Virtual Learning: How Gov. Terry McAuliffe and VEA Failed Virginia Families

As the Virginia Legislature continues its "Special Session" next week, one of the biggest issues that will get debated by legislators is how to address the Commonwealth of Virginia's public school system and the lack of "in person" schooling taking place as a direct result of the Covid-19 crisis.

Legislators will have opportunity to consider legislation that attempts to address those students throughout Virginia that live in areas or regions that do not have broadband internet access to facilitate "on-line" or "virtual learning" as well as all the students in the urban and suburban areas with access.

However, it is important to remember that the unpreparedness that the Virginia public education system has experienced during the pandemic very well may have been avoided had it not been for Governor Terry McAuliffe and the Virginia Education Association.

In order to understand why things are where they are in Virginia in terms of education it is important to look backward.

This week during the "Special Session" we have seen Delegates using a "virtual" session which they managed to of on Thursday yet many school systems are still lacking the infrastructure or tools to implement such programs effective

"Let’s empower parents to get the technology, to get their kids the technology to learn virtually... Let’s empower parents to get the tutoring and in-person teaching their children need to excel, regardless of how much money they make.” stated Delegate Carrie Coyner (R).

"I would hope that we would support school systems as they go virtual...not because it’s what we want, but because where we are right now in this epidemic it’s what we need. It’s what’s doable. It’s where students can best learn.” Delegate Schuyler VanValkenburg (D).

Both Coyner and VanValkenburg have experience in education. Coyner is a former School Board member in Chesterfield County and VanValkenburg is a teacher in Henrico County. Both entered the House of Delegates after Governor Terry McAuliffe had left office and never had the opportunity to vote on Virginia's Virtual School Board first introduced in 2016.

These two counties represent significant school age populations in suburban Richmond rivaled only on Northern Virginia counties like Fairfax.

Where other states have transitioned to on-line or "virtual learning" though such platforms as Google classroom or Blackboard, Virginia lags behind. The question becomes how is it that Virginia get caught so off guard during the pandemic with the extended periods of no "in-person" learning and how could the state leave local jurisdictions in such a position of unpreparedness to deal with the situation.

Truth be told this very situation very well could have been avoided entirely. Republicans began working on legislation as early as 2015 regarding increasing the funding in the area of virtual learning though you will not hear much of that around Richmond these days. Members of both parties supported vital legislation in 2016 and 2017 that would have moved virtual learning forward in Virginia with the necessary funding. Virginia did in fact already have some on line learning programs through the Department of Education however, the virtual learning transformation sought via the legislation would have created a virtual school independently.

Here is the measure. Both Senate Bill 1240 and House Bill 1400 were identical.

Republicans Siobhan Dunnavant in the Senate and "Dickie" Bell in the House were the chief patrons of these vital virtual learning bills in 2017.

SB 1240 Virginia Virtual School Board

Virginia Virtual School established. Establishes the Board of the Virginia Virtual School (the Board) as a policy agency in the executive branch of state government for the purpose of governing the full-time virtual school programs offered to students enrolled in the Virginia Virtual School (the School). The Secretary of Education is responsible for such agency. The 14-member Board is given operational control of the School and assigned powers and duties. Beginning with the 2019-2020 school year, the bill requires the School to be open to any school-age person in the Commonwealth and to provide an educational program meeting the Standards of Quality for grades kindergarten through 12, with a maximum enrollment of 5,000 students statewide. The bill requires the average state share of Standards of Quality per pupil funding for each enrolled student to be transferred to the School

Incorporates S.B 1380 ( Sen. Petersen (D) )

Incorporates S.B.  1570 (Se. Peake (R) )

02/03/17 Passes 38--0- 1 abstention Senate

02/20/17 Passes the House of Delegates 59-37

03/13/17- Vetoed by Governor Terry McAuliffe (D) 

04/05/17  Senate sustains Governors Veto  21-19

04/05/17- Veto Overide fails in Senate--- requires  27 YES votes.

So what happened? Why did this particular bill supported by both the House and Senate that not only passed in 2017 but had also passed both in 2016 get vetoed a second time by Governor Terry McAuliffe (D). This may provide insight.

         

This comes from the Virginia Education Association (VEA) Daily Reports dated April 6, 2017. Clearly the VEA stood in the way of this significant legislation becoming law. This provides some insight of how the lobbying efforts of the VEA who represents teachers throughout Virginia who pay membership may have directly resulted in where Virginia is today with virtual learning and why Virginia is playing catch up some three years later.

VEA had Virtual School Board in effect killed even after legislators supported it until the Governor vetoed the measure.

"Every year, on a Wednesday, six weeks after the close of session, the General Assembly reconvenes to take up the Governor's action on the bills passed by the legislature during the regular session. Yesterday was that day. Governor McAuliffe has vetoed 40 bills this session. Delegate Kirk Cox gave a floor speech announcing that the Governor has set a single-session record for vetoes. Because all his vetoes held, Governor McAuliffe has vetoed 111 bills during his term. That is a term record as well. Governor Gilmore has the next highest number- 91 vetoes. Delegate Toscano did remind the House that many of the House bills the Governor vetoed this session are identical to bills he vetoed last session.

The VEA was following a group of bills. These bills are all bad for public education and we are thankful to our members who have called, emailed, and written the Governor asking for his veto. We are also grateful that WE WERE HEARD! Governor McAuliffe vetoed all of the bills we requested. We expect the vetoes to be upheld since you need a 2/3 vote to overturn a veto. The Senate sits at 21-19, so it is very difficult to get a 2/3 vote in that body. The House, on the other hand, sits at 66-34, just one vote away from a 2/3 vote possibility. We followed the House closely, but we felt good that we had locked up our votes. Thank you to the 34 members of the House of Delegates who stood with us on the vetoes!

Today we will watch the following veto votes:

House Bill 1400, Delegate Dickie Bell's Virtual School Bill (the Senate version, Senate Bill 1240, from Senator Dunnavant is identical to the House bill and was also vetoed). In his veto, the Governor questioned the constitutionality of these bills. He also commented that, even with off-session work to improve this legislation, it passed in a nearly identical form as House Bill 8 from the 2016 session that he also vetoed. These bills would establish a separate Virtual School Board independent of the Virginia Board of Education and would receive state funding on a per-pupil basis based, draining those resources from our traditional public schools. All school divisions in VA are already required to offer on-line courses, and the VA Department of Education already offers full-time, virtual high school. The VEA opposed these bills and we are grateful the veto was upheld. In the House, the 34 Democrats were joined by Republican Delegates Bloxom, Farrell, Habeeb, Helsel, Hugo, Miller, Ware and Yost in sustaining the Governor's veto."

These bills in 2017 were first introduced in 2016 as House Bill 8. The Daily Press reported the following on March 31, 2016:

"Under the legislation, a student will be able to enroll in a state-approved virtual program if a parent determines that doing so is in the "best interest of such student," but no more than 2 percent of all students in a division could enroll.

The school would be tuition-free to all students, but comes with a $275,000 initial start up cost in Fiscal Year 2018 under the General Assembly-approved budget.

The state share of the per-pupil funding provided to each division would be transferred to the virtual school"

This was the basis it seems for the VEA determined effort for two years to keep the "Virtual School Board" from happening. The state share of the per student funding to local jurisdictions would be impacted if such a board were established and create an entity that very well may have been beyond its lobbying control.

