HoodaThunk?

The mental wanderings of a common man.

Skip to: Content | Sidebar | Footer

Town Hall meeting with Herring & Poisson

24 March, 2009 (07:53) | Politics, Virginia Politics | By: ricjames

This past Saturday I went to the local town hall meeting held by our Virginia GA reps, Senator Mark Herring and Delegate Dave Poisson. The event was attended by about 30 people and held at the Ashburn campus of GW University. I took a couple of pages of notes and I wanted to pass along what I heard.

Mark Herring represents the 33rd Virginia Senate District and Dave Poisson handles the 32nd House District. Both districts are the largest districts in their respective houses of the General Assembly owing to the massive influx of population we’ve had since the last redistricting. The next redistricting comes in 2011 and both Herring and Poisson expect northern Virginia to get additional seats in both houses when that happens. Poisson said he expects there to be an additional Senate district created and 2 additonal House districts.

A question was immediately raised as to whether the addition of such seats would help us as regards our transportation issues. Both men said they believed it would since, if that comes to pass, the caucus (my word, not theirs) that comprises northern Virginia’s districts and the Richmond/Hampton Roads districts would represent slightly more than 50% of the Assembly. They said they believed the common ground of the issues we in more urbanized areas face would overcome any partisan resistance.

Both men spoke of the laws passed this past session and what bills they had introduced. Mark Herring mentioned his sponsorship of a bill authorizing a 1-year extension on the time that hybrid vehicle drivers would be allowed to use the HOV lanes while driving alone. Also the ban on texting while driving (Grrrrr…), the widely-known smoking ban, and the budget bills. He spoke of the deep bipartisan support the budget bills received and the vote tallies tend to bear him out. I believe the passage ratios in both houses was well over 60%.

One of the budgeting items he mentioned specifically was of great interest to me. According to Herring, the funding from state sources for Loudoun’s schools increased by $37.8 million over the last 2 years. I seem to recall the last 2 years listening to the LCPS bemoan the state of funding and demand increases in taxes to cover the loss of state funding. Now I find that the state funding went up? Where did this $37 million go?

Dave Poisson mentioned that the House was under a different sort of stricture this session. There was apparently agreement from the Delegates that there was going to be a 15 bill limit on business introduced into the House. They wanted to make sure they didn’t get bogged down in other stuff so much that they couldn’t do the budget work so this was their solution. As a result there were fewer issues addressed. He spoke of the federal stimulus money being used to cover a budgetary hole over the Medicaid program. (I would ask how that is supposed to be stimulating the economy but I know I wouldn’t get a direct answer.)

Also mentioned was a bill introduced and passed that would add to the requirements for getting a driver’s license. New licensees would be required to listen to a 90-minute program detailing the dangers of drunk driving. This is necessary, he said, because of the large numbers of young drivers dying on Virginia’s roads. The actual program would apparently be run by non-governmental contractors and parents of new drivers would be required to “sign off” on their kid’s compliance with this program. Sounds like a non-controversial issue but there a catch. This requirement only applies to northern Virginia drivers. So that means that Loudoun parents would be signing off on this in order for their kid to get a license but a parent in Lynchburg would not have to. Good idea or not, I can’t imagine this is constitutional. This is holding some people in the state to a different set of standards that other people in the same state for getting the same license. I would think this violates the equal protection clause that says everyone gets the same treatment under the law.

Poisson brought up the various firearms issues that were raised this session. The biggest one was the concealed carry in restaurants bill that was passed – again this year – by a wide margin. Poisson didn’t offer it any help, himself, and he believes the Governor is going to veto it again. I believe Poisson is on the wrong side of this issue and I’ve already stated my reasons. He was challenged on the matter by Greg Stone of the LCRC and various other pro-2nd Amendment organizations, as well as by another man in the audience openly carrying. This other gentleman brought up the inconsistency of denying the average citizen the ability to carry concealed where that citizen isn’t permitted to drink while allowing retired police officers to carry in the same place and drink to their heart’s content. Neither Poisson nor Herring had a good answer to that one except to say that retired police have a greater need for defense (against bad guys they might have previously put away) than do common Joe’s. Even if I agree with that much, why do they have a greater need to drink while doing so?

The remainder of the session dealt with bills these 2 gents personally introduced. I’ll leave it to you, the reader, to check those out at the General Assembly website if you’re interested.

Comments

Comment from amcit
Time March 24, 2009 at 16:16

The “other guy” was Ed Levine, an open-carry and 2nd Amendment-rights activist. I pointed him to your blog (after getting his permission to name him here).

Comment from Allen D. Porter
Time March 24, 2009 at 21:07

FWIW, statistically, there is no overall distinction that can be made in DUI arrest or fatality rates between northern and southern Virginia counties. Few states can really be separated into two regions with drastically different needs.

One example might be Oklahoma where one is 4 times more likely to die in a DUI-related crash if they live in one of the western counties instead of the eastern counties.

But Virginia? No.

And I am of course totally sidestepping the whole constitutionality issue!

Comment from Ric James
Time March 24, 2009 at 21:44

amcit, thank you! I appreciate both the reference and the ID for Mr. Levine. I’ll make a point to introduce myself the next time I get a chance.

Comment from Ric James
Time March 24, 2009 at 21:47

Excellent points, Allen, thanks for bringing those in. Both Herring and Poisson seemed to understand that there’s no statistical difference between the southern districts and ours in terms of fatality rates but they were basically taking a “well, there’s no reason we can’t protect our kids.” The problem I have (aside from the constitutional one) is that there’s been no evidence that such programs do a damned thing to the drunk driving rates and even Poisson said that they’d need to run this program for a few years to give the other districts the proof. I disapprove of making our district the pilot program without getting citizen approval first.