Only One Week Left: Help Protect Rights Of Faith Based Child Service Agencies!

There is a lot going on right now in Virginia: An ever earlier presidential race, an earlier than ever U.S. Senate campaign, a vitally important State Senate election only five weeks form now, a phenomenal annual gala this Saturday, not to mention spectacular early fall weather in which to experience great Virginia festivals. But there’s something vitally important to add to the check list that won’t take long and which you can do from the comfort of your home computer.

There is only one week left in the 30 day re-opened public comment period regarding a proposal that would allow the government to discriminate against faith-based child placement agencies by forcing them to adopt children to homosexuals despite their deeply held faith beliefs and principles. This not only is discrimination, it violates conscience protections and religious liberty…..Read More

I just received an email reminding me to comment. We have only until tomorrow (October 11) midnight? Have you commented? No? Then what are you waiting for?

Please contact the Board of Social Services by following the instructions below and urge it to reject any regulation that discriminates against faith-based child placement agencies.

» Click here.

» Click “Enter a comment.”

» Type “Preserve religious freedom” in the subject line.

» Type and submit your comments.

What follows is an excerpt from today’s Cuccinelli Compass by Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli.

Some developments took place last week in the healthcare cases that warranted me updating you on the status of all of these cases, including Virginia’s.

There are three courts of appeals rulings that are headed to the Supreme Court for that court’s consideration.  The 6th Circuit case out of Michigan, our case in the 4th Circuit, and our 27 sister states’ case out of Florida in the 11th Circuit.

In the 6th Circuit, the federal government won, so the private parties have appealed to the Supreme Court and the federal government has responded to that appeal.

In the 11th Circuit, the states won, so the federal government this week filed its appeal of that decision to the Supreme Court.

And last but not least, in the 4th Circuit, the federal government won, so we have filed our appeal to the Supreme Court.

There are different elements to all of these decisions which I won’t go into today, as the most important new information this week is how all of the decisions and actions of the federal government have effected the schedule for the case.

Essentially, the federal government got off the brake and hit the gas.  They appear to have decided over at the Department of Justice that they want to complete this case relatively expeditiously.  This is a complete change from their earlier strategy of delaying the case as best they could.

Thus, approximately by the end of October the requests to the Supreme Court that they hear these cases will all be in, and the Supreme Court will have then hold a “conference” among the nine justices at which they consider all of the requests for appeals.

I would be shocked if some portion of these cases are not taken up by the Court, so for purposes of discussion, let’s just assume that the Supreme Court will hear these cases.

As early as late October or November the Court will decide what legal questions they want us all to address and they will set a briefing schedule for the case.

That briefing schedule will take us into 2012, when the case will probably be argued in the late winter/spring, and it will be decided by the end of June of 2012.

I thought you’d like to know that!  I will get back to you soon regarding details of the specific legal questions that are being proposed to the Supreme Court, and then again as the Supreme Court lets us know what it decides about how the case(s) will be presented … and when!

To help add some context, here are several news articles.

• From USA Today: Obama to ask Supreme Court to hear health care case
• From the Washington Post: Justice Dept. asks Supreme Court to review health-care law
• From The Christian Science Monitor: Why a fast Supreme Court ruling on health-care law might benefit Obama
• From the White House Blog: Obama Administration Asks Supreme Court to Hear Health Care Lawsuit

Here is a post that reflects upon a curious inconsistency. How does an article in of our local papers begin?

It’s no secret that school officials and educators generally consider the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 to be onerous.

President Barack Obama appears to agree with that take.

Under a plan Obama announced last week, states will now have the chance to get waivers from some provisions of the law that, among other things, requires stu­dents have 100 percent proficiency in math and reading by 2014.

Manassas City Schools School Board Member Tim Demeria said lifting NCLB is a good thing because it was a “onesize- fit-all” program that measures end results rather than progress. (continued here).

Can we naively assume Federal officials or any government officials always have the best interests of our family and friends at heart? No. Too often people just want things their way. Here is an example. What must state governments do to get a waiver from President Obama?  They must qualify for the waiver.