So when Virginia parents look to Richmond for answers in terms of the circumstance the Commonwealth education system faces now with no in-person schooling to start the school year and the majority of school systems having to implement "virtual learning" understand that Virginia has been here before. Richmond had the opportunity not once but twice in 2016 and 2017 to get a jump start on such virtual learning for students and the VEA and Governor Terry McAuliffe(D) failed them.

Jonathan Scott

Guest Contributor

Virginia Assembly: Day 3 Virginia Senate Update

 

The Virginia Legislature "Special Session" day is underway and the Virginia Senate meeting at the Science Museum of Virginia on West Broad Street in Richmond is taking up various bills today coming from the Senate Education and Health Committee.

         

The Senate has determined to combine three bills (S.B.  5026, 5150, 5081) into one bill that has passed unanimously. These bills address that matter in which the public is informed with regard to outbreaks, location, cases and deaths resulting from said outbreak.

The Senate has also advanced S.B 5004 calling for every school building in the Commonwealth to have a School Nurse on site. This bill while passing was referred back to Finance Committee.

One bill that appears stalled is the bill relating to the prevention of evictions during the pandemic.  The Senate has put off this bill until next session in January. Virginia experienced a 16% rent failure rate in the month of July. It is believed that some 262,000 Virginians are "at risk" for evictions due to the pandemic.

Other measures under consideration:

SB5116-  In Home service verification by Department of Medical Assistance; electronic verification system

SB5114- Requires each School Board to make available in person instruction to each enrolled student when an area is determined not to have adequate internet services

SB5109- Provides that employees and residents of nursing homes receive priority testing for Covid-19

SB5064- Employer reporting of Covid-19 for each workplace with 30+ employees to health services

SB5028- Emergency Services and Disaster Law- Prohibits any Governor from issue any rule, regulation or under under his powers under Emergency Services that affects the operation of any public or private elementary or secondary school in Virginia. Bill also makes it so the State Board of Health cannot issue such order either.

SB5076- Paid Sick Leave during Covid-19 crisis from public and private employers for full or part time employees if the Governor has declared a state of emergency in response to health threat.  (FAILED)

Virginia's State Legislature Convenes Special Session

         

Citing "uncharted territory" the Virginia Demcorats seek to consolidate even more power and authority with several rules changes motioned on Tuesday during the Special Session in Richmond. House of Delegates has convened at the Siegal Center part of Virginia Commonwealth University and the Virginia Senate has convened at the Science Museum of Virginia.

Aliscia Andrews: Rising Star in Virginia GOP

 

Jonathan Scott

Guest Contributor

There are very few conservative candidates who have impressed me more the last few election cycles in Virginia than Tina Ramirez (VA7) and Aliscia Andrews the Republican nominee in the Virginia Tenth Congressional District. Both ladies are first time Republican candidates that determined to seek the nomination to challenge Democratic Congresswoman and are rising stars in the Virginia GOP.

Tina Ramirez's candidacy in the Virginia Seventh Congressional District fell short as the convention nominated Delegate Nick Freitas (R) who has run a few local races as well as a statewide primary race against Corey Stewart in 2018 for U.S. Senate in which he lost. The story with Rameriz very similar with Andrews in that very few gave either a chance to win the nomination especially given both were nominating conventions. Conventions in Virginia tend to produce the most entrenched interest of nominees and often through rather suspicious means. Ramirez  finished behind Freitas in balloting but performed extraordinary for a first time Congressional candidate with limited resources. Andrews, a Marine veteran and a a contractor with Department of Homeland Security path to the nomination was one of precision campaigning.

Aliscia Andrews had only 27% after the first round of balloting at the VA10 Convention. Most never gave Andrews much of a chance going into the convention however far too many underestimated to level of retail campaigning and relationship building she dedicated herself to throughout the campaign. After speaking with many participants in the convention many stated that while Andrews was not their first choice they respected the fact that she was always gracious and engaging and ran a very respectful campaign when it came to the other challengers. This in the end was the difference in getting her nominated.

The expected winner was Rob Jones. Jones in fact won the first two rounds of balloting securing 31% in the first round than 34% in the second. Andrews increased her votes to 33% in the second round after Jeffery Dove was removed from contention. By the third round it was down to Jones and Andrews after Matt Troung was removed after the second round where he earned 32% just one percent less than Andrews. In the third and final round Andrews defeated Jones 57-42%.

Andrews has been running a dedicated "WEXIT" campaign focused on defeating Rep. Jennifer Wexton (D) in November. Andrews rarely concentrated any time focused on fellow potential nominees and stayed laser focused on speaking to voters (delegates) on how to unseat Wexton. "Wexit" is a play on the "Vexit" movement that popped up where some counties in Virginia have been courted by West Virginia to join it given they resemble West Virginia more than Virginia culturally and politically. Many Virginians in rural and mountain areas no longer see Richmond as relating to them and their lifestyles let alone respecting it. 

The VA10 represents all of Clarke, Frederick and Loudoun Counties in western Northern Virginia and incldues Winchester, Manassas, Manassas Park and parts of Fairfax and Prince William Counties.

Jennifer Wexton (D-V10) similar to Abigail Spanbeger (D-VA7) was elected during the so-called "blue wave" of 2018. Wexton defeated Republican incumbent Barbara Comstock(R) while Spanberger defeated Rep. David Brat (R). Both were successful in winning the suburban vote especially that of women. Wexton won Fairfax by 18 points over Comstock very similarly as Spanberger won Henrico County in suburban Richmond by the same margin. Whereas Spanberger only won two localities in the VA7 and won, Wexton five localities outright and one within 1% margin.

Andrews likely will win Clarke and Frederick County however will need to make major inroads in my childhood home in Loudoun County. Fairfax is strong Wexton country and the  urban areas of Manassas and Manassas Park are very Democratic with heavy immigrant demographics that have been supporting Virginia Demcorats the last few cycles in mass. Loudoun was once a strong "red" county but has seen  shift with the massive growth of the federal government and the growth that it has experienced resulting in a shift towards the left just like Fairfax experienced decades before.

Andrews however carries none of the "establishment" baggage that Wexton used effectively against Comstock so it will be interesting to see how the Wexton campaign plays things and whether it will simply run against Trump given its a Presidential cycle. Trump lost the VA10 by seven points in 2016 and performed roughly the same as Comstock in Loudoun County.

Having lived in both the counties of Loudoun and Chesterfield the two are very similar and will determine the outcomes of both Congressional races this November. Chesterfield is following the same journey politically as Loudoun as it to is now moving to the left at the polls in statewide elections though still supporting GOP candidates locally.

Andrews like Rameriz will not be defined by the outcomes of this race as both have already far exceeded any expectation most had with regard to their campaigns. 

Draft Denver Riggleman (R) for Governor Launched

 

With the Republican nominating conventions now complete for the 2020 November Elections,there is now a grassroots effort underway to "draft" Representative Denver Riggleman (R) to run for Governor of the Commonwealth of Virginia in 2021.

