Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility
Upcoming Event

Best Places to Work in Virginia

Hamburger Menu Hamburger Menu

byline: Will Gonzalez | Capital News Service

Virginia voters, legislators split on redistricting amendment

RICHMOND, Va. — Before Kelly Herring voted in the presidential election, she was undecided on a key vote, and it wasn’t who she was going to elect for president.

Herring wasn’t sure how to vote on a Virginia constitutional amendment that will change the process of redrawing congressional and state legislative districts.

After every 10-year census, the General Assembly is responsible for drawing new congressional and state legislature districts, over which the governor has veto power. The majority of congressional and state legislative districts in Virginia were redrawn after the 2010 U.S. Census, when Republicans controlled both chambers of the General Assembly and the executive branch. The maps will be redrawn again next year with final census counts.

The proposed amendment would put the mapmaking power into the hands of a bipartisan commission. It’s the final step needed to amend the state constitution after state legislators passed the redistricting amendment for two consecutive years.

Herring is one of millions of Virginians who will weigh in on the amendment — one of two on the current ballot.

“There was one local issue that I went back and forth on too, but the amendment was a big one,” Herring said.

The commission would be composed of eight state legislators and eight citizens. An equal number of Democratic and Republican legislators from each chamber of the Virginia General Assembly would be appointed by the political party leadership. Legislative leaders also would recommend people for the citizen positions, which would be selected by retired circuit court judges.

New legislative district maps approved by the commission would go to the General Assembly for a vote. If any are rejected, the commission would be required to produce  new maps. If rejected again, the Virginia Supreme Court would establish the new districts.

The amendment requires maps to be drawn in accordance with federal and state law requirements that address racial and ethnic fairness, including the 14th Amendment and the Voting Rights Act. Maps also need to “provide, where practicable, opportunities for racial and ethnic communities to elect candidates of their choice.”

Some Virginia lawmakers oppose the amendment. They believe it gives legislators more power to choose voters as opposed to voters choosing legislators.

“You have four party leaders that not only control the process, but control the appointment and representation on this commission,” said Del. Lashrecse D. Aird, D-Petersburg. “Ultimately what you get, is legislators actually compounding their party and hanging on to control in the process of map-drawing.”

Legislators passed a measure in the spring that establishes standards for redistricting. The bill, introduced by Del. Marcia Price, D-Newport News, is intended to prohibit racial gerrymandering, or the manipulation of boundaries that ultimately favors one political party. The measure sets criteria for drawing legislative districts, which includes abiding by equal population requirements, following laws related to racial and ethnic fairness, and creating contiguous districts.

“The Voting Rights Act has been under attack since the day it was signed in 1965,” Price said. “There is nothing that prevents it from being further gutted, so our argument is; don’t just mention it, actually put the protections in there so even if it fails on the federal level, we have the state level that’s protecting us.”

Opponents of the amendment argue that the recently passed redistricting law deals with the effects of racial gerrymandering better than the proposed amendment. Opponents say that passing the amendment could potentially prevent further progress by the General Assembly since it’s difficult to overturn the constitution.

“We have always said that we wanted to prohibit gerrymandering, which is ultimately the main problem that we’ve experienced with map-drawing in Virginia,” Aird said. “There is no language in this amendment that would prevent gerrymandering.”

Nicholas Goedert, an assistant professor of political science at Virginia Tech supports the amendment. Other states have changed the criteria for redistricting but it proved ineffective, he said.

“I think changing the process is much more important as a general rule than changing the criteria,” Goedert said. “Because there are a lot of ways that legislatures can get around the wording of the criteria and still implement a map that suits their interests.”

Goedert said the amendment isn’t perfect, but sees Virginia passing both the amendment and redistricting bill as a step in the right direction to creating more demographically balanced districts.

“We’ve seen, throughout the states that have adopted commissions, that the commissioners take their jobs seriously, and for the most part succeed in drawing acceptable maps,” Goedert said. “There’s always been a couple of exceptions, but I would be optimistic on that point.”

The redistricting amendment is endorsed by several democratic groups, including the ACLU of Virginia and the League of Women Voters of Virginia. Herring, who identifies as progressive, decided to do more research after seeing there were progressive groups on both sides, and ultimately decided to vote no on the amendment.

“The Black Legislative Caucus and the NAACP both spoke out against it, and ultimately gerrymandering is an issue that affects minority voters more,” Herring said. “So, I figured this is probably an issue where I should listen.”

The other proposed amendment on the ballot would exempt disabled veterans from property taxes for motor vehicles.

Virginians debate mandatory COVID-19 vaccinations

RICHMOND, Va. — Though the federal government is asking states to prepare for the possibility of a COVID-19 vaccine within months, some Virginians differ on whether the vaccine should be mandatory when it becomes available.