States will receive a waiver if and only if they agree to certain conditions set by the Education Secretary. CNN calls those conditions “credible commitments to close lingering achievement gaps.” Conservatives call those conditions “strings attached” and “legislating through the executive branch.”

Chief among the administration’s stipulations for a waiver: The adoption of college-and-career-ready standards (a.k.a. national standards). National standards and tests might sound sensible in theory, but, in reality, they would strengthen federal power over education and weaken schools’ direct accountability to parents and taxpayers. Moreover, they would most likely lead to the standardization of mediocrity rather than the standardization of excellence. (from here)

If the Federal Government’s role in public education is not a “onesize-fit all” solution, what is it? Well, what the Federal Government does is needlessly involve distant political officials and bureaucrats in our schools. In return for a small sum of money, Federal officials dictate how our children will be taught and what our children will learn. We call these unfunded mandates, and nobody really knows how much they cost. Consider this excerpt from Federal Government Shouldn’t Mandate Kids’ Meals—or Their Education by the Heritage Foundation.

Additionally, one Virginia school district calculated that the price associated with NCLB was “equivalent to the cost of hiring 72 additional teachers…[ten] instructional assistants,…[and] four additional assistant principals” who could have had direct “interface…with the community’s children.”

Thus, it is no surprise that after five decades of ever-increasing federal involvement and spending, there has been virtually no increase in student achievement. Nonetheless, since the implementation of the first Elementary and Secondary Education Act (currently known as No Child Left Behind) in 1965, the government has taken the approach that greater federal involvement is the way to improve schools.

Fortunately, some of Virginia’s elected officials have started saying no. Here are a few examples from the last year.

• Governor McDonnell Vetoes Unfunded Mandate on Localities. Here is the reason.
  

  Governor Bob McDonnell has vetoed legislation (SB 966) that would force local school districts to provide 150 minutes of physical education per week for all students in elementary and middle school by the year 2014. The state mandate was strongly opposed by local school districts and teachers concerned about the financial impact of its implementation.

• Md., D.C. poised for common education standards, but not Va. This reference is from The Washington Post. Of course, the writer favors nationalizing education standard, and editorializes to that effect. However, Virginia is not ignoring these standards. It is simply incorporating portions of those standards into its own standards. See VIRGINIA STANDARDS OF LEARNING & COMMON CORE STATE STANDARDS

In the last post, HOW OUR GOVERNMENT SUPPORTS DEVIANTS, we posted Delegate Bob Marshall‘s letter chastising the Virginia branch of the Federal Reserve for flying the homosexual, bisexual and transgender rainbow flag. Here we post Marshall’s letter to Federal Reserve Chair Bernanke.

Federal Reserve Chair Bernanke questioned by Bob Marshall

Below is a copy of the letter I sent to Federal Reserve Chairman, Ben Bernanke, why his organization is taking sides in a social controversy. Specifically, I questioned a decision of the Richmond Federal Reserve Bank to fly the homosexual, bi-sexual, transgender flag just under the American flag at the Richmond Federal Reserve Bank building during June.

Previously I had contacted the head of the Richmond Federal Reserve and received an ambiguous response which is why I decided to write to the Fed Chairman.

June 24, 2011
Hon. Ben S. Bernanke, Chairman
Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System
20th Street and Constitution Avenue N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20551
[Via Fax: 202-452-6481]

Dear Chairman Bernanke:

I write you as a senior member of the Virginia House of Delegates regarding the decision of the Federal Reserve Bank in Richmond to fly the homosexual, bisexual and transgender rainbow flag, along with the American flag, at its Richmond offices during June.

This act appears to violate the Richmond Fed’s own political advocacy policy: ” Federal Reserve Banks have a unique need to protect their independence from the political process … an employee may not engage in political activity while on duty or on Bank premises, and must be extremely cautious to avoid any suggestion of Bank sponsorship or support of such activities.”

In the Richmond Fed’s June 16, 2011 public response to me, Mr. Jeffrey Lacker first reported that this decision “generated considerable public reaction,” but then disputed that flying this rainbow flag was a “political or social statement.” His response failed to explain how this decision to fly the rainbow flag was arrived at, other than to say employees requested it.