Many Republicans see Congressman Riggleman as the kind of candidate that can appeal to areas of the Commonwealth that thus far the Virginia GOP has been unable to engage and connect with. The suburbs.The defeat of Chairman Jack Wilson on Saturday August 15, 2020 at the Republican State Convention signals to many that the party will move further right and alienate demographics that the party must tap in order to change the outcomes of the the last decade where the Democrats have swept elections.

Some doubters point to Riggleman's recent defeat in the Virginia Fifth Congressional , however that result and the reasons behind it are exactly what makes Riggleman an appealing candidate to far more Virginians especially centrists and swing voters.  The Republicans have little chance to win these voters in the "middle" from either party if State Senator Amanda Chase (I-R) is nominated. Riggleman has an outstanding conservative record in Congress that appeals to many in the party that are outside the far right social conservative camp. The social conservatives defamed Riggleman for performing a same sex wedding and for that reason alone sought to stack the deck in the district committee and worked to undermine his re-election. Committee members were paid by the challenger in such an offensive manner to many that the State Convention just passed an amendment to the Party Plan to ensure that such issues never happen again.

The social conservatives have long carried their own agenda which has proven not to be in the best interests of growing the party in Virginia the last decade. The social conservatives are focused on "settled issues" and "litmus tests" which is limiting the party in attracting more Virginians to the candidates it nominate. In fact, one could argue that the local committees are no longer reflective of the conservative electorate at large in Virginia which are nominating unelectable candidates.

Riggleman speaks to a broader audience withing the Virginia GOP with a broader message than mere social issues that the majority of voters in Virginia have moved past. Riggleman has had to fight the Conservative Fellowship and Middle Resolution elements of the party that seek to return Virginia to the 1990's environment and believe they can undo all the changes or progress that Virginia has experienced especially in the area of respecting gay marriage and individuals rights to marry the person of their choice. These social conservative elements seek to place their religious belief systems upon all Virginians independent of any ramification regarding what Republicans and the Republican Creed stand for.

The real battle in 2021 will come when the RPV determines how to nominate candidates. After experiencing what happened in his home district at its convention it is no wonder that Denver Riggleman may contemplate running for Governor as an independent. Ironically, State Senator Chase has threatened to run an independent campaign should the RPV determine to hold a convention and not a primary. This is an interesting dynamic that two candidates would consider third party runs. It speaks to just how dysfunctional things have become within the Virginia GOP in 2020.

Supporters have taken to social media to organize a "Draft Denver Riggleman for Governor" campaign and forming a Facebook group to encourage Riggleman to enter the Governor's race in 2021.

https://www.facebook.com/groups/333270554377849

Denver Riggleman's clear grasp of the business community and economic conditions Virginians face and his depth of knowledge regarding issues facing Virginia in agriculture, defense, and technology far out pace the only other Republican candidate declared in State Senator Chase.

The following are Denver Riggleman's  recent approval ratings:

Endorsement of President Donald Trump

Campaign for Working Families 100%

National Right to Life Committee 100%

National Retail Federation 100%

Americans for Prosperity 100%

Heritage Action for America 100%

American Energy Alliance 97%

Family Research Council 100%

https://justfacts.votesmart.org/candidate/evaluations/181445/denver-riggleman-iii

State Senator Amanda Freeman Chase (I): "We Are In an All-Out War"

 

On Saturday August 15, 2020 State Senator Amanda Freeman Chase the Republican Senator turned Independent according to the latest update of the Virginia Senate on Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Senate_of_Virginia ) continued her campaign tour of western Virginia  where Chase participated in the "Back the Blue" event in Salem.

The event was sponsored locally by Veterans Event Management Inc. and drew a hundred or so Virginians in the rain to march in support of law enforcement. The event did not come without some protest however from a small group of people demanding police reforms. The Progressive Anti-Racist Action marched at times alongside the "Back the Blue" marchers through parts of downtown Salem.

Many critics of Senator Chase have attacked her for her disingenuous nature when it comes to law enforcement, especially in her home county of Chesterfield in suburban Richmond, Virginia. Chase has had repeated run-ins politically with Chesterfield County Police and the Chesterfield County Sheriff as well as even Capital Police in Richmond.

Senator Chase was removed from her local political committee the Chesterfield County Republican Committee after she refused to follow the Republican Party Plan and support a Republican nominee which comes with it a four year ban from committee activities. Chase's refusal to support Karl Leonard who ultimately won election as Sheriff of Chesterfield County resulted in serious controversy for the Senator given such months before the Senator was involved in misrepresenting an encounter with Capitol Police at the State Capitol over Chase taking liberty with a parking spot that was unauthorized for her use. Chase asserted one story regarding the incident that was never substantiated and was found to have berated a police officer she claimed she had not once a video surfaced. This came after Chase was reported to have used Capital Police for unauthorized chaffuering whereby she was using state property for her own personal benefit.

https://richmond.com/news/local/government-politics/updated-with-video-police-sen-amanda-chase-berated-officer-who-wouldnt-let-her-park-in/article_56f46cdc-44a0-5379-bda1-e5879e3f34fe.html

The Republican leadership embarrassed by the actions of State Senator Chase issues a statement of support for the Capitol Police.

https://richmond.com/news/local/government-politics/gop-leaders-send-support-to-capitol-police-following-report-of-sen-chases-altercation/article_e3913e83-e8b0-56df-aabc-346c9b14827c.html

Furthermore, Senator Chase just last month stepped into a similar issue with Chesterfield County Police when she claimed to have been informed by its Chief that ANTIFA that was participating in protests in Richmond for weeks were planning to cross the James River into Chesterfield and riot and loot residences.

“I actually spoke with Chesterfield Police Chief [Jeffrey] Katz, and just wanted to make aware to you all what is actually coming to Richmond,” said Chase. “First of all, it is conclusive that Antifa has been in the Richmond area. They are now going into, this evening, the greater Richmond area neighborhoods. I know that Chesterfield County where I live is one of those targets.”

https://www.chesterfieldobserver.com/articles/police-chief-says-he-wasnt-source-of-sen-chases-antifa-warning/

Chase just last month failed to appear at her own county event to support law enforcement called "Go Blue Day" on July 25 and Chase failed to make any mention of the event on her official page offering any support.

The Senator has been very vocal with her opposition to the protesting efforts in the Richmond the last few months that have resulted in the removal of statues and monuments along historic Monument Avenue. Chase claimed "there is an all out attack on folks that are white" relating to the protesting. Chase would later claim that "they" were "going after white history" on a radio show with John Fredericks.

Then on Saturday in Salem at the American Legion State Senator Chase openly states to those in attendance that "We are in an all-out war" today. Was Chase referring to "Republicans" or "white people"? So much of the rhetoric lately from Chase has come along the same racial lines as previous statewide candidate Corey Stewart that the campaign appears to almost mirror Stewart's failed Senate bid in 2018.

None of this appears to have been too convincing for most Republicans in Virginia. The thought of Chase threatening to run as an independent if there is not a primary has not sat well with many in the party. The likelihood is that the Republican Party of Virginia will declare a convention method to select the candidates in 2021 to represent the party and Chase appears to be positioning herself for the opportunity to claim it was done to keep her from winning. Its a rather interesting political strategy however everything Chase has done in recent weeks suggests she is preparing for a convention as she is courting local committees that typically end up as delegates at the statewide convention. Chase supported and participated as a delegate in the nominating convention for the Virginia Seventh Congressional District and made her participation very visible on site and on social media.  In fact, some have even claimed that Chase attempted to steal the limelight as she worked the delegates not only on behalf of Delegate Nick Freitas but also herself.

