What David Marsden Says in Front of Friendly Audiences

Scenes from a Debate

This past fall, my congregation hosted a debate between David Marsden and Kerry Bolognese for the 41^st House of Delegates seat. The congregation I attend is much more liberal than conservative, politically speaking, though people of all political stripes are always given a gracious welcome. Little did Mr. Marsden know that this blogger was present.

During the debate, the candidates were asked several questions submitted by congregation members. I am not going to recount every question and answer here. However, given Delegate Marsden’s claim to being “moderate,” I think that the highlights of his responses in a recent forum should be shared with the public.

David Marsden attacked the idea of a tax cut. He said that programs such as schools and roads that compete for funding would get hurt. He wants to give better funding to community colleges when the economy recovers. Unlike Kerry Bolognese, Marsden made no commitment to monitoring how money is actually spent.

Marsden insists that as a low tax State, Virginia does not have the money to get work done. The fact that Northern Virginia gets back only 30% of its highway dollars did not seem to bother him. Rather, he said that the 17-cent per gallon gas tax does not buy what it used to (despite the fact that Northern Virginia has a lot more people paying this tax).

As far as public-private partnerships are concerned, David Marsden thinks that the “public” part is just not there. Apparently, Northern Virginia does not have a lot of “shovel-ready” projects. Apparently, extending Metro to Fort Belvoir is a good idea in Marsden’s mind. (Ah, but aren’t we lacking in money?)

Marsden was most interesting when asked about waste that can be eliminated. When Kerry Bolognese recounted the Wilder Commission as well as specific items (and given the short time given for responses, no one can give a complete list), Marsden’s attitude was that it was like finding “$2.98 from couch cushions.” (his words) He thinks that we have reached a limit as far as cost savings are concerned while spending “needs” have been raised.

When asked about what pet project he would want to fund for the 41^st District, Marsden responded that he had introduced three bills to help clean up the Chesapeake Bay. These bills could create jobs for watermen. Marsden did not mention how many Chesapeake Bay watermen lived in Burke and Springfield.

On card check issues, when Bolognese noted what a disaster it would be, Marsden insisted that card check was compatible with small businesses. Of course, he gave the usual union line about how we owe having weekends to unions. He claims that he would only apply card check to large employers, though he did not give a specific figure.

When asked about fighting crime and gangs, David Marsden did support prosecution. He also mentioned having gang prevention activities and outlawing pneumatic weapons. Kerry Bolognese pointed out that Marsden opposed HB 1626, which would allow homeowners to protect themselves. Also, on crime issues, Marsden supports closing “loopholes” at gun shows and supports legislation to mandate background checks.

Finally, Marsden was amusing on other energy and environmental issues. He supports environmental initiatives that are “fiscally sound’ (of course), but then he said he supported setting up windmills in an old Ford plant. Marsden came out opposing drilling off the coast of Virginia, giving the excuse that it would interfere with Navy bombing exercises. He must be glad that his opponent in the State Senate race knows a thing or two about the Navy!

In summary, while Marsden has done a lot of admirable work in the juvenile justice field, has a long record of public service, and isn’t as radically pro-abortion as some of his Democratic colleagues, he is still very much out of touch with voters of the 37^th District and rather uncurious about government accountability. You would think someone with the long public service record he claims would understand where to look for cost savings, but perhaps David Marsden has grown comfortable in the fact that government runs on someone else’s money. Perhaps, in front of an audience he perceives as more liberal, he could be more candid about the kind of person he is. Voters of the 37^th District will be well-served by electing Steve Hunt as the next State Senator to get quality representation in Richmond.

Now We Are ALL John Galt

Ayn Rand wanted Farrah Fawcett to star as Dagny Taggart.

Hat tip: The Corner at National Review Online.

