By now, many have had the chance to listen to the Bearing Drift podcast that I participated in last night. For those who haven’t, allow me to summarize my choices and my thoughts on them. I will do them in the same order as they appear on the podcast.
Ballot issue #2
Shall Section 14 of Article IV of the Constitution of Virginia be amended by deleting the provision that prohibits the incorporation of churches, a provision that was ruled to be unconstitutional and therefore now is obsolete?
This amendment is basically a housekeeping one. The federal district court for the Western District of Virginia ruled in April 2002 that this provision of the Virginia Constitution is unconstitutional because it violates the federal constitutional right to the free exercise of religion. Falwell v. Miller, 203 F. Supp.2d 624 (W.D.Va. 2002). (Hm, does that qualify for the activist judges thing?)
So, I’m voting YES on this one.
Ballot Issue #3
Shall Section 6 of Article X of the Constitution of Virginia be amended to authorize legislation to permit localities to provide a partial exemption from real property taxes for real estate with new structures and improvements in conservation, redevelopment, or rehabilitation areas?
I have some misgivings about this. Will this create displacement of people located in “conservation, redevelopment or rehabilitation areas?” I don’t know. But it looks like to me that this will result in a loosening of the Dillon Rule. Anything that gives localities more freedom to determine their own destiny will get my support. I’m voting YES.
Ballot Issue #1
Shall Article I (the Bill of Rights) of the Constitution of Virginia be amended to state:
“That only a union between one man and one woman may be a marriage valid in or recognized by this Commonwealth and its political subdivisions.
This Commonwealth and its political subdivisions shall not create or recognize a legal status for relationships of unmarried individuals that intends to approximate the design, qualities, significance, or effects of marriage. Nor shall this Commonwealth or its political subdivisions create or recognize another union, partnership, or other legal status to which is assigned the rights, benefits, obligations, qualities, or effects of marriage.”?
I’ve been pretty clear on this. I’m voting NO.
Congressional District 2
I believe that this country has gone in the wrong direction over the past six years. We’ve tried it their way and we have a mess: the war in Iraq, huge deficits, 40 million people without healthcare, our education system nearly in shambles. So I think we need to try another direction. As the result, I’ll be casting my vote for Phil Kellam.
This has not been an easy decision. I am quite unhappy with Kellam’s decision to support the so-called Marriage Amendment, and I’ve told him so almost every time I’ve seen him. I consider Thelma Drake a friend, even though we disagree on just about everything. The fact that she supports the amendment as well had no bearing on my decision; I do not expect her to be against it, as I think it is part of her set of deeply held beliefs. I don’t know that Kellam’s support of the amendment comes from that same place.
The other factor in my decision was something that was mentioned in the Pilot editorial, which reinforced something I had discussed with a delegate friend of mine earlier this year. The Democrats will obtain a majority in the House and the 2nd deserves to be represented by a member of the majority party. I do believe that Drake’s influence would be reduced by a Democratic majority.
Senate
There should have never been any doubt that I would not be voting for George Allen. I think I’ve been pretty clear on that in my postings on this blog. I remain lukewarm to Jim Webb, but I have to say that his little talk to Kellam on the amendment at Delelgate Lionell Spruill’s breakfast made an impression. The man has some convictions. Add to that the possibility that electing Webb will give the Democrats the majority in the Senate, presenting an opportunity for our country to change direction, then making the decision was a bit easier for me. I’ll be voting for Jim Webb.
Technorati Tags: Virginia Marriage Amendment, Virginia Ballot Issues, Phil Kellam, Jim Webb
VIVIAN J. PAIGE | All Politics is Local 
We’ll be voting the same way, Vivian, but I’ll be voting for Webb and Kellam with much more passion and conviction. I think Kellam will be a great fiscal watchdog in the House, and I think Webb has the potential to be one of the greatest statewide leaders Dems have seen in a longtime.
Thanks for the write up, Vivian. A few days ago you wrote a post that asked who would potentially influence our vote by endorsing a particular candidate or issue. Although I already planned on voting the same way as you (expect for the fact that I’m in the 11th CD, where I’ll be voting for Andy Hurst), I can honestly say that your endorsement would one that I’d strongly consider while making my voting decisions.
Vivian, although I agree with your vote on Constitutional Amendment 3 (and your other choices too, although I’ll be voting for Bobby Scott myself), I’m afraid I don’t see any loosening of the Dillon Rule there. The change only permits the General Assembly to enact statutes providing these exemptions. The localities still have to make their usual pilgrimages to the Holy City to seek favor from the mighties of the Assembly. And, if they retain their usual view of their privileges, that will mean the GA will probably insist on authorizing each individual “redevelopment area”.
There will be no real delegation to the cities. There will just be a succession of charter changes and other special legislation, project by project, each requiring a 2/3 (or is it 3/4?) vote of each house.
Abolishing the Dillon Rule constructs – now *there’s* a constitutional amendment I could get behind . . .
Randy – you could be right, if the legislature decides to control all of this. I’m hoping that they won’t go that far.
Bryan – thanks for the kind words.
Great podcast – excellent discussion. Your mike left you at the wrong time, but I enjoyed listening to all 45 minutes of the discussion. Will you be part of next week’s edition? Is that Sunday night?
On the choices, you and I agree right down the line – I just wish I had a chance to vote for Phil Kellam. I’m in Bobby Scott’s district – I love Bobby Scott, but he doesn’ t need my vote as much as Kellam does.
The Dillon rule has to go. If this is not going to make a dent in it, there has to be another way.
And I concur with Bryan. Your endorsement means a lot to me as well. I respect your political experience, views and conclusions immensely.
I appreciate the kind words. I think my “endorsements” just reinforce what y’all already know, though.
Yes, I’ll be on next week’s podcast. It will get posted late Sunday night, if all goes according to plan.
As for the Dillon Rule – there is no will in Richmond to give up the power they enjoy. I don’t see anything major happening in this arena any time soon.
Maybe if the people make it an issue, the GA will listen.
Then again, maybe not. 😦