Freitas would win the nomination on the third ballot and Chase was heard claiming to deliver Chesterfield County to Freitas in the election this Fall as Freitas squares off against Democratic incumbent Abigail Spanberger. While it might seem rather insignificant of a claim given the historical dominance of the GOP in Chesterfield, the county has moved closer towards the center than at any time in the last thirty years. Spanberger won Chesterfield County just two years ago by 10 points over Rep. David Brat (R) whom Senator Chase has long ties with and supported.

The Chase campaign still appears to be a campaign that is trying to find its messaging. The current messaging is not resonating with voters in Virginia if you consider Senator Chase trails in fundraising and has not even come close to raising even half what prior candidates have in the first quarters of statewide bids while potential challengers have raised close to one million or more. This is a huge concern as the Republican Party now appears poised ready to launch other candidates into the nomination process.

Well respected former State Senator Bill Carrico and Delegate Kirk Cox are expected to enter the race come October/November and some consider Rep. Denver Riggleman a potential to enter after losing his primary seeking re-election in the Virginia Fifth Congressional. Another one many are keeping an eye on is Virginia businessman Pete Synder.

RPV Changes Direction: Wilson Out; Anderson In

 

The Republican Party of Virginia held its State Convention over the weekend in what has been labeled an "unassembled" convention due to the Covid-19 crisis.

The convention nominated a new Chairman of the Republican Party of Virginia in Rich Anderson. Despite dozens of endorsements from prominent Republican leaders around the Commonwealth, Chairman Jack Wilson was defeated soundly. Wilson has the support of former Rep. Randy Forbes, former Lr. Gov. Bill Bolling and John Hager as well as many district leaders like Cary Allen and Dennis Free. 

Many of the supporter of Chairman Wilson were labeled "establishment" by the opposition to his attempt to continue in his capacity as Chair for the next four years. Wilson took over the Chairmanship for John Whitbeck. Wilson had the support of the Young Republican Federation of Virginia as well as the new organization known as Grow Our Party and many local boards across the Commonwealth.

Rich Anderson, a former Delegate in the House of Delegates, defeated Jack Wilson handily where Wilson only received some 18% on the first ballot to determine the next Chairman. Anderson ran a "Its Time to Win Again" campaign linking Jack Wilson to the failures of the past few years of the GOP to resonate with voters and for the losses sustained like in the Virginia General Assembly.

It proved to be a vert strong message though Jack Wilson was hardly the one responsible for said losses the last decade. They started long before Wilson arrive to take over the state chairmanship and Rich Anderson will likely find himself in the same situation given the status of the GOP local committees and their inability to locate, recruit or develop new candidates.

Rich Anderson won on the second ballot with 62% of the vote after Jack Wilson was removed after the first round of voting. The other candidate was Mike Schoelwer who garnered 32% in first round and than around 38% in the second.

Major questions remain for the GOP moving forward and whether Anderson can deliver on his stated plan for the RPV. The Virginia GOP appears more divided than ever and has experienced various controversies this year at the district level that are beginning to turn many apathetic on the prospects that the GOP can win any time soon. From the VA-05 corruption on the district committee involving the payment of committee members, the VA-07 delegate controversy and the recent social media diatribes of the VA-06 newly elected Chair John Massoud concerning Senator Kamala Harris D) selected as the VP running mate by former VP Joe Biden.

The only Amendment to pass at the 2020 Convention was the "Conflict of Interest" Amendment which was crafted to address such issues as occurred in the VA-05 and the undermining of Rep. Denver Riggleman (R) and the nomination of Bob Good.

Political Survival in 2021: Redistricting at the Gates

 

During the 2020 General Assembly session in March, the Democratic majority passed the legislation addressing the means of which statewide redistricting will be determined. Redistricting has traditionally been a product of the State Legislature every ten years following the Census Report that evaluates the distribution  and changes of population. Not only is this significant to the legislature but also the level of representation a state will send as a delegation to the House of Representatives in Congress.

Virginia currently has an 11 member Congressional Delegation. There is not data thus far to support that following the 2020 Census that that number will change. Virginia currently has 8.5 million residents  The 2010 Census reported a population of 8,001,024 Virginians. Other states like New York , California, Illinois, Ohio, Pennsylvania for example are predicted to actually lose at least one seat in Congress due to population changes while Texas and Florida are poised to gain one. This is important politically for both parties.

In Virginia however, the immediate impact will be redistricting existing districts both relating to the Legislature and Congress.

The power to "gerrymander" is an old game and one played by both parties historically. Gerrymandering refers to the manner in which the majority draws new lines of districts to benefit them politically. If you examine some of these districts they are hardly uniform. They are drawn less on basis of the population of a geographic area and more by using the historical voting metrics of local precincts. The majority always claims such redraws are done to address disenfranchisement however that appears less the case when you examine the history of them. It is more a matter of political metrics given various pockets of areas. This is easily illustrated in the manner in which all these districts appear simply by examining them in map form.

The Democratic majority largely flip flopped from 2018 to 2020 on the issue of removing the legislative redistricting and placing it in the hands of an independent (more or less) commission. Democrats supported a commission while in the minority yet after the 2019 election cycle that saw Democrats take control of both chambers of government in the legislature changed their position. During the 2020 legislative session only nine Democrats supported the amendment joining 45 Republicans in the House of Delegates. After championing the commission in previous years, the Virginia Black Caucus appeared to do a complete about face on the issue claiming that a commission would suppress black political power. 

The previous year during the 2019 General Assembly Session that exact same bill passed 83-15 in the House of Delegates with support of majority of the Black Caucus. So what changed? What changed was a power shift in government and the securing of the "trifecta" of controlling both chambers in the Capitol and the Executive led by Governor Ralph Northam (D).

For Virginians what is clearly on display here is a lesson in Politics 101.  Democrats once securing power no longer wanted Virginians themselves to play a role in determining how redistricting would take place and under whose direction. They did so only when they were out of power.

The amendment to the Virginia State Constitution calls for a sixteen member bipartisan commission of which eight would still remain state legislators comprising members of both chambers as well as eight citizens. If the commission ever were to be unable to decide on an plan than ultimately the Virginia Supreme Court would decide the outcome. This is something opponents to the measure like Del. Mark Levine (D) highlighted last year in his opposition given the court in his view is overwhelming stacked with conservative appointed judges.

Virginia Democrats for years have crafted messaging that the courts are not to be trusted. One could argue that Democrats have attacked every major institution in Virginia in truth. The recent protesting and riots seem to illustrate this point. If the judicial system can not be trusted to remain objective in this process than who would the Democrats suggest have that power? Well, their legislative majority of course.

Will voters support the amendment referendum in November? Many suspect that Virginia will support this measure. There have been many groups and organizations like One Virginia 2021 that have been strong advocates for the measure.

Redistricting itself will happen one way or another. The Republicans face the fact that many of its stronger districts especially in the Senate very well may get redrawn, especially many of those that have been staunch supporters of President Trump. 

