comstock (and apparently signed on as Marshall's finance chair - Fimian says "I'm confident that Bob can win the 10th Congressional District. I intend to help him raise the funds to attain that objective."), taking a bunch of hard shots at the latter, such as: *"We don't need more Republicans in Congress who have spent careers inside the beltway in government, lobbying and politics." *"We don't need more Republicans in Congress who will promise one thing on the campaign trail or take a few good votes at the state or local level in order to climb the political ladder." *"We don't need more Republicans in Congress who will vote with John Boehner over the interests of the people they serve in order to secure a leadership position." Ouch - the truth hurts! Fimian adds that he's "proud to announce that I will serve on Bob Marshall's Finance Committee." Again, lots more popcorn is in order. :) 3. Comstock has basically been shut out in Richmond, with almost every one of the bills she's patroned being "continued" until 2015, "left" in committee, or otherwide deep-sixed. 4. Marshall has gotten a lot of positive publicity and kudos among far right wingnuts for his strident defense of Virginia's anti-LGBT-marriage amendment (which he co-authored). While crazy from a non-homophobe's perspective, this kind of stuff could play VERY well among the hard-core electorate likely to vote in a Republican "firehouse primary," which is how the 10th CD will select its 2014 nominee for Congress. 5. The Comstock vs. Marshall fight has already prompted one blog war in the Virginia  right-o-sphere (between supporters of the two main Republican candidates for the 10th CD GOP nomination, with accusations of payola being thrown around), with likely more to come. Gotta love it. :) Bottom line: Comstock remains the odds-on favorite for the nomination, mainly because she has access to large sums of money from connections she made in the George W. Bush administration, as well as work she did for Tom DeLay, for Dick Cheney's pal "Scooter" Libby, and for Willard "Mitt" Romney. Still, Marshall has a shot, and if nothing else he could force the already right-wing Comstock even further into the far-right-wing fever swamps, while distracting her for several months and making her spend money to fight off his challenge. For Democrats, it certainly will be fun to watch. Meanwhile, a strong Democratic nominee - John Foust, almost certainly - will await whoever emerges from the Teapublican meat grinder.

Del. Patrick Hope Wins First Blue Virginia 8th CD Poll with 33% of Vote

With 102 votes in our first poll of who Blue Virginia registered users support in the 8th CD Democratic nominating contest, Del. Patrick Hope finished in first place with 33% of the votes. Hope was followed by Sen. Adam Ebbin (23%), Mark Levine (18%), Don Beyer (10%), Del. Alfonso Lopez (8%), Del. Charniele Herring (3%), Mayor Bill Euille (2%), Lavern Chatman (2%), Del. Mark Sickles (2%), and Bruce Shuttleworth (0%). Of course, no online poll is scientific in any way, but they can be interesting in the sense of which campaign tries hardest to win them (and is the most organized/determined to do so).P.S. For my reviews of all these candidates, see the upper left corner of the page and click on the candidate(s) you're interested in. Also note that this poll began prior to Derek Hyra's announcement, so he was not included.

A Better DPVA in Depth - Part 1: Money

by Dave

Part 1 of my series (leading up to the next DPVA meeting) examining how DPVA can be the best state party possible.

Dave Leichtman is the DPVA Vice-chair for Technology and Communications

A few weeks ago, I wrote about how DPVA could seize on the opportunity created by our current leadership transition to become a better, stronger Party (Read: "A Better DPVA"). I think we're off to a decent start. The current Chair has mostly recused herself of day-to-day duties, and the selection of the next ED appears likely up to her successor - both good things. But the most worrying development during this transition has been the lack of communication and dialogue. For some reason, people seem to think it's heretical to discuss how Virginia Dems can do better. To that I say, we cannot afford to be silent. The election of a new Chair is just 3 weeks away, and with exactly 0 publicly declared candidates, I fear we're headed toward another coronation orchestrated by the Powers That Be - one accompanied (like last time) with no conversation and no discussion. The least we can do is talk about it here!

