• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

State Democrats lose legal battle to reel in Republican power

va_tazdad

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 23, 2009
Messages
1,162
Location
Richmond, Virginia, USA
http://www.wtvr.com/news/wtvr-state-senate-democrats-lawsuit-20111216,0,2768754.story?track=rss


RICHMOND, VA (WTVR) - A Richmond judge refused to issue an injunction Friday that would take some power away from Republican Virginia Lt. Governor Bill Bolling, the Washington Post reported.

State Senator Donald McEachin (D - Henrico) filed the suit claiming while the Lt. Governor did have the power to cast the tie-breaking vote in a deadlocked state Senate, he did not have the power to break ties when deciding the Senate's power structure and committee appointments.

"While I respectfully disagree with the outcome, it was purely a procedural decision," Sen. McEachin said in a statement. "The judge determined that the matter was not ripe for a final determination on the merits. The opinion was not a decision on the merits of whether the Lieutenant Governor can vote on Senate organization."

Sen. McEachin said state Democrats would explore their options and asked Republicans to respect past history.

"The Senate is evenly divided, 20-20 so committees and responsibilities and power should be divided to reflect that even split, just as the Republicans said in 1996. Even then Governor Allen spoke to the need for parity under these same circumstances," Sen. McEachin said.



Well, I guess there is some sanity on the bench after all.
 

user

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Feb 12, 2009
Messages
2,516
Location
Northern Piedmont
Yeah, respect the history as much as the dems respected the rules last term?

I'd say that the historical pattern, at this point, is that which the Democratic members established in the prior session. There ain't no goin' back.
 

Grapeshot

Legendary Warrior
Joined
May 21, 2006
Messages
35,317
Location
Valhalla
I'd say that the historical pattern, at this point, is that which the Democratic members established in the justprior session. There ain't no goin' back.
...........................^
...........Point of clarification, councilor.

......That's why we call it "Living History" :lol:
 

TFred

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 13, 2008
Messages
7,750
Location
Most historic town in, Virginia, USA
I'd say that the historical pattern, at this point, is that which the Democratic members established in the prior session. There ain't no goin' back.
Do you mean to say that you think that Senate subcommittees will continue to kill bills in violation of the rules from now on, no matter who is in charge?

TFred
 

peter nap

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Oct 16, 2007
Messages
13,551
Location
Valhalla
Do you mean to say that you think that Senate subcommittees will continue to kill bills in violation of the rules from now on, no matter who is in charge?

TFred

Make a note to ask that very question of the members on Lobby day, TFred.
I already have asked the question of a member who is on the committee, but not the sub committee.
 

TFred

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 13, 2008
Messages
7,750
Location
Most historic town in, Virginia, USA
Make a note to ask that very question of the members on Lobby day, TFred.
I already have asked the question of a member who is on the committee, but not the sub committee.
Seems to me that the decision will be made by the chair of the full committee... they would seem to have the call on whether or not to put the bills before a full vote or not. No?

TFred
 

peter nap

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Oct 16, 2007
Messages
13,551
Location
Valhalla
Seems to me that the decision will be made by the chair of the full committee... they would seem to have the call on whether or not to put the bills before a full vote or not. No?

TFred


Yes, that's correct TFred but I'm going on the assumption (I know, I know)...that Saslaw and Marsh will no longer be assigning the bills.
Despite the court decision, there is still a great deal of uncertainty though.

My discussions have centered around an honest game where our bills are actually considered. Just think of a Blackjack game where the dealer who had always dealt from the bottom of the deck, has now been demoted to just a player. He's still crooked but the only cards he has are his.
 

Grapeshot

Legendary Warrior
Joined
May 21, 2006
Messages
35,317
Location
Valhalla
...snip...My discussions have centered around an honest game where our bills are actually considered. Just think of a Blackjack game where the dealer who had always dealt from the bottom of the deck, has now been demoted to just a player. He's still crooked but the only cards he has are his.

The cards they dealt themselves last year:
as.gif
ks.gif
qs.gif
js.gif
ts.gif



Left holding this for the next sessionr:
 

Repeater

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 5, 2007
Messages
2,498
Location
Richmond, Virginia, USA
I'd say that the historical pattern, at this point, is that which the Democratic members established in the prior session. There ain't no goin' back.

More likely than not the Demon Caucus will consider the 'Wisconsin Option' and perhaps seek sanctuary in the District, thus depriving the Senate of its constitutionally mandated quorum.