One such Senate district is the Virginia 11th. Long a solid "red" district in Chesterfield County, Virginia and represented by potential gubernatorial candidate State Senator Amanda Freeman Chase has experienced a massive shift that has largely gone unreported by the media. Not unlike other districts in Chesterfield where the strength of the GOP brand is declining.

If the change in voting metrics is examined over the course of the last decade or so the shift is massive. The Virginia Senate hold elections every four years. Here are the winning percentage in the Virginia 11th since 2003.

2003- 97.27 (Steve Martin)

2007- 62.41 (Steve Martin)

2011- 94.7% (Steve Martin)

2015- 63.74% (Amanda Chase) -Chase defeated Martin in primary than won General

2019- 54.51% (Amanda Chase)

The most alarming metric in the voting data is that Senator Chase won in 2015 with a 27 point margin in 2015 and four years later saw that margin decline 18 points to +9 winning with 54.51%.

Many have speculated that this data is one of the major factors that Senator Chase has declared her candidacy to run for Governor in 2021. There were rumors Chase would seek the GOP nomination in the Virginia Congressional District but declined to run given that the district determined to hold a "convention method" over a primary. Chase has stated she knows the district (VA7) better than anyone given her participation on the Rep. David Brat (R) campaign who defeated Rep.Eric Cantor (R) in a primary and ultimately went to Congress. Brat would lose his re-election bid in 2018. 

The changing demographics of the Virginia 11th, especially in the Chesterfield portion of the district are moving away from the the base that Chase has held. While the county is still lead by a Republican Board of Supervisors, the board and the local Republican committee do not appear to support Senator Chase any longer. This poses a real challenge for Chase in 2023. The metrics are going the opposite direction just as the GOP has witnessed in the Virginia 10th adjacent to the Virginia 11th that the GOP lost in 2019.

Chase is one politician to watch over the course of the coming year. Chase has stated she would run as an independent if she did not secure the GOP nomination but the real thing to watch for is Chase has always had any eye on Congress. If Delegate Nick Freitas (R) nominated last month to represent the GOP on the ballot this November in the Virginia 7th Congressional District does not defeat Rep. Abigail Spanberger (D) do not be shocked if Chase transitions to a 2022 Congressional bid unless of course Chase herself become victim to any  redistricting that may occur.

House District 29: Special Election due to Judge Appointment

 

Many Virginians may be unaware that Delegate Chris Collins (R) representing the  29th House District comprising Fredrick, Winchester and Warren Counties in Northern Virginia has resigned from the legislature to assume the position of General District Court Judge in Harrisonburg, Virginia.

Collins defeated Irina Khanin (D) rather handily in the 2019 election cycle. Khanin is the Democrat candidate for the special election scheduled November November 3, 2020. The Republicans have settled on Bill Wiley to represent the party to hold the seat that has remained Republicans for well over twenty year and held for long time by Beverly Sherwood before being defeated by Mark Berg in a primary battle in 2013. Bergs served on two year term before being ousted himself in a primary by Chris Collins in 2015.

The district has been solidly red for many years and is said to be one of the areas that the Democrats would like to redistrict given the conservative dominance.

The Collins elevation to the bench identifies yet another issue that Virginia faces. Not only has Virginia failed to add seats in its legislature to keep pace with population density where the Commonwealth as as many state legislators today with over 8 million residents as it it had in 1900 when it had just one million but the Commonwealth still does not permit the electorate to determine judicial appointments.

Typically what happens is the General Assembly selects or appoints Judges in Virginia. However, in the case in which a vacancy occurs and the Assembly is not in session than the Judge may be appointed by the corresponding circuit court judges or the Governor . In either case, Virginia voters do not determine the judges which make up the Virginia Judicial System. 

This process is written directly into the Virginia State Constitution. Judges must also reside in the circuit courts jurisdiction of which they sit and have been a member of the bar for at least five years and be a Virginia resident. This of course all creates and even greater  overly "political" atmosphere and almost country club setting in which legislators whom are lawyers appoint other lawyers they may know or have worked with.

 

Why is Virginia one of the few states that does not permit its voters to determine judges? The question comes around from time to time but is never more pertinent than today. If a political party gains total majority of the legislature they in effect can get total control of the judiciary over time though appointments. This is not unlike of course Supreme Court nominations. However, these nominations are far more public and with hearings before the people. The state appointments are far less transparent and often the people never know they are even taking place.

Virginia requires transformational change in the manner in which it undertakes the peoples business. The Assembly requires greater representation and the people require the ability to select its own judges independent of political positioning. 

These things require an reexamination of the Virginia State Constitution and need to get taken directly to the people. 

Has Time Come to Amend the Virginia Constitution For Equal Representation in Richmond?

                                                          

Jonathan Scott

Guest Contributor

Is it any wonder many counties in the Commonwealth of Virginia are frustrated with the level of representation in Richmond?

Are Virginians represented equally in Richmond in the Virginia General Assembly today as they have been throughout Virginia history? Given the increasing Virginia population, what is a good ratio of official to constituent for the purposes of representation?

Would not amending the Virginia Constitution and increasing the number of Delegates and Senators provide for greater representation?

The time has come to address the rising population of the Commonwealth and stop disenfranchising the vote in truth by limiting the number of officials sitting in the General Assembly.

The Assembly will send an amendment referedum to  the Virginia Constitution regarding redistricting but what it really should be doing to addressing the Articles that determine how many seats there can be in the Assembly in the first place.

By increasing the number of districts to be represented in the Assembly, the ratio of the number of Virginians represented per official would be lowered thus providing greater representation to the population.

A big issue facing Virginia today is a dominance by one single Virginia region in terms of representation in large part due to the population density of Northern Virginia which has just recently provided dominating control of the Legislature by one Party over that of another due its control over that region politically.

Fairfax County, Virginia for example has a population of 1.1 million. Fairfax has three different Democrat Congressional Representatives with precincts within the county and (9) State Senators and (17) State Delegates representing constituents in the General Assembly residing in the County.

The General Assembly has 100 Delegates and 40 Senators as determined by the State Constitution.  This translates to a political reality that Fairfax County influence controls 17% of the House of Delegates and  22% of the Senate.

Not a single seat held in the Virginia Assembly from Fairfax is a Republican official. Every Assembly seat including the Speaker of the House of Delegates position and three Congressional Districts are held by Democrats. In essence 1,1 million Virginians dominate the political influence over a Commonwealth with 8.5 million in terms of seats, influence and power.

In fact, Fairfax is so partisan that in 2019  (6) races for the State Senate did not even have a Republican or Independent on the ballot. In 2015 there were (2) such races with no Republican or Independent.

In effect, Fairfax controls (9) Senate votes. Are there Republicans and Independents residing in Fairfax County? Sure. However, the way the districts are configured you would not know it. For example District 39 had 20,757 Republican voters and both District 32 and 33 both had about 18,000  but the manner in which the precincts and district has been drawn it hardly provides for real representation.

In fact, examine the fact that in District 36 Democrat Scott Surovell won with 37, 518 votes yet Republican incumbent Glen Sturtevant in District 10 comprising Richmond and portions of Chesterfield and Powhatan earned 37,737 and lost. Over 80,000 votes were cast in the 10th District.

