Just say NO to uranium mining in Virginia

keeptheban.org

There is a widely held view across the commonwealth that uranium mining in Virginia is a bad idea. When Paul Locke, the chair of the National Academy of Sciences report, "Uranium Mining in Virginia said, " Internationally accepted best practices, which include timely and meaningful public participation, are available to mitigate some of the risks involved. However, there are still many unknowns."

Unknowns? Mitigate some risks?

Virginia's climate and geology does indeed present significant and scary unknowns to uranium mining and milling that have not been confronted in other places. As the report noted, Virginia is subject to extreme natural events, including hurricanes, tornados, and heavy rainfall. And, as we've recently witnessed, the commonwealth is not immune to earthquakes.

The risks to public health and safety are great, yet powerful economic interests led by Virginia Uranium, Inc. are pulling out all the stops to influence legislators and agencies who will make the final decisions about keeping or rescinding the 1982 statewide moratorium on uranium mining. Those decisions will affect the future of every Virginian and possibly people beyond the state's borders. Unable to get ban-lifting legislation through the General Assembly, the industry enlisted Governor Bob McDonnell to create a Working Group that is tilted towards industry views, lacks transparency, and has encouraged little public participation.

To date, many concerns and questions remain unanswered. For instance:

• What happens to left over toxic wastes?
• What is the impact on drinking water supplies for millions of Virginians?
• What is the impact on air quality for the region?
• How will hunting, fishing, and outdoor recreation be affected?
• What is the impact on key parts of the Virginia economy such as agriculture and tourism?
• What plans are in place for extreme natural events?
• What is the impact on property values near mines and mills and along transportation routes?
• What is the impact..... (fill in your own concern or check these out)?

The Virginia Department of Health (VDH) is conducting public meetings on issues of water quality and water recreation to assess the impact of uranium mining and milling in the commonwealth. The meetings scheduled (more info about these and other meetings) are:

• August 7 from 6:00 to 8:00 pm at the Chatham Circuit Court Building in Chatham, VA;
• August 15 from 6:00 to 8:00 pm at The Barn, Lord Fairfax Community College in Warrenton, VA;
• August 29 from 6:00 to 8:00 pm at Meyera Oberndorff Library in Virginia Beach, VA.

If you can't make the meetings, you can submit comments directly to the Uranium Working Group online or by mail at 1100 Bank Street, 8th Floor, Richmond, VA 23219.

Another way to take action is to contact your legislators in the General Assembly. For those of us in the central Valley contacting Senator Emmett Hanger is vitally important. He has previously shown that he is willing to listen and he has been sensitive to environmental concerns on other issues. And, as a senior member of the Virginia Senate, he holds a position of power and influence. Not sure who your legislators are or want more ideas for your email to him/her - visit the Virginia Chapter Sierra Club.

Virginia faces many challenges in the commonwealth's diverse environment - cleaning up the Chesapeake Bay, reducing the impact of burning dirty coal on air and water quality, mountaintop removal coal mining, and the uncertain dangers of hydrofracking in the huge watersheds of the George Washington National Forest. Each of these threats is very real and deserves the public's and policymakers' attentions. But, the unknowns and horrific perils of uranium mining and milling in Virginia are job #1 of all who care about a healthy future for the Old Dominion.

Last week's other loser

Senator Emmett Hanger, I hope you are watching your back. Folks are already taking aim at your political life... and most likely they are your fellow Republicans. Democrats are still in a daze and aren't plotting that far ahead....

Senator Hanger represents the 24th Senate District that includes Augusta County, Greene County, Highland County, Lexington, Staunton, Waynesboro, plus parts of Albemarle County, Rockbridge County, and Rockingham County. You may recall that right wingers in the GOP worked hard to deny Hanger the party's nomination in 2007. They put up Scott Sayre who Hanger eventually defeated in the primary, but not until deep rifts between party factions were exposed.

Flash forward to the summer of 2009. At Staunton's July 4 parade Senator Hanger had his own float (actually a convertible) that was quite separate from the Republican float. Then later that month came Chris Saxman's surprise announcement that he was withdrawing from the 20th District House of Delegates race. Although there was a very public forum at Buffalo Gap High School, the local GOP chairs privately interviewed candidates and just as privately picked Staunton City Councilman Dickie Bell as their nominee. Bell easily won the election in November.

So, what does all this have to do with Senator Hanger? The bitter feelings from 2007 are still festering among local Republicans. Hanger, who is still popular with many in the GOP (and independent) electorate remains distrusted, even disliked, by his party's right wing. Reports indicate that the GOP chairs' interviews of potential candidates in the 20th District got not only into issues and electability, but also touched on their relationship and loyalty to the Senator. Anyone who was seen as too friendly to Hanger, or not tight enough with the conservative faction, had no chance of being the nominee. Equally important was picking a nominee acceptable to Delegate Saxman.