This week a Politico editorial bemoaned the waning importance and increased irrelevance of state parties around the country (Read: "Last call for state parties?"). I agree that if we do nothing, if we remain silent and nobody listens, then yes we'll be headed that way. But state parties can play a vital role in how we train and build local committees. And they can provide crucial ground game and long-term cost savings if only higher-ups can see the benefits and invest wisely.

The first step in any successful venture is dialogue. So let's talk! I'd like to examine various aspects of DPVA in depth over the next t3 weeks leading to the Chair's election. Today, let's start with Money.

Two troubling things have occurred with DPVA's monetary situation over the last few years, and I've covered them before:1) The statewide Coordinated Campaign has branched off into its own shadow party. This is unaccountable and dangerous. There are staffers hired by non-DPVA personnel who are managing giant budgets, to which the current DPVA leadership are completely blind. There is no oversight or accountability, and at some point this will lead to trouble - jail time or fines. Alarmist, you say? It already happened about 10 years ago when the Coordinated didn't file proper FEC paperwork. This led to massive fines levied against DPVA, in whose name the money was being spent. The current situation makes this, and worse, even more likely to happen. 2) The statewide campaigns have sucked the fundraising air out of the room. By actively giving the current Chair and the Party no fundraising goals, Terry McAuliffe essentially became DPVA's "sugar daddy." Sounds cushy - somebody else does all the fundraising for you? What's not to love? But that means they get to decide how much you spend. One would like to think the statewide campaigns are high-minded. But the second they feel threatened - say a former RNC Chair decides to run for Senate - well, then they're almost obligated to keep all the money for themselves and make no investments in the Party. Now this situation isn't irreversible. It simply takes the will to fix it, and a few people in power to realize the potential inherent in the Party. Here's a few ways we could solve this dilemma. 1) Give the DPVA Steering Committee at least some amount of insight into the Coordinated Campaign budget. Honestly, the DPVA by all rights should have to approve the entire budget of both entities. Assuming that's a non-starter, the Coordinated could at least give the Steering Committee quarterly updates on fundraising and spending. 2) And while we're at it, DPVA's Central Committee should require the same for its own budget. Currently, it approves a yearly budget with no interim updates. So the approved budget is essentially worthless as it goes right out the window the second anything material changes. 3) Let DPVA fundraise! Give the next Chair, ED, and Finance Director robust fundraising goals. Believe it or not, fundraising isn't a zero-sum game. People who give are more likely to give again - nonprofits often see up to 1/3 of their yearly fundraising come from repeat donors. A donor who gives to DPVA or to a statewide campaign does not do so exclusively. In fact giving to one primes them for giving to the other (counter-intuitive, but true). So let DPVA do its thing; let it raise money toward funding the kind of committee-building efforts it can successfully execute. 4) Solidify a sustained giving program. The gold standard in philanthropy is the locked-in recurring donor. The Arlington County Democratic Committee funds the largest part of its operation through the $10+/month Roosevelt Society (of which I'm a proud member). The previous DPVA ED floated a program called "20/20" - $20/mo sustained gift toward the goal of goal of taking back the House of Delegates in 2020. This is the best thing we could possibly be pushing right now, but it was given almost no promotion in 2013 (see Item 3 above). At $20/month, it would only take 5,000 sustainers to fund the entire current yearly budget of DPVA. Did that just blow your mind? It should. The Central Committee alone is almost 300 people, and I bet each of them could sign up 15-20 others. Even if we got halfway there, we could make a huge dent and make it possible to increase the yearly budget. 5) Stop spending to $0. We've been promised this every year: "this is the year we stop spending to $0." And every year, we do it anyway "because this election is too important." We'll probably have the same excuse next year. We have to break that vicious cycle. Every year in January, DPVA has to cut staff and scrimp every penny and is often saddled with Coordinated debt that was unplanned for (see Item 1 above). A sustainer program would go a long way toward easing this "necessity" and making the excuse harder. Regardless, we have to plan a cash reserve and resist the urge to spend it. Those are my thoughts on DPVA's money situation. I'd love to hear your opinions. Let's keep the conversation going over the next three weeks. Together we can work toward a better DPVA. But first we have to at least discuss what that means.