Only 37,518 votes were cast in the 36th District for the Virginia Senate. That compared with over 80,000 voters casting ballots in District 10, 11 and 12 all including the suburbs of Richmond.

This fact alone demonstrates the fault that exists in the current district allocations and how they are drawn. Instead of drawing these districts is such a manner to benefit those actually drawing them would it not make more sense long term to amend the State Constitution and add seats.

While adding seats could certainly address better representation in Richmond, it is also important to address the size of districts and the number of voters casting ballots so Virginia is not left with such disparity as illustrated by District 36 and Districts 10, 11, and 12.

Did the Virginians who enacted the Virginia Constitution on June 29, 1776 ever envision such a development. By 1790 Virginia had a population of 747,610 amassing even greater geographical territory then given it was not until the Wheeling Convention of 1861 that the western areas of Virginia  broke and sought the formation of present day West Virginia. Even back then the Assembly would be comprised of the same number of Assembly officials as today.

Virginia population 1900 was 1.85 million and had 100 Delegates and 40 Senators in the Virginia General Assembly. Virginia's population in 2019 was 8.54 million and it appears to continue the trend of growth moving forward and yet today's session in Richmond has the same number of Delegates and Senators as it did in 1900.

While Virginia may have been more unified culturally in 1900 than today it is critical to consider just how different today the various regions of the Commonwealth are in truth. One such debate today is over gun control. A majority of counties throughout the Commonwealth have enacted 2A Gun Sanctuary Resolutions top protect citizens against the extreme legislation  being enacted by Virginia Democrats in Richmond.

Having so many seats in the Assembly from the populous Northern Virginia certainly aligns with the Constitution but as population grows all that will happen is Virginia will have districts with more and more citizens. The State Constitution constrains the Assembly ability do nothing more than re draw and re draw district lines regardless of the population  growth Virginia experiences.

It is clear the solution is to amend the State Constitution and increase representation. This is not something the political establishment will do however without the people demanding it. Citizens will have demand equal representation just as Virginians did during the Revolutionary period of Virginia history. Politicians will not surrender the power that the current system creates, especially those politicians in the Progressive region of Northern Virginia.

So what is the biggest issue to reaching equality of representation?

Understand that are Maryland justa cross the Potomac has less population than Virginia yet has more State Senators and Delegates representing its citizens than Virginia. Maryland has 6 million citizens and 47 State Senators for example. Delaware has less than one million people yet has 21 State Senators. Virginia is approaching 9 million citizens and has just 40 State Senators.

The State Constitution of Virginia determines the exact number of seats in the General Assembly.

State Constitution of Virginia Article IV Sections 2 and 3:

Section 2. Senate.

The Senate shall consist of not more than forty and not less than thirty-three members, who shall be elected quadrennially by the voters of the several senatorial districts on the Tuesday succeeding the first Monday in November.

Section 3. House of Delegates.

The House of Delegates shall consist of not more than one hundred and not less than ninety members, who shall be elected biennially by the voters of the several house districts on the Tuesday succeeding the first Monday in November

These sections of the State Constitution are what should be revised and amended. The number should be increased to reflect more representation with seats having a maximum population density that each official shall serve.

Should the Assembly in Richmond not address the disparity that exists it will not  be able to prevent some counties from considering offers made by West Virginia to join that state and leave the Commonwealth.

The sizes of various districts vary in terms of population and voting participants. 

Follow TCS on Social Media:

https://www.facebook.com/TurnVARedAgain/

"Grow Our Party" Readies for Virginia Republican State Convention Fireworks

                                        The Fight within the Republican Party Continues

There certainly remains much to do in Virginia if one identifies as a Republican. It is important to use the term "Republican" because the very coalition that claims that banner has been fighting an internal battle for years now. Various labeling set upon dividing the Republican Party of Virginia has become a constant theme especially via social media where the barometer regarding "conservatism" appears always in question. Terms "RINO" or "Liberal Republican" appear more and more every day as simply a means of disparaging others rather than formulating and debating ideas or solutions.

The RPV 

Many have questioned the failures over the course of the last decade where no Republican has won a statewide race yet little appears to have changed within the party itself other than the escalation of infighting and wrangling for more control at the committee levels throughout the Commonwealth of Virginia. Where are the voices that can identify the problems and craft solutions to address why the outcomes have been so negative for Republicans the last few years. Do the committees not recognize any problems the party faces with the 2020 electorate or are they still consumed with running the party as if it were still the 1990's?

Many elements within the party have sought to use the committee system as a vehicle to control outcomes and not "grow our party". This is very alarming to many in Virginia. The strongest forces working behind the scenes are often people whom voters have little knowledge of in fact. Most have never been on a ballot for voters consider and frankly operate in what many call the "shadows". Frankly, these individuals often are the ones that are pulling the strings at the circus that has become the Republican Party of Virginia in the last few years.

This is what happens when a party faces repeated defeat. Its textbook. It resorts to blame. Blame has become the biggest message the last few years, especially since the election of Donald Trump. Many constantly blame Trump for the divisions with the GOP yet in Virginia its less Trump himself rather its those that opposed Trump in the first place. Many of the recent challenges and "power grabs" at the committee levels across Virginia have stemmed from the very group that opposed Trump from the outset. These individuals for the most part were supporters of Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX) whom lost the primary in 2016 in Virginia to Trump. Now support for Cruz was to be expected in some quarters of the Virginia GOP given its long history of a vocal "social conservative" contingent however the issue arose when this group failed to support Trump after winning the Presidency. This contingent of "bright red conservatives" or "biblical conservatives" as Congressional candidate Bob Good (VA-5) represents abandoned Trump in terms of utilizing the victory in 2016 and uniting any messaging that could be used to support growing the party in Virginia and impacting direct change at the polls. Polls which for the last few years have been very unkind to Republicans in the General Assembly and the Virginia Executive. This contingent has blamed Trump when in fact locally it is they who should bear much of it in terms of failed outcomes.

In Virginia, the term "principled" has simply become nothing more than "uncompromising". These conservatives have forgotten the lessons of Ronald Reagan and some have questioned whether they embraced them at all. Reagan was "principled" yet understood that in order to govern and advance his vision for America "compromise" must play a role in how he moved an opposition Congress. Many conservatives today refuse to compromise. The decline in the Republican Party and more importantly the decline in enthusiasm for its ideals is not that the ideas do not address issues effectively its that the messaging no longer resonates. The Republican Party of Virginia appears today without real communicators that can take the message directly to ALL Virginians in all parts of the Commonwealth. A message centered on limited government, reforming education, lowering taxes, and healthcare coupled with addressing how we get Virginia back on track fiscally after having dealt with Covid-19.

To make matter worse now we see where some "conservatives" seek to shrink the party over expanding it. Is the party a party that welcomes ALL Virginians or not? Is the party a "big tent" of ideas it once were or not? Who is making these decisions who can or can not claim the banner of Republicanism.? Does the party seek to alienate voters and future generations over settled "social issues"? Examine the message that was sent all across the Commonwealth (and nation) when "conservatives" in VA-5 Congressional District rejected a sitting Congressman who was virtually assured of re-elections simply because he performed a private "same sex" wedding ceremony after being asked to do so by the participants. The rejection of Rep. Denver Riggleman (R) would never have transpired had his own district's committee sought to remove him. There was no grassroots effort or groundswell but rather a dedicated few that are nothing more than the cancer whose self righteous indignation is working against the future of the party. It did not matter to these individuals that Riggleman had a 90% conservative approval rating, was endorsed by the President and was favored to win re-election handily. The outcome sought had little to do with November in truth.

