Bills to watch
By Brian Kirwin | Sunday, February 15th, 2009 | PolicyThis is one of the more fun weeks in the General Assembly, as the House and the Senate take one look at each other’s hard work and dump it into the nearest trash bin. A few bills warrant a little bit of watching.
HB1579 This is Glenn Oder’s bill to make economic development projects help fund the roads they need, (for example, port growth pays for new roads). It’s so popular this year that many House Democrats ended up voting for it, even though they opposed it every step of the way (cough, Joe Bouchard, cough Bobby Mathieson, cough Ward Armstrong)
HB 2672 is Del. Herring’s only contribution to bills this session, changing the “Department of Minority Business Enterprise” to the “Department of Supplier Diversity and Procurement Advocacy” – Wow, I couldn’t have made it through life without this one. It passed the House, proving that it was important to fill Brian Moran’s seat as soon as possible. After all, we can’t have names of Departments staying the same.
SJ 273 This is Yvonne Miller’s “Get Rapists to the polls” act to help felons vote for Democrats. It actually passed the Senate, but I love popping some popcorn and watching the House P&E kill Miller’s dumb ideas.
HB 2041 Sal Iaquinto thinks that DUI convicts should spend 6 months with an ignition interlock on their cars. 90 other delegates agreed. The Senate loved bills restricting sober drivers. I’m curious if they’ll hold drunks to a lower standard.
SB 1421 Louise Lucas’ bill tacks on 10% to hotel guests’ ordering movies in a hotel room, with half the money used to fund filmmaking incentives. House Finance killed the House version of this, but because Democrats voted no.
SB 1105 Word on the smoking ban is that Howell is sticking to his agreement with Kaine and will strip most of the House amendments to the bill, rather than defend the House version of the bill. That means the smoking ban should pass. We’ll see. Cosgrove’s 1703 is still hanging out in the Senate, too.
HB 2104 Those mean-spirited Democrats in the House voted against tuition assistance for children with Autism. Democrats don’t put bills like this on their campaign literature while they call Republicans mean, nasty and rotten. But they do go to Richmond and vote mean, nasty and rotten. Let’s see if the Democratic Senate will match the House Democrats in making the world tougher for families with autistic children.
The Senate budget – There is none! That’s right, the Democratic Senate failed to pass a budget on time. The Senate can substitute their budget for the House one, but that’s not the same thing. The media who blasted Republicans when they punted their budgetary duties are whistling in the back of the room and not reporting it (i know, I’m shocked too)
HJ 620 Yes, kids, it’s the lock box for the Transportation trust fund that Senators say they support at election time but never seem to pass anytime else. House passed it as usual. Maybe this time.
Those are some I’m watching. What are some of yours?
Tags:
Contribute for Conservatism!
Share this post
About the author
The right wants to jeer him. The left wants to censor him. Moderates usually want both. Brian Kirwin is a political consultant and public relations strategist in Virginia Beach with a lightning-rod flair. Brian also serves on the VB Arts & Humanities Commission and frequently appears on Hampton Roads theatrical stages, if only to prove that all actors aren’t liberals. Kirwin’s columns stir up debate and hit the political scene with no punches pulled.
Comments
11 Responses to "Bills to watch"
SB 819 – the House left ALL thelr early voting bills in committee. The Senate passed Louise Lucas’ (29-11), and it’s been assigned to the same P & E Committee. What does the House do?
HB 1890 – this bill would raise the number of signatures needed on a petition for a R&HA referendum from 100 flat to 2% of qualified voters. In addition, it prohibits holding a second referendum on the issue within 5 years of a prior referendum.
Given the fun in Virginia Beach a few years ago, thought some might be interested.
The autism bill is a thinly veiled attempt at putting vouchers into the school system. Those programs actually cost a heckuva lot more than what is being offered. Part of the IEP process can get those students into a placement, including other school placement, that will allow the parents not to bear the cost of any of it.
Ok, I’m not too familiar with the autism bill but, I don’t see the bad part even if it is below what is needed. If it is a true voucher than the money would follow the student. If it is a public school then that school wouldl get it right? If the voucher follows the student to a private school that specializes in special needs then it might be able to better compete. They might also get non-profit organization sponsorship. I wouldn’t rule out that a voucher that appears to low by public school standards could make a difference. But, like I said, I haven’t been following this bill and know little about it.
Kevin, I don’t know many families that want to have an autistic child so that they can get tuition assistance. Anyone who denies help to these families because of politics should be proud to tell the voters about it.
Or I’ll do it for ‘em.
Britt,
Your understanding is pretty much spot on. There are provisions that provide the funding to follow the student to another public school, if that is deemed to be the best place. It’s also limited to nonsectarian private schools. How horrible that a bill could actually empower the parents of autistic children to choose the best possible education for their children…we certainly can’t have that!
Brian,
I don’t know where I said that families want to have a student with autism for the benefits of a voucher. Since I have taught students with Autism, I understand the struggles that parents, teachers, and the students themselves deal with. I often find myself on the side of parents in IEP meetings and education discussions. I was going for an honest dialogue on the subject. If you want to throw out red herrings, do so.
[...] Drift let’s us know which bills we need to keep an eye on in the Virginia General [...]
Kevin, don’t throw your teaching credentials at me. You’ll never be as close to this issue as I am.
All your experience tells me is that you’ve bought into the education cabal’s protectionism, no matter how many families you restrict from making better choices.
Again, wasn’t trying to throw teaching credentials at you. I was just trying to give some background information. But I see since you’ve already made assumptions about me, that this discussion can go no further. Enjoy your echo chamber.
Attacking a good bill as a “veiled attempt at putting vouchers into the school system” isn’t simply giving background information.
It’s reading teacher talking points and putting politics ahead of helping families who could use a more level playing field.
By your own admission, you seem proud to be on “parents’ side” during IEP meetings. The fact that there’s a “parents’ side” in these discussions should tip you off that there may be better options than preserving monopolies.
If the voucher follows the student and the student remains in an established public program then that public school it would appear, would get MORE money. So, if they’re doing well…..they get rewarded with tax dollars. What’s wrong with that?
If a particular school isn’t doing as well, surely that student and parents deserve another option. That would include another public school or a private one.
This is an issue I think we “evil” Libertarians will support. If ya must confiscate our tax dollars, when it comes to determining where to spend it…….let the market decide! It does seem to be our (libertarian) answer to everything.
Leave your response
The comments section is for meaningful discussion. Readers are reminded to post comments that are germane to the article and write in a common language that steers clear of personal attacks and/or vulgarities.
Please take a moment to review our comment policy.