Looking forward to 2011, most observers assume Senator Hanger will seek renomination by the GOP and another term. But he faces considerable obstacles. Hanger, though he remains popular with many in the community, is largely estranged from the local Republican committees. Delegate Dickie Bell, who owes his nomination to those local chairs and to Chris Saxman will never be a Hanger ally and may well continue what some say was Saxman's behind-the-scenes sabotage of the Senator.

Speaking of Saxman, come January he is free to roam the political landscape. He says he will concentrate on "school choice" issues, but nobody buys that as his last waltz in politics. While some of the rumors swirling around his exit from the House race would, if true, likely end his career in electoral politics; the rumors of his future political aspirations have more credibility. Some say he may challenge Bob Goodlatte, but this bird wonders if his plans might be focused more on 2011.

Added to the toxic mix for Senator Hanger is the rise of the Tea Party activists and their appeal to right wing Republicans and the continuing local involvement of far right groups like the Club for Growth fighting healthcare reform. The nexus of a hostile party leadership and right wing grassroots politics spells danger for a mountain-valley Republican like Hanger. The Senator is well-advised to watch his back, to see who is following, to see who is gaining, to see who is taking aim. Might be a whole flock!

Karaffa's Red Shirts

There are whispers that David Karaffa is the Republican insiders' choice to replace Del. Chris Saxman. Local GOP chairs are posturing to have someone as a counterweight to Sen. Emmett Hanger, who they don't especially like. Rephrase - despise. Were other candidates told there would be a press release from the district chair announcing all candidates, while they told young David to get the word out a day early? This increasingly has the stench of a done deal, bred in the cesspool of the hard right fanatics who control the local committees.

On his blog (with grammar and spelling errors), Karaffa calls out his "Red Shirts" for Monday's meeting. Maybe someone should clue him in on that poor choice of terms - Red Shirts were paramilitary, racist, anti-Republican groups that formed in southern states after Reconstruction and the term is still used by some racist groups today. But, if the shoe... I mean shirt... fits!

Governor vetoes bad bills

Governor Tim Kaine's office announced the vetoes of several bills in which CCC has passed through the grist mill and rejected as spoiled grain. Among the vetoes:

Senator Emmett Hanger's SB 1035 would have allowed concealed weapons in restaurants and bars serving alcohol. The governor noted that this bill would put employees and patrons of these establishments at risk and that many in the law enforcement community opposed it. He also vetoed SB 877 that would have allowed retired law enforcement to carry concealed weapons in restaurants and bars selling alcohol. The governor found no compelling reason for retired officers to do so.

The governor also vetoed SB 1069, HB 2358, SB 961, HB 2638 and SB 1409, all of which expand the capital murder statute to increase the number of offenders who would be eligible for capital punishment. The governor noted that Virginia is already second in the nation (behind Texas) in the number of executions. The most controversial, SB 961/HB 2358 patroned by Senator Mark Obenshain and Delegate Todd Gilbert, would have redefined the triggerman rule so principals in the second degree and accessories before the fact could be charged as principals in certain first degree cases. 

The General Assembly reconvenes on April 8 to consider the governor's vetoes and amendments. Contact your legislator and urge him/her to sustain the governor's vetoes of these bad bills.

Cleaning up the smokehouse

The General Assembly agreed to a compromise bill to ban most smoking in restaurants. Governor Tim Kaine says he'll sign it quickly, although it won't become effective until December. The bill passed the Senate by a vote of 27-13 with Creigh Deeds voting in favor and Emmett Hanger voting against. In the House of Delegates, the vote was 60-39 with Steve Landes supporting the ban and Chris Saxman and Ben Cline voting no.

Smoking will be banned in most restaurants, exceptions being private clubs and restaurants with separately ventilated smoking rooms. The ban does not apply to outside dining areas.

The battle over the compromise bill cut across party lines but the rifts were felt most keenly on the GOP side of the aisle. Many Republicans, favoring a "don't work with the governor on anything" mentality, were beyond miffed when Speaker Bill Howell appeared with Governor Tim Kaine to support a compromise earlier this month. Majority leader Morgan Griffin parted ways from the speaker and there was open talk of choosing a new speaker for the next session - if the GOP stays in control of the chamber.

Final passage in the House found 21 Republicans voting with the speaker and that pissed of the Americans for Prosperity. Ben Marchi, speaking for the right wing group noted:

"A lot of conservatives were surprised that the Speaker would go off on his own and have talks with the Governor without even consulting his caucus."

The divisions in the GOP ranks bode well for the Democrats this November who need to pick up six seats to gain control of the House of Delegates. Delegates like Steve Landes may find some conservatives hedging support because of his yes vote on this one issue. On the other hand, opponents of the bill will have to answer for voting against a reasonable and good policy that is supported by a majority of Virginians.

Gubernatorial candidates may find political smoke blowing in the wind this November, too. Senator Creigh Deeds voted for the ban and the other two Democrats say they support it (of course, they are bystanders to the General Assembly). Republican Bob McDonnell blew warm smoke up conservatives' skirts by opposing the ban.

Republicans, trying to dodge backlash, were successful at delaying implementation until after the election.