The infighting has been virtually non-stop. In the VA-3 Congressional District we witnessed attacks on a potential nominee for having been a former Democrat of all things. Once again muddying any "big tent" message being advanced to grow the party. In truth, in this instance it was Republican auxiliary officials that targeted the candidate during a primary having little to no comprehension it seems that Ronald Reagan was once a Democrat as well. The spin by the left made matters even worse given the fact the candidate was a minority and now makes it even harder for the nominee to attract minority voters in the VA-3 come November.  Like the events transpiring in the VA-5 the circumstances in the VA-3 simply permit the narrative from the left that the Republican Party is not an open and inviting party for ALL Virginians to continue to compound the issues that the Virginia GOP faces with young, suburban voters.

The Republican Party must face facts. The party is losing on the ground in the suburbs that are determining the election outcomes today. The party is not offering Virginians solutions and is losing the entire messaging game as it simply focuses its efforts on the "decided" Republican voter. The party currently has candidates fighting "two front" wars against both the Democratic Party of Virginia and the Republican Party of Virginia. State Senator Amanda Freeman Chase (I-R) from Chesterfield County spends half her time on the campaign trail fighting other Republicans or at the very least attempting to settle scores with other Republicans. Hardly a party unifying message.

And going into the upcoming State Convention of the Republican Party we learn of efforts to make the Republican State Central Committee (SCC) smaller. At a time when the Virginia GOP is losing elections and failing to secure donations at the same pace as the Democratic Party of Virginia there appears to be a concerted effort by the very same people who have failed to unite with the Virginia GOP post 2016 to make the controlling and influencing function "smaller". The fact is the GOP SCC is dwarfed by its Democratic counterpart  and only as 75 or so members. Almost two million people in the Commonwealth of Virginia vote Republican and yet the State Central Committee has a mere 75 members. Now there is an effort afoot to shrink this committee to 54 members. This is simply a death by 21 cuts.

This desire to reduce the number of "seats at the table" is very telling. It tells Virginians that those in support of this are less concerned with winning elections and more concerned with simply consolidating power from the scraps left from the Democratic "blue wave" that continues to overwhelm them. It signals nothing more than a "white flag".

This effort is being advanced by what has become known as the Republican Change Committee. Many have argued however that it is nothing more than Middle Resolution and the Conservative Fellowship by another name.

The proposal by the Republican Change Committee is a direct assault on the current structure of the Republican Party of Virginia. The committee seeks to limit the voice and participation (power) of the affiliate and auxiliary organizations that support the party all across the Commonwealth. These are the College or Young Republican organizations or the Women's Federation for example. The goal is to reduce the number of SCC members thus reducing the number that these organizations may have holding seats on the committee itself. The majority of support for the Republican Change Committee proposal appears to be coming from the VA-5 and VA-7 Congressional District.

What would a reduced State Central Committee to 54 members solve? What is the issue that such a proposal seeks to address? How would a 54 member committee have greater success in electing Republicans than a 75?

The truth of the matter is the 75 member State Central Committee is too small not too large. Other states have massively more members performing the same functions as the Virginia SCC and the Democratic Party of Virginia as somewhere around 200 members. The GOP should be examining means to grow the committee not reduce it. The party must grow to compete and have the manpower of engaged supporters to effectively implement the goals of the committee and unify the party with clear messaging to drive future elections.

We need to face a very simple truth. Far too many on these committees have failed to understand that the one true purpose of these committees to to locate, identify and recruit candidates that can win elections. Period.

These committees need to come to grips with the fact that while the reduce members other organizations like the Libertarian Party of Virginia for example continue to grow. A fact that very well may hinder Republicans in future elections as more younger Libertarian Party candidates begin to run for local and statewide offices.

The Republican Change Committee is facing some push back from the affiliate and auxiliary organizations however. One such newly formed group is Grow Our Party headed up by Thomas Turner who also is the current Chairman of the Young Republicans of Virginia. Clearly, The Conservative State has taken issue with the manner in which the Young Republicans have engaged in the primary process however on this issue Grow Our Party appears to fight the good fight regarding rejecting the proposal to reduce the number of members on the SCC.

Only issue with the Grow Our Party amendments that it will advance at the State Convention is they do not appear to go far enough. The goal should be to expand not fight for the status quo of 75. Below are the stated amendments that Grow Our Party seek to advance. Virginians may get a real lesson in how entrenched the special interests are withing the state convention and what the true objectives are for the Republican Party of Virginia moving forward.

Young Republicans National Federation

Thomas Turner has stated that RPV Chair Jack Wilson is supportive of all three amendments his group is proposing but the other candidates for RPV Chair have yet to embrace all three. Jean Gannon who is a candidate for the RPV National Committee is also supportive of all of the amendments proposed by Grow Our Party.


The Grow Our Party (GOP) Initiative is a response to the frustration you’ve probably been feeling if you’re a conservative in Virginia. Every year, we’ve seen the left gain more ground. Even worse, we’ve seen Republicans retreat inwards, conceding seat after seat, district after district, and defeat after defeat. We owe it to ourselves, our communities, and our principles to fight for every seat every year. 

Amendment #1 – Unit Chair Caucus

Amendment #1 would create a caucus of Unit Chairs and provide for the caucus to elect three unit chair representatives to serve on the State Central Committee.

Unit Chairs are the frontline leaders of our Party. Creating a caucus to build relationships between unit chairs from around the state would allow for unit chairs to join together to advocate for the needs of unit committees. Providing for three representatives on the State Central Committee would provide a focal point for advancing the priorities of unit committees in policy and financial decision making.

Amendment # 2 — Expanded Affiliate Group Representation

Amendment # 2 would increase from three to four the number of representatives of each of the Republican Women, the Young Republicans and the College Republicans. It would also make the leader of each group a full voting member of the State Central Committee.

These party affiliate groups have long been among the strongest leaders in the Party. Every candidate whose sought office in Virginia can attest to the strong, well-organized support of affiliate group members. By expanding their representation and giving them a vote on the Executive Committee, they would have a status similar to each of the Congressional Districts.

Amendment # 3—Ethical Conduct Recusals

Amendment # 3 would add a public disclosure of conflicts of interest by members of the State Central Committee and District Committees and require recusal where a conflict of interest occurs because of the member’s paid relationship with a candidate or elected official on an issue affecting the candidate or elected official.

The current Ethical Conduct provision provides for disclosure of conflicts to the other members of the committee, but not to other Party members who should be aware of any issues faced by their leaders. Posting conflict notices to the RPV website would correct this.

Additionally, the current provision only requires that members provide notice of conflicts, it does not require them to refrain from voting on issue where the conflict arises. The amendment would require that members recuse themselves from votes affecting candidates or elected officials for whom they work.

FICO 10t: What the Government Is Not Talking About But Should Be!

TAKE CONTROL OF YOUR FINANCIAL HEALTH NOW!

We constantly hear today all the issues regarding Healthcare.