Places your bets.
 

Old Virginia Joe

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 25, 2010
Messages
365
Location
SE Va., , Occupied CSA
I was not paying attention to this issue back when Allen was quoted.

Are we saying that the Republicans in Allen's day (1) made nice with the Dems, but that in the last session (2), under the exact same situation the Dems did not play nice with the Republicans?

And, that now, in THIRD situation (3), the Dems want the GOP to ignore the last session deal, and go back to quoting Allen in the first scenario? Do I have this right?

If so, why isn't some GOP person speaking in such simple terms to the media, so I did not have to come to OCDO to understand this trickery? If I have it wrong, correct me, please.
 

Repeater

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 5, 2007
Messages
2,498
Location
Richmond, Virginia, USA
McEachin now claims Virginians WANT power-sharing -- it's only fair!

I was not paying attention to this issue back when Allen was quoted.

Are we saying that the Republicans in Allen's day (1) made nice with the Dems, but that in the last session (2), under the exact same situation the Dems did not play nice with the Republicans?

And, that now, in THIRD situation (3), the Dems want the GOP to ignore the last session deal, and go back to quoting Allen in the first scenario? Do I have this right?

If so, why isn't some GOP person speaking in such simple terms to the media, so I did not have to come to OCDO to understand this trickery? If I have it wrong, correct me, please.

Well, McEachin first whines:

McEachin on power sharing lawsuit
The opinion was not a decision on the merits of whether the Lieutenant Governor can vote on Senate organization.

"I call on the Republicans to respect the will of the voters and past history. The senate is evenly divided, 20-20 so committees and responsibilities and power should be divided to reflect that even split, just as the Republicans said in 1996. Even then Governor Allen spoke to the need for parity under these same circumstances.

"The Senate Democratic caucus will continue to explore all its options, both legal and procedural, to resolve this issue in a way that reflects the actual outcome on election day, not an arrogant partisan power grab, totally to the benefit of one Party that does not reflect a majority of the Senate," Senator McEachin concluded.

Now, the Donald is citing a new poll:

McEachin reacts to PPP poll on Power Sharing
Senator A. Donald McEachin (D-Henrico) noted that that the PPP Poll released today showed that Virginians, by an absolute majority, want power shared in the State Senate. Senator McEachin said, “As I would have expected, the inherent fairness of Virginians, their interests in seeing the parties work together to find real solutions and not engage in partisan posturing, was further demonstrated today by the PPP Poll results.

“Over half of respondents, 55%, believe that power should be shared in the Virginia State Senate. These voters, constituents of both Democrats and Republicans, recognize that the Election day results created an evenly divided Senate and, therefore, the Senate should organize in a way reflective of those results.

“I would ask my colleagues on the other side of the aisle to respect not only the Election Day outcome, but this further indicator, from a scientific poll, that demonstrates that Virginians want parity and power-sharing. As elected legislators, representatives of the people, we should respond to Virginians’ needs and perspectives and follow their directives.”

It's scientific -- Well, that settles it, then!!

Um, why don't we see what the Public Policy Polling survey actually says:
That's how Virginians generally feel about the issue ... but when it comes specifically to whether they think Bill Bolling should be able to cast a tie breaking vote on Senate organization voters say yes by a 37-34 margin and independents side with the Republican point of view on the issue by a 41/37 spread.

Takeaway: in theory voters think there should be power sharing but they also think Bolling has the right to break the tie...so they're basically sending a message to the GOP that it should share power, even if it doesn't have to.

Revised comment: It's scientific; the GOP doesn't have to -- Well, that settles it, then!!
 

VApatriot

Regular Member
Joined
May 8, 2006
Messages
998
Location
Burke/Blacksburg, Virginia, USA
If we supposedly "want power sharing," why did Virginians elect a Republican governor, Lt. governor, attorney general, and house of delegates and cast 43% more votes for Republican state senate candidates?

Specifically, why did we elect a Republican Lt. Governor, other than to shift the control of power in just such a situation?
 

Grapeshot

Legendary Warrior
Joined
May 21, 2006
Messages
35,317
Location
Valhalla
If we supposedly "want power sharing," why did Virginians elect a Republican governor, Lt. governor, attorney general, and house of delegates and cast 43% more votes for Republican state senate candidates?

Specifically, why did we elect a Republican Lt. Governor, other than to shift the control of power in just such a situation?

Yep - them's the facts. :cool:
 
Top