Mr. Lacker also failed to address how the Fed made its decision or how it would handle future requests from other employee groups. However, a reporter later told me that a Fed spokesman had said it would be a non-starter if an employee group requested the Richmond Fed to even consider flying a Christian Flag or a Flag of the Sons of the Confederacy.

The New York Times reported (6-10-11) that, “Jim Strader, a spokesman for the bank, said the bank had fielded hundreds of phone calls and as many e-mails about the flag. … One of the most popular arguments by the flag’s opponents was that the bank is a government institution … Mr. Strader’s response is that the bank is in fact privately owned, as are all regional Federal Reserves, and that it considers requests by employees … but not the general public.”

As chairman of the Federal Reserve System please advise me of the following: (1) Did the Richmond Fed violate its own non-partisan directive? If so, what steps will you take to ensure that it does not happen again. (2) Regardless of whether the flag flying violated the Richmond Fed policy, should the Federal Reserve, and/or its 12 regional banks, use Fed money to take such public advocacy positions? (3) Mr. Strader’s comments about the status of the Richmond Fed are problematic. Was Fed spokesman Jim Strader accurate when he told the New York Times that the Fed’s 12 regional member banks are privately owned, and not governmental in nature? I look forward to your response.

Sincerely,

Delegate Bob Marshall

Delegate Bob Marshall
R – 13th District of Virginia

With liberty comes responsibility; we must leave others in peace. We live as a free people when we do not force our beliefs and practices upon each other. Unfortunately, not all people will accept the self restraints required to remain free, and they look for ways to impress their beliefs upon their fellow citizens.

Here is an example, a recent email that Delegate Bob Marshall provided to his constituents. Note that the online version provides a picture showing how the homosexual, bisexual and transgender rainbow flag is being flown. Can you imagine what’s next. Are we going to have innumerable flag poles at the Federal Reserve so we can sport flags for all the other special interest identity groups?

Below is an Op-Ed I was asked to write by the Richmond Times Dispatch. To see an online version Click Here. 

* * *

Virginia Federal Reserve Takes Side In Culture Wars

The Richmond Federal Reserve Bank has decided to take sides in the culture wars.

Its decision to fly the homosexual, bisexual and transgender rainbow flag under the American flag on Fed property is imprudent and conflicts with the Fed’s own code of conduct.

Its policy states: “Federal Reserve Banks have a unique need to protect their independence from the political process … an employee may not engage in political activity while on duty or on Bank premises, and must be extremely cautious to avoid any suggestion of Bank sponsorship or support of such activities.”

The U.S. Supreme Court in Texas v. Johnson (1989), recognized that flags can be used to make political statements. The Fed flying the homosexual, etc., flag is a political statement.

Federal Reserve banks are not corner convenience stores that we can choose to not patronize. They are not mere private entities. The Fed was chartered by an act of Congress in 1913. It is subject to portions of the federal Freedom of Information Act.

The Fed notes that: “The Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System is a federal government agency. The Board is composed of seven members, who are appointed by the President of the United States and confirmed by the U.S. Senate.”

The president and U.S. Senate do not appoint and approve the CEOs of McDonald’s or Wal-Mart because they are privately owned and controlled.

The Richmond Fed website states: “As the nation’s central bank, the Federal Reserve sets monetary policy, supervises and regulates member financial institutions and provides an array of financial services.”

The Federal Reserve’s secretive, behind-closed-door actions can make or break national economies.

There is no logical link between banking and sexuality. Yet, the rainbow flag was placed on the Richmond Federal Reserve flagpole by unnamed operatives of a public agency with enormous coercive powers granted by Congress.

When I asked a Fed official who authorized the flag, I was told the Fed was flying the rainbow flag to show “inclusion and acceptance.”

I then asked, “Does the Richmond Federal Reserve ask prospective employees about their sexual inclinations? Or has this been done in the past?” I wanted to know if this flag was some kind of a “remedy.”

I was told, “Thank you for the additional questions. Those will be reviewed with your letter.”

Flags are very powerful emotional symbols used as rallying points in warfare, as standards in armies, as proclamations signifying dominion, legality, nationhood or ownership. Americans pledge allegiance to our American Flag.