How we need to take care of ourselves and YET who is looking out for our "Financial Health"
these days in Washington? Do politicians have a vested interest in our financial health
anymore?

As nation, for decades following the Great Depression the lesson was we should "save". Can
we really call ourselves a "saving" nation in 2021?

NOW we spend and spend on credit and the political elites encourage this behavior along
with the financial institutions that contribute to them year after year. Healthcare has certainly
been a central political issue for over two decades now and we still have no real solutions
while no one ever seems to address the declining FINANCIAL HEALTH of our citizenry
and our nation as a whole. Why is that? Who has a vested interest is seeing consumers

pay more for borrowing? Why even after banks and lending institutions were bailed out
over a decade ago has little to nothing changed with how banking and lending services
are conducted?

How is it that has our economy expands and leads the world our borrowing interest rates continue to rise for average consumers in America. It is stated that some 220 million Americans have Fair or Below Average credit using the FICO scoring modeling. 220 million out of roughly 360 million Americans. While our government continues to borrow on the back of our national debt and borrowing from the Chinese , there appears little support or will in Congress to address spending and borrowing. They have treated our debt no different than consumers revolving credit accounts and see it merely as a federal charge card for a bill later generations will certainly have to pay.

Consumers however, do not have that luxury. In fact, consumers are about to get crushed under a new credit scoring model that is being rolled out to banking and lending institutions that is the most anti-consumer of any of the prior scoring models. This model is known as FICO 10t. FICO is the number one method to evaluate applicants for consumer credit followed VantageScore. Currently the predominate model used is FICO 8, however this will likely be replaced by years end as banks switch over to FICO10t.

Fair Issac Corporation (FICO) is a public company that has been around since the 1950's and has had a virtual monopoly over consumer credit scoring. FICO (NYSE: FICO) "powers decisions that help people and businesses around the world prosper. Founded in 1956 and based in Silicon Valley, the company is a pioneer in the use of predictive analytics and data science to improve operational decisions. FICO holds more than 180 US and foreign patents on technologies that increase profitability, customer satisfaction and growth for businesses in financial services, telecommunications, health care, retail and many other industries".

FICO is trading today at five year highs on the NYSE. In fact, FICO is trading roughly the same market value as Apple Computer. This is most likely do to pre-booked sales of the FICO 10 & 10t modeling across its client platforms. This is a huge indicator that FICO 10 modeling will become the norm in 2021.

In short, FICO partners and work with the lenders not borrowers. Borrowers are not FICO's customer base. Banks and financial institutions are and FICO seeks to provide the financial industry with the means of providing the reason why interest or borrowing rates  are so widely different for varying consumers. The industry claims these rates are a direct relationship to the "risk" they are assuming yet the "risk" is defined in truth by the scoring model used. For example, a consumer credit score often is completely different from all three of the national credit bureaus.



FICO 10t will punish the average consumer. FICO 10t  unlike FICO 8 or 9 uses a "trailing" twenty four month scoring model as opposed to the "snapshot" of the current modeling where it simply uses your current three digit score "in the moment". FICO10t instead permits lenders to look back two years into the borrowing and payment behavior of consumers. The immediate effect will be if a consumers score under FICO 8 is under 620-30 the FICO 10t modeling will lower the score even further. The reason for this is the change in the scoring parameters and the weighted measures that FICO places in areas of the credit profile.

Revolving credit accounts were once king. Revolving accounts are typical credit cards. However, under FICO 10t "revolving" accounts are considered more negatively than ever before replaced with a higher value upon "installment" loans. Why the change? The change it appears obvious is set to benefit lenders. 

For example, revolving accounts permit consumers to increase utilization up to the credit limit. Thus a consumer could qualify today for a loan under FICO 8 with low utilization (balance to limit ratio) "in the moment" and than after closing on a loan can then potentially utilize the entire credit limits on revolving accounts thus potentially creating a situation where the borrower may at some point be unable to pay back loan payments. FICO 10t permits lenders to review two years of consumer habits so if a consumer historically tuns high utilization yet "in the moment" its utilization is low the history will carry more weight in the scoring than the current ratio of balances to limits.

While Washington is focused on Covid-19 and Second Stimulus Checks debates, little is being done to address how consumers will be negatively impacted by FICO 10t which will ultimately costs borrowers more.

"Built on predictive analytics created from huge data stores of consumer behavior, FICO® Scoring Solutions distill data down to a score, as a concise measurement of risk. FICO® Scoring Solutions are easily understood and provide automated decision-making capability that can be integrated into a company’s operations as the basis for taking action.

Sophisticated mathematical and statistical processes exploit patterns found in traditional and new sources of data to better identify risks and opportunities, and capture relationships across many factors to drive better results"

The driver of these results is to the benefit of lenders not borrowers. Consumers have accepted these scoring models largely with no push back in large part due to the fact that Washington is so in bed with the financial sector that little has ever gotten done in addressing these scoring models.

Consumers are left to themselves to navigate the credit industry. We are never taught credit in schools let alone taught credit by our families. Individuals are left to navigate their "financial health" alone for the most part and accept the "three digit code" that identifies them. In truth, consumers are nothing more than a number and this number determines everything with regard to one's ability to borrow or and some cases even qualify for a job.

Many have likely seen the marketing push recently by Experian Boost. This marketing push is a direct result of the reality that Experian already understands that FICO 10t is going to hurt consumer credit scores. The boost in effect is a mean of raising an individual credit score artificially outside the FICO scoring model in truth undertaken by the credit bureau. The question remains how effective the boost will be longer term. This is why bureaus are beginning to add other credit entries such as gas, utilities, rent and most recently subscription services.

No in truth has prepared consumers for FICO 10t. There has been largely no conversations in Washington regarding the matter. Other matters have consumed the Congress and FICO 10 has rolled out in almost stealth-like fashion. 

Lenders are under no obligation to use the FICO 10 modeling though they are certainly paying for it so in all likelihood most utilize the scoring model though they still can run the FICO 8 or 9 modeling at least in the interim.

What can consumers do today?

The first thing to do is to begin to take one's "financial health" seriously as much as one would take the actual health. Examine the impact of FICO 10 in the context of your current credit and spending habits. Develop an action plan or if you require one based on how to mitigate FICO 10 we have a no cost guide available based on consultation with a leading financial institution to help guide consumers through this new paradigm of credit scoring. Readers of The Conservative State can receive this information simply by requesting it be emailed to them from theconservativestate2020@gmail.com.

Readers will get an Action Plan and suggestions to address high debt ratios or how to address one's credit profile to prepare for FICO 10. This may include removing items from one's credit file or adding additional lines that raise one's score that are not included in the current profile but will be beneficial under FICO 10 & 10t.

The time is now. Consumers cannot wait until FICO 10t is formally accepted by all financial institutions likely by January 2021 to take action. It will be too late. Remember FICO 10t uses a trailing modeling so what consumers do in the next six months will impact their scores dramatically. 

Consumers have already been impacted with unemployment and other Covid-19 related issues negatively and though tax payers may be provided an additional stimulus benefit the question consumers have to ask themselves is how best to use that stimulus. Spend it on a whim or use it to address their "financial health" and the impending new scoring model from FICO.

Take action today. You future ability to borrow very well may depend on it.