Virginia Freedom Keepers, a nonprofit that advocates for medical freedom, gathered in Richmond this week for a “March Against Mandates,” in protest of the statewide mask mandate, as well as a potential vaccine mandate, in response to COVID-19. The Virginia General Assembly is currently holding a special session to discuss the budget, along with COVID-19 and criminal justice reform measures.

Virginia Health Commissioner Dr. Norman Oliver said in a recent interview with ABC-8 (WRIC-TV), that if he is still Virginia’s acting Health Commissioner when a COVID-19 vaccine is made available, he will make immunization mandatory.

“It is killing people now, we don’t have a treatment for it and if we develop a vaccine that can prevent it from spreading in the community we will save hundreds and hundreds of lives,” Oliver said.

Gov. Ralph Northam’s office did not back up the health commissioner’s statement. Northam’s administration told WRIC it had “taken no official policy position on whether or not a COVID-19 vaccine for adults should be mandatory.” Northam’s office did not respond to a request for comment from Capital News Service. According to the Virginia Department of Health press office, when Dr. Oliver spoke in support of a mandate for a future COVID-19 vaccine, he was “sharing his personal opinion as a physician.”

Virginia law currently gives the health commissioner the authority to issue a mandate for a vaccine in the case of an epidemic. The law allows doctors to exempt people from vaccination if their health would be negatively affected. A. E. Dick Howard, a professor of international law at the University of Virginia, says this statute must be read in light of the state constitution, which states the commonwealth’s executive power is vested in the governor, meaning it’s unlikely that Oliver would have the final word.

“This provision is meant to focus both authority and responsibility of the governor. It therefore argues against the splintering of authority in the executive branch,” Howard said in an email.

The current language exempts those with a note written by a doctor, but two Virginia delegates wanted to exempt people who object to vaccination on religious grounds.

HB 5070, introduced by Del. Dave LaRock, R-Loudoun, and HB 5016, introduced by Del. Mark Cole, R-Fredericksburg, have similar wording. The two bills, which were tabled during the special session, would have eliminated the health commissioner’s authority to enforce a vaccination mandate for people who object due to religious beliefs.

“I am concerned that there is such a rush to develop a vaccine for COVID-19, that normal safety and effectiveness testing may be bypassed, leading to the distribution of a vaccine that has not been fully tested,” Cole said in an email. “Who knows what the health consequences of short-circuiting the process may be?”

LaRock did not respond to a request for comment about his bill. Cole said constituents concerned about a mandatory vaccine asked him to introduce HB 5016, and that “religious beliefs” in the bill incorporates any belief system, including secularism.

“I am old enough to remember the Swine Flu scare more than 40 years ago. President Ford started a program of public vaccinations to protect people from it,” Cole said. “I received the vaccine when I was in college.”

In 1976, a swine flu outbreak in New Jersey led President Gerald Ford to issue a nationwide immunization program, according to the Los Angeles Times. Of the 40 million Americans who received the vaccine around 500 are suspected to have contracted Guillain-Barré syndrome, a disorder that damages nerve cells and causes paralysis in some cases.

“No one should be forced to take a vaccine. Every vaccine has some health risks associated with it; they may be relatively minor, but they are there,” Cole said. “Vaccines that have been tested and found to be effective and safe should be offered to the public, and I am confident that most people will take advantage of it, including myself.”

In 1905, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled states have the authority to regulate for the protection of the public and a community has the right to protect itself against an “epidemic of disease,” regardless of one’s political or religious objections, according to the National Constitution Center. The ruling allowed the city of Cambridge, Massachusetts to fine residents who refused to receive smallpox injections. According to Howard, in the case of a mandatory vaccine, the court ruled that states may create an exemption based on religion but are not obliged to do so.

“Thus, the question of what qualifies as a religious exemption depends on how a statute is drafted and interpreted,” Howard said.

Bill allows renters to make certain repairs if landlord doesn’t respond

CORRECTION: THIS WIRE STORY HAS BEEN UPDATED. The original version incorrectly stated the party affiliation of state Sen. John Bell.

RICHMOND, Va. — A bill that gives tenants the power to make repairs on their property and deduct the costs from their rent, with conditions, recently passed the Virginia Senate and is expected to advance in the House.

Senators voted unanimously in committee and on the floor to pass Senate Bill 905, introduced by Sen. William Stanley, R-Franklin, which gives a tenant the right to seek repairs that constitute a fire hazard or serious threat to the life, health or safety of occupants. Such conditions include the infestation of rodents and lack of heat, hot or cold running water, light, electricity, or adequate sewage disposal facilities.

Tenants would have the right to secure a contractor to fix the issues and deduct the cost from their rent.

First, the tenant would submit a written complaint to their landlord and allow them 14 days to fix the issue before the tenant secures a licensed contractor to complete the repairs. The tenant must provide documentation and itemized receipts of the repair to the landlord. The tenant would be allowed to deduct the costs of the repairs, not exceeding one month’s rent, from subsequent rent payments.