Curt/Frederick Cock Fight

Walter Curt, a conservative Harrisonburg area businessman who was tapped by Virginia GOP chair Jeff Frederick to head the party's fundraising, has abruptly quit. In his letter of resignation Curt bemoaned Frederick's lack of leadership polish and wrote:

"Unfortunately the problems of structure, power projection, consultant interference, interpersonal difficulties, years of internal malaise, luddite attitude, leadership, and unity of purpose stand in the way of any hope of success."

Curt was a favorite of the right wing swacgirl types who hailed his appointment by Frederick back in June. Since then the party has continued to implode with Frederick having to wear a flack jacket as he dodges "friendly fire." Frederick narrowly avoided ouster just before Christmas.

Curt's resignation is one more sign that the Virginia GOP continues to be sharply divided between the ultra-conservative swacs who would disembowel government and the pro-government conservatives like Emmett Hanger, while the whack job Frederick flails in the wind. Meanwhile November is approaching.

Senator Emmett Hanger's Huntin' and Peckin'

Senator Emmett Hanger (R-Mount Solon) says he'll introduce legislation demanding Congress call a constitutional convention to consider a balanced budget amendment to the United States Constitution. Hanger believes the federal government needs to balance its budget or "... the economy will continue to deteriorate over time and we won't be the economic power we've historically been."

People can have various views about the wisdom of such an amendment. Many conservatives have long called for the federal government to balance the budget (bit of irony here as two of the biggest budget busters are darlings of conservatives: Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush). Some of these same folks also call for abolishing the Federal Reserve and returning to the gold standard. Others point to the need of the federal government to borrow in time of national emergency such as war (excuse me Adolph, can we take a few days off because we are out of money) or economic collapse (Obama's rescue plan). 

The truth is, Congress must have the flexibility in times of crisis, but Congress must also have the discipline to not spend like a drunken sailor (apologies to sailors). Recent attempts to bring that discipline resulted in the Graham-Rudman-Hollings Balanced Budget Act in 1985. When parts of that law were found unconstitutional, Congress pass the Budget Enforcement Act in 1990 which expired in 2002. Budgets were actually balanced in the late 1990s under President Clinton and a Republican controlled Congress.

All of this is complicated by entitlement programs like Social Security and by the politics of legislation where earmarks and pork barrel spending. To get a handle on wasteful spending, many have urged that the President have the power of line-item veto. The Republican controlled Congress gave this power, by simple legislation, to President Clinton. The Supreme Court held it was an unconstitutional violation of separation of powers and the line-item veto could only be granted by constitutional amendment.

So, would a balanced budget amendment be a good thing? Guess it depends! I am glad that Congress has the ability to respond with fiscal policy to our current deepening recession. But, it would would have been nice if Congress had said to President Bush, "Gee George, we just don't have a few extra trillions for your illegal war." Any proposed amendment would likely contain an ability of Congress to override its commands with a supermajority of 3/5s or 2/3s.

Is the idea of calling a constitutional convention a good one? We've never had a constitutional convention to propose amendments, so there are numerous unanswered questions. Article V of the Constitution says: "Congress... on the application of the legislatures of two thirds of the several states, shall call a convention for proposing amendments ..."

Some (there are many more) of these questions are:

• How timely does the "application of the legislatures" need to be? Does Congress have to respect such an application made two years ago? Twenty years ago? Or must the applications be within a term of Congress?
• Can a state legislature rescind an application?
• If (huge if) Congress did call a constitutional convention how would states be represented? Equally as in the Constitutional Convention that wrote the original document or by population similar to the House of Representatives?
• How would delegates to the convention be chosen? Appointed by the state legislature and/or governor or elected by the people of the state?
• Could Congress limit the scope of the convention to a balanced budget amendment or would the convention exercise its own authority and propose amendments on topics such as prayer in school or abortion? Could it rewrite the whole Constitution? If we look at record the Constitutional Convention in 1787, the convention would only be limited by what it thinks could potentially be ratified.

Although this method has never been used to propose a constitutional amendment, it may be used as political muscle to force Congress to act by either proposing an amendment itself (2/3s vote in each house), by passing legislation (like Graham-Rudman-Hollings), or by finding the political will to act more responsibly (at least until the current outrage passes).

Remember that proposing an amendment is the first step, as amendments must be ratified by 3/4s (currently 38) of the state legislatures (usual method) or at conventions held in each state (21st Amendment). Congress (or the national convention?) selects the method of ratification.

So, what is Senator Hanger's motive in introducing this "application" and pushing the idea. He has to know the odds of there actually being a constitutional convention are extremely long. Perhaps he feels like this is one way to push Congress into acting. Perhaps he hopes to generate public outrage about federal deficits and the growing federal debt.

Or perhaps all this is much closer to home. Senator Hanger remains an outcast within his own party, many of whom see him as too moderate. Some even call him gasp a liberal. Perhaps all of this is mostly about repairing the Senator's reputation and image among the right wing Republicans who will control the fate of his renomination in 2011. Perhaps it is politics 101 - saving his own seat?