Thursday, April 25, 2013

Understanding the Office of Attorney General: A Defense of Ken Cuccinelli

Since this is an open forum for the PWA YRs, I would like to defend Ken from the recent wave of criticism he has come under from his position on transportation.  I've been quite vocal in opposing the recent transportation tax hike.  However, it is important to not only educate people on the issues, but also understand how the political process works.

First thing to understand is the Washington Post.  The Washington Post has made a career out of trying to level Virginia Republicans.  George Allen is exhibition number one of this fact.  They intentionally write things in a way to make Republicans look bad.  In 2009, I was contacted multiple times by Washington Post reporters running stories to make Bob McDonnell look bad.  This is standard practice for the Washington Post.  Ken also has one of the most incredible records of any elected official in Virginia.  This doesn't mean he is above critique, however one should keep in mind both his record and the Post's record when criticizing him because of something they read in the Washington Post.  This is why when I read a previous Post article that I was concerned with about two months ago, I waited and asked him and ended up getting a solid response from him.  As Republicans it is important that we understand the Washington Post's tactics this election cycle.  The Post will be going after Ken all year long, and we need to be willing to defend Ken from the Post as opposed to falling for all their attacks on Ken.

It is also important to understand the role of the Attorney General.  Attorney Generals are much more like judges than legislators in terms of their ability to talk about policy issues.  See, the Attorney General's job is to advise the state on constitutional issue and defend state legislation if it is challenged in the courts.  As a result, he legally can not argue for the repeal of legislation he may have to defend in court this summer.  Anyone who has talked with Ken about various subjects over the last four years has run into topics where he has been limited about saying certain things because of his position as Attorney General.  Ken did all he could on the transportation bill.  When asked for an opinion, he released one that thew a monkey wrench in the process.

Ken also has been one of the most elected officials when it comes to taxes and spending.  Shortly after he was elected to the state senate, he lead the opposition to Gov. Mark Warner's tax referendum out of his house.  As a state senator he fought against anything that smelled of a tax.  He's opposed one of the biggest wastes of state funds in NoVa, the expansion of metro into Fairfax and Loudoun.  Honestly, anyone who has heard Ken talk about the recent tax increase quickly realizes it is not a bill he loves.

As conservatives we need to pressure our politicians to stay true, but we also need to understand how the process works.  Attacking one of our finest for what his opponents say about him, simply plays into the Democrats hands.  Like it or not, Ken is our nominee and we should work hard to support him.  Playing up fears that he isn't really a conservative will only reduce energy from the base, and hinder volunteer turnout.

As someone who has supported Ken since his 2007 reelection to the state senate, I am excited to see him as our nominee, and look forward to helping turnout the YRs to make Ken the next Governor.

4 comments:

  1. I appreciate the constructive rebuttal, Willie. As you indicated, his job as AG comes with a completely different set of requirements than a gubernatorial campaign and I have defended him from attacks of being too "socially conservative" on this very point. Though its no secret the WAPO has an anti-conservative agenda, the article still contained the facts and his public statement on them from March simply does not provide enough relevant information for him to maintain a consistent message on lower taxation. That was my criticism. This is why I stated in my post that Ken's supporters should be questioning on this - not to "attack" him but ensure he is maintaining a consistent campaign message. I really wanted to ask Ken about his role in helping the bill pass at the YR meeting in Arlington, but he left before I had a chance to do so.

    Could he still come out and say he is against the Transportation Bill, even though as AG, he was required to help it pass, as you suggest? The statement from his campaign indicates a philosophical willingness to get the bill passed: "I was honored to work with members of the McDonnell Administration in making sure the legislation was able to move forward without the threat of any legal challenges."

    Willie, what exactly are the boundaries between what he can say as acting AG and as a candidate running for gubernatorial office?

    ReplyDelete
  2. It is rather impossible to come out and say, I oppose x legislation and want it repealed, when your job very well may require you to defend that same law a few months later. That just doesn't work...

    ReplyDelete
  3. That makes sense. Was he required by law to work with the administration to make it constitutional before it became law, or just merely offer an opinion on the lawfulness of the bill as it was written?

    ReplyDelete
  4. Yes, one of the primary jobs of the Attorney General is to offer a legal opinion on the legality of actions being taken by the state, or a state agency. This is off of the VA Attorney General's website.

    "Official opinions are legal advice, not personal opinions, and do not reflect the attorney general’s personal views about what the law should be. Such advice is provided to ensure clients/the requester are in compliance with the law. While the opinions may be given deference by the courts, they are not binding on the courts.

    The official opinions issued by the attorney general are part of the duties of the office (see Code § 2.2-505). A person authorized by statute, such as the governor, a member of the General Assembly, a constitutional officer, or the head of a state agency, can ask the attorney general for an official opinion on the law. Members of the general public are not authorized to ask for opinions."
    http://www.oag.state.va.us/Opinions%20and%20Legal%20Resources/OPINIONS/index.html

    Here is the actual legal opinion. http://www.oag.state.va.us/Opinions%20and%20Legal%20Resources/OPINIONS/2013opns/13-014%20Marshall.pdf

    As stated in the opinon...
    "Given the foregoing, it is my opinion that the additional local taxes imposed by HB 2313 violate
    the Virginia Constitution.30 In reaching this conclusion, I make no judgment on the wisdom of the policy
    decisions underlying the local tax provisions of HB 2313. My opinion is limited to the means the General
    Assembly chose to achieve its objectives. These particular means violate the Virginia Constitution, and
    therefore, other means to address this aspect of Virginia's transportation challenges must be used."

    I will add as well if you remember at the time this opinion was issued, it was celebrated for stalling/throwing a monkey wrench in the process. None of the pro-tax hike legislators were very happy with this opinion.

    ReplyDelete