Sen. John Bell, D-Loudoun, proposed an amendment that was rejected during the Senate committee hearing, requiring the tenant to obtain two repair estimates.

Currently, state law allows the landlord more time to fix issues that compromise the health and safety of the tenant. The tenant can file a detailed, written complaint and give notice that the rental agreement will terminate on or after 30 days, if the landlord hasn’t fixed the issue within 21 days. If the problem is fixed, the tenant can’t break the lease.

A tenant, though legally empowered under current law to terminate the rental agreement would still, in most cases, need to have a deposit plus first month’s rent to secure a new place, which can present a roadblock for renters.

The Virginia Poverty Law Center noted its support of the bill and stated that in addition to speeding up the repair process, the proposed bill would reduce the number of cases in Virginia’s courts, because tenants are given the opportunity to handle issues themselves instead of having to take landlords to court. Christine Marra, the group’s director of housing advocacy, said that the bill benefits tenants by allowing them to deduct the cost of donated repairs.

“There are a number of nonprofits across the commonwealth that do home repair for homeowners, but will not do them for renters because they don’t want to unjustly or unduly enrich the landlord,” Marra said. “I hope this will encourage them to start doing repairs for tenants.”

According to Elizabeth Godwin-Jones, a Richmond attorney who represents landlords, the original bill was too vague about what would constitute an emergency condition and how the tenant was allowed to go about getting the work done.

Now that the tenant is required to hire a licensed contractor and provide the necessary documentation, she said there’s little a negligent landlord could do to challenge their tenant in court and force them to pay their rent in full.

“To me, the landlord already has a bit of a black eye, if it was something really serious and they didn’t do what they were supposed to do,” Godwin-Jones said.

Stanley patroned another renter’s rights bill, one which didn’t advance. The bill would have given tenants the right to use their landlord’s failure to maintain the property as a defense if they were taken to court for failure to pay rent.

Virginia’s eviction rates are among the highest in the country. Princeton University’s 2016 Eviction Lab study showed that five of the 10 cities with the highest eviction rates in the U.S. are in Virginia, and Godwin-Jones believes the problem is rooted in poverty more than it is in landlord-tenant legislation.

“To me, the biggest thing to help the eviction problem would be to raise the minimum wage and have more affordable housing options, but that’s terribly underfunded, and the funding hasn’t kept up with the increase in the rent,” Godwin-Jones said.

After making it to the House of Delegates, the bill was assigned to a General Laws subcommittee, which recommended advancing it. A committee on Thursday postponed hearing the bill because Stanley was still in the Senate and could not speak to the bill.

Bill defining milk aims to give dairy farmers supermarket advantage

RICHMOND, Va. — As people drink less dairy milk and some turn to plant-based alternatives such as oat, soy and almond milk, dairy farmers say they’re struggling. That’s why Virginia is the latest state to advance legislation restricting the use of the word milk for marketing purposes.

Del. Barry Knight, R-Virginia Beach, introduced House Bill 119, which defines milk as the lacteal secretion “obtained by the complete milking of a healthy hooved animal.” The bill prohibits plant-based milk alternative products from marketing their products as milk. Knight, a pig farmer, said agriculture is the largest private industry in Virginia, and the state government has to protect it. The bill reported out of the Agriculture, Chesapeake and Natural Resources committee Wednesday, and heads to the House floor.

Virginia produced about 1.6 billion pounds of dairy milk in 2018, and the number of permits issued to dairy farmers is on the decline, according to the Virginia Farm Bureau.

“We’re losing about one dairy farm a week in the state of Virginia, and farmers are struggling hard,” Knight said. “I thought, ‘well, maybe these plant-based fluids are capitalizing on the good name of milk.’”

HB 119 was amended to say that 11 out of the following states need to pass similar legislation for the law to go into effect: Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maryland, Mississippi, North Carolina, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas and West Virginia. A bill that passed the North Carolina legislature carried a similar stipulation.

Michael Robbins, a spokesperson from the Plant Based Foods Association, believes the bill is unnecessary, and the dairy industry has created a “bogeyman” in plant-based milk, instead of addressing the tangible issues the dairy industry faces.

“We view these bills as a solution in search of a problem,” Robbins said. “There is no consumer confusion on plant-based dairy alternatives versus dairy coming from a hooved animal. Consumers know exactly what they’re purchasing.”

Mississippi and Arkansas passed their own “truth in labeling” laws for plant-based meat alternatives such as tofu dogs and beyond burgers, which were challenged and overturned on the grounds that they violated the First Amendment. Robbins said if milk labeling bills become law, the plant-based food industry will fight them in court.

“Right now, because none of those bills are in effect, there’s no standing to challenge them in court, but step one would be to file an appropriate lawsuit,” Robbins said.