If you haven't read the classic novel Atlas Shrugged, you should. The premise of the novel is to illustrate a world in which all the people of ability go on strike. The author, Ayn Rand (1905 - 1982), features prominently as heroine Dagny Taggart, the Operating Vice President of her family business, the Taggart Transcontinental Railroad. As Dagny tries to run the railroad despite the best efforts of her brother James (the company President and a big supporter of bureaucracy), she finds that everyone she needs to accomplish any necessary task quits and disappears. Soon, she starts to suspect a destroyer at work. Along the way, the novel describes not only Dagny Taggart's search for this destroyer, but also the inventor of a miraculous motor she found in the ruins of an abandoned auto plant, and also love in her own life. The government, in the meantime, grows in size, scope, and oppressiveness as it lurches from one crisis to another (while failing to admit that the government's own actions are what make the situation worse). There is a running gag through the book in which everyone seems to say "Who is John Galt?" as if nothing matters and no one can to anything to change the deteriorating economic situation.

The book is very difficult reading, as Ayn Rand frequently interrupts the plot to go on a one or two or 60-page objectivist philosophy stream of consciousness rant. Many people find that they either really love or really hate the book. However, sales of this book (first published in 1957) have been soaring in recent months, especially as the novel is rather predictive of the consequences of a growing Federal government that makes big giveaways to unions and other special interests (like we are experiencing now).

It is interesting that Ayn Rand wanted Farrah Fawcett to be her Dagny Taggart. What guy wouldn't have wanted to be her John Galt?

Taking People for Granted

Hat tip: The Corner at National Review Online



Why is anyone surprised about Obama’s cancellation of the DC Voucher program? This will continue to happen as long as the Democrats feel free to take minority votes for granted. As the advice columnists remind us, people take advantage of you as long as you let them!

So let’s apply Janeane Garofalo’s logic to this situation. Remember how she said that those of us who opposed President Obama’s election did so because we “hate that a black guy is in the White House?” Well, I guess those people who are against vouchers just don’t want black children to succeed!

Union Dues Hard at Work

The latest Education Intelligence Agency Communiqué has an interesting item about how the teachers’ unions spend their members (often forced) dues money. It seems that without any major collective bargaining issues or ballot issues directly related to education, the union has a little more money than they know what to do with. But do you think the unions would ever return a surplus to its members? Naaaaah! As EIA writes:

But what happens if there are few or no major education-related issues or initiatives to battle, especially in a presidential election year, and your fund keeps filling up? Continually rolling it over eventually leads to delegates questioning whether that dues assessment is needed at that level. Even after accounting for a prudent reserve, the union has money to burn in 2008, and there is no shortage of people with ideas about how to spend it.

So the union's horizons broaden. Since there are no imminent threats, the union spends money on stamping out possible future threats (ConCons). There are 12 initiatives on California's ballot, none of which have the remotest relationship to public education. But the 800 or so members of the CTA State Council are mostly good liberals, their allies are all on the No on Prop 8 side, and the union's GLBT Caucus is powerful and influential. The result is a total of $1.25 million to protect gay marriage. If Prop 8 had been on the ballot in November 2005, along with Gov. Schwarzenegger's education initiatives, CTA would not have spent a dime on it.

The Sacramento ABC affiliate has more on this issue.

[Note to the reader: California Prop 8 is a ballot initiative to add a State Constitutional Amendment to support traditional one-man, one-woman marriage.]

So let’s remember this as Mark Warner, Gerry Connolly, Judy Feder, Jim Moran, and, of course, Barack Obama favor compelling workers to join unions and pay dues to support such causes. Not exactly Virginia (or American) values, eh? Remember, the unions always claim that dues do not go for political causes, but as recent filings required by the Department of Labor show, the unions have a way of making “grants” to “non-profits” that support various left-wing political agendas.

Pauvre Petits Enfants

French may have to work more than 35 hours per week

Mark Warner: Too Extreme Even by George McGovern’s Standards

McGovern Opposes Obama/Warner/Connolly Forced Unionization

Hat tip: Ace of Spades blog

I blogged recently about how Democratic Senate candidate Mark Warner came out in support of the deceptively-named “Employee Free Choice Act” (EFCA). The main reasons Democrats and unions want this law is that it has a feature called “card check” by which union thugs can intimidate workers into signing a petition advocating for union organization rather than having a secret-ballot election. Unions would then use the extra dues money to give (directly or indirectly) to their Democrat friends.

