blue Virginia

Tuesday Is Primary Day In Virginia

Tuesday is primary day in Virginia and several intraparty races will be decided in preparation for November's elections. Democrats will decide on their candidates for lieutenant governor and attorney general. Senator Ralph Northam (D-6, Norfolk) is facing off against former Obama administration appointee Aneesh Chopra for the nomination for lieutenant governor. Northam, who received a 25 on The Family Foundation Action's 2013 General Assembly Report Card, has the endorsement of Planned Parenthood and has been one of the abortion industry's most vocal apologists. Chopra, who served as Secretary of Technology for then-Governor Tim Kaine, has made public statements that are supportive of the abortion industry and abortion on demand, is supportive of elevating sexual behavior to a protected class, and opposes the "Tebow Bill" (see Blue Virginia). The winner of the nomination will face Republican E.W. Jackson in November.

Democrats also will decide their candidate for attorney general between Senator Mark Herring (D-33, Fairfax) and former federal prosecutor Justin Fairfax. Herring, who received an 18 on TFF Action’s Report Card, also is an ally of the abortion industry in Virginia. Fairfax has made comments in opposition to Virginia's abortion center health and safety standards. The winner will face Republican Mark Obenshain (R-26, Harrisonburg) in November’s general election.

In addition to these two statewide nomination campaigns, there are several House of Delegates primaries in both parties. Follow this link to see if there is a primary in your district for either or both parties. In November, all 100 seats in the House are up for election.

As you know, The Family Foundation is restricted by federal law from endorsing any candidates for office and we do not participate in primaries for either party. Our goal is simply to keep you up to date on the elections that are happening and to ensure that you have the best information available on the candidates' stances on important values issues so that you can make an informed decision.

 

The White House's Response To Virginia's Round One Health Care Win

Perusing liberal blogs today has been a hoot. The Left Wing is in hysterics (for example, see Blue Virginia). At least it uses a nice picture of Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli. More composed, of course, but no less disingenuous, is the White House itself. Stephanie Cutter, writing on its blog, posted the following:

Having failed in the legislative arena, opponents of reform are now turning to the courts in an attempt to overturn the work of the democratically elected branches of government.

The federal government believes this procedural ruling is in error and conflicts with long-standing and well-established legal precedents . . . designed to preserve the "judiciary’s proper role in our system of government" and to ensure that our courts do not become forums for political debates.

Now that this preliminary stage has ended, the government fully expects to prevail on the merits. The Affordable Care Act falls well within Congress’s power to regulate under the Commerce Clause, the Necessary and Proper Clause, and the General Welfare Clause.

So little written, so much nonsense. Regarding activist courts, the Left Wing should know better. Much better. But they often prove not understand the U.S. Constitution — or purposefully misguide: The courts were put in place as a safeguard against government encroachment on individual liberty. So, when the government overreaches (especially when new requirements are established), individuals, localities and states have recourse. It is the check against the ruling class which, if not held back, could easily consolidate all power unto itself. By the White House's logic no law can be overturned as long as it is — by definition — passed by Congress and signed by the president. Absurd!

Real judicial activism is legislating from the bench, rather than undoing a law, or something not previously on the books. So the White House has it only half correct, but it is liberals who, over the decades, when failing to get legislation passed into law, have resorted to seeking decrees from courts to invent laws and "rights" nowhere to be found in the constitution. There was no more frank admission of this than the infamous remark by now-Justice Sonia Sotomayor where she said, "The court of appeals is where policy is made." (See YouTube.)

The White House also cities numerous clauses, a debate it assuredly doesn't want to have — at least not before it finishes debating itself. None of the clauses mentioned empower the government to force people to purchases something they may not use. Knowing this, the Justice Department argued at the hearing to dismiss on July 1 that the law comes under the taxing authority of the constitution. But at every turn, including his campaign and during the shambolic legislative process leading up to the health care vote, Barack Obama and Congressional liberals said it was not a tax bill.

As a candidate, Mr. Obama went so far as to oppose an individual mandate, opposition to which is the thrust of Attorney General Cuccinelli's argument (see news release). That the White House and its own DOJ are on separate pages tells us much and perhaps liberal bloggers need rant at them before taking aim on the attorney general. Even bloggers at the White House.

About Tuesday Night, In Alexandria: Are You Listening Brian Moran?

As mentioned in the previous post, there was a shocking result Tuesday night in Alexandria: A Republican, Frank Fannon IV, and a GOP-endorsed independent, Alicia Hughes (a former Miss Black USA), won seats on the city council by defeating Democrat incumbents (see Washington Post). Hughes, a federal government patent attorney, could not run as a partisan because of the Hatch Act. It was the first Republican election victory to the Alexandria City Council since 2000 (Alexandria Times, here). That's right — Democrats had whitewashed Republicans ever since. If this was Little League, they would have invoked the "mercy rule" long ago.

Of course, many, including GOP establishment types, are tripping all over themselves to talk about a nascent Republican ripple in Northern Virginia, after this and a Fairfax special election win in March, as well as two nail-bitingly close special election losses early this year. Meanwhile, Fox News and Weekly Standard pundit Mary Katherine Ham had her own, somewhat tongue-in-cheek, take (here).

But what caught our eye is not what the Republicans have learned since November or what new campaign techniques they're using to counter the much advanced Democrats, as fascinating as that is (see Alexandria Gazette here), it's what Democrat gubernatorial candidate Brian Moran must learn before the June primary.

As Jim Geraghty of National Review's Campaign Spot blog writes:

"There are also some interesting signals about the upcoming gubernatorial primary and general election. Ginsberg worked a polling place yesterday, and said he saw a supporter of Democratic gubernatorial candidate Terry McAuliffe handing out literature — but not one for the candidate with the local roots, Moran. 'I don't know to what extent the Moran people were working the polls for this election, but this result, coupled with the race for his state House seat, should be reason for some concern on his part.'"

The seeming paradox here is that as Moran as moved further and further to the left (see here), perhaps the most liberal locality in the Commonwealth is edging —granted, at an Eastern Box Turtle's pace — to the middle. Beside last night, his Democrat successor retained his House seat by a mere 16 votes in a January special election. So, if his liberal message isn't resonating there, where will it? Furthermore, whether he wins the Democrat nomination or not, will his campaign have pulled the Dems too far left, even for certain portions of blue Virginia? It all remains to be seen, of course, but the interim trends are fascinating.