In today’s Wall Street Journal, former Democratic Senator and 1972 Presidential nominee George McGovern came out in opposition of this bill (which has passed the House of Representatives). In a piece titled, “My Party Should Respect Secret Union Ballots,” he said, in part:

The key provision of EFCA is a change in the mechanism by which unions are formed and recognized. Instead of a private election with a secret ballot overseen by an impartial federal board, union organizers would simply need to gather signatures from more than 50% of the employees in a workplace or bargaining unit, a system known as "card-check." There are many documented cases where workers have been pressured, harassed, tricked and intimidated into signing cards that have led to mandatory payment of dues.

Under EFCA, workers could lose the freedom to express their will in private, the right to make a decision without anyone peering over their shoulder, free from fear of reprisal.

Now you know why I tend to use the term “left-wing” rather than “liberal” to describe our friends in the Democratic Party. Given how they are losing in the marketplace of ideas over the long term, the only way they can keep any semblance of power is via intimidation.

By the way, the Democratic candidate for Virginia’s 11th Congressional District, Gerry Connolly, also supports this legislation, and Senator Jim Webb has co-sponsored it in the U.S. Senate. It’s nice to know that Mark Warner, Gerry Connolly, and Jim Webb are more out of the mainstream than George McGovern. Warner claims to be a "radical moderate?" I find that Astounding!

Warner and Connolly Support Compulsory Union Membership

Secret Ballots for Me, but not for Thee

Hat tip: Anonymous Is a Woman

I do not normally link to my fellow bloggers on the left side of the political spectrum, but in this case I wanted to thank Karen of Anonymous is a Woman for posting this information. At a recent AFL-CIO Fourth of July picnic, Democratic Senate candidate Mark Warner endorsed the (“exquisitely mistitled, in the words of George Will) “Employee Free Choice Act,” which is a union-backed ploy to intimidate workers into approving labor unions in the workplace (cosponsored by Senator Jim Webb among others). AIAW also indicated that 11th CD Democratic candidate Gerry Connolly supports this legislation.

The proposed legislation, which has already failed in the current Congress, has a provision called “card check” While its left-wing supporters give the usual heart-felt speeches about how it gives workers a “choice” about whether or not to join a union without those eeeeeeevil bosses interfering with their decisions, it in fact allows unions to organize a workplace without a secret ballot. Employees must publicly declare support or opposition to unionization, and thus be subjected to notorious labor union harassment and intimidation techniques.

Karen helpfully posted a link to an AFL-CIO web page that claimed that 60% of workers would join a union if they just had the chance. Well, heck, I say, give them a secret ballot and let’s have a vote! Isn’t it ironic that politicians who are elected via secret ballot want to take that right away from American workers?

We all know the real reason for this – labor unions in the private sector have declined in membership for years. The unions need coerced dues money for political purposes (er, to contribute to worthy non-profits) to push their left-wing agenda. The old generation of union organizers and union members has been dying off, thus leading to labor’s desperation. In addition, free market ideas concerning portability of benefits, personal retirement accounts, and school choice (not to mention legacy costs imposed on stockholders and taxpayers by the union agreements of old) have helped demonstrate to a more mobile society that the bureaucratic power of union leaders is outmoded and even counterproductive.

In many ways, I do feel sorry having to write this. My grandfather, a 1930s era card-carrying communist, was a union organizer. I know enough history to realize that unions did play a role in getting workers safer working conditions in many occupations. Many unionized workers do believe in doing good work for their employers and customers. However, the same 1930s mentality contains an overly adversarial relationship that only hurts employers and workers. Unfortunately, the strong-arm tactics that have persisted throughout the years have only made the “On the Waterfront” image of the unions persist.

I realize that Karen and I will disagree on the intent and outcome of the card check legislation, but I thought that this issue deserved (some admittedly backhanded) publicity. So Karen, I do respect your opinion.

By the way, I also hope that Mark Warner, Gerry Connolly, and other Democrats advertise loudly their support for this legislation. The bloggers who support these candidates should do all they can to spread the word as well, and post more videos just like Karen did. Maybe the candidates will post them on their web sites. With any luck, 11th CD Republican nominee Keith Fimian and the Republican Senate nominee, former Governor Gilmore, will help voters understand the agenda of the Democrats as well.

For those of you in other States, please remember that your Democratic candidates most likely support the same legislation. It is your duty to find out.

Solidarity Forever?

The Service Employees International Union (SEIU) has a "tête à tête" with the California Nurses Association. Read about it at Intercepts.