The Fed’s action is unnecessarily provocative and is not merely the placing of a piece of cloth on a metal pole to show workplace “inclusiveness.” Homosexual persons were already hired and are working there now.

This act is loaded with coercive implications for individuals and businesses. Will member banks be required to fly “rainbow” flags or adopt employment or business loan policies that force “inclusion and acceptance?”

As partisans in the values war, the Federal Reserve cannot be a fair umpire of the economy because it refuses to recognize moral cause of some economic problems — and calls some “problems” panaceas.

If the Fed cannot be trusted in the things we see, how can we trust them behind closed doors?

Institutions are lengthened shadows of their founders. A Federal Reserve System founder, Virginia Rep. Carter Glass, was the force behind the poll tax in the 1902 Virginia Constitution to “protect” Virginia’s self-appointed elites.

Official notes record Glass as saying the poll tax “will emancipate the mind and make free the action of the dominant race … restoring to us the natural right … of independent thought. … This plan of popular suffrage will eliminate the darkey as a political factor in this State. … And next to this achievement will be the inability of unworthy men of our own race … to cheat their way into prominence.”

At a time of economic uncertainty and growing mistrust of the Fed, our skepticism is certified by the Fed’s in-your-face action.

George Washington, in his first inaugural address noted “the propitious smiles of Heaven can never be expected on a nation that disregards the eternal rules of order and right which Heaven itself has ordained.” No one is perfect. Calling vice a virtue does not alter the nature of things, but it does call into question the judgment of those making such declarations.

Upholding “the Laws of Nature and Nature’s God” is love of our neighbor.

Again, I urge Richmond’s Federal Reserve Bank president, Mr. Jeffrey Lacker: Take down that flag.

Who is Zac Bissonnette? Well, that is not the subject of this post. However, an article he wrote is. So let’s begin with Bissonnette.

Zac Bissonnette is graduating this spring from the University of Massachusetts at Amherst. He is the author of “Debt-Free U: How I Paid for an Outstanding College Education without Loans, Scholarships or Mooching off My Parents.” (from here)

Bissonnette wisely advocates less debt and promotes living modestly. Thus I highly recommend his article in the Wall Street Journal.

Money Lessons for Every High-School Graduate

When Felipe Matos enrolled in the New York Institute of Technology to study graphic design, he never thought that degree would be the very thing that prevented him from pursuing his dream career.

But more than $50,000 in student debt later, he has found himself working as an assistant building manager in New York City — with half his salary going toward debt repayment. Read More

Is there election fraud going on in our nation? Is it happening here in Virginia? If so, what can be done to prevent it?

The King Street Patriots from Houston asked these same questions and were shocked to find many irregularities in its hometown election process. In response, it created an initiative called True the Vote, which is becoming a model for groups to fight voter fraud across the country. Learn what the King Street Patriots discovered and what it is doing about it at 7:00 p.m on Tuesday, May 17, at Centreville Baptist Church in Centreville. Catherine Engelbrecht, The King Street Patriots president (see Breitbart.tv), will share her experiences with True the Vote in the Houston area……Read More

via Family Foundation Blog

Do you have children? The National Organization For Marriage (NOM)has a post on its blog that you should read.

Unfortunately, we live in less discrete and mannerly times.  Thus, the following blog post includes explicit language (not vulgar): Queerty: Can We Admit That We Do Want To Indoctrinate Kids? The publication it reference includes both explicit and vulgar language. So please view NOM blog when your kids are not around to watch.

The big news out of the General Assembly is that Governor Bob McDonnell signed off on HB 5005 House of Delegates and Senate districts; changes in boundaries. The Redistricting Plans maps are provided here. What’s in the news?

• Gov. McDonnell to Approve New Redistricting Plan from the ManassasParkPatch describes some of the effects locally and includes Supervisor Corey Stewart’s take.
• McDonnell signs new redistricting bill from the washingtonexaminer.com points out the redistricting plan is still not a settled matter.
  

  Virginia still must submit its maps to the U.S. Department of Justice for review because of the state’s history of racial discrimination.

• Va. assembly reaches deal on new legislative map from the Washington Post gets quotes from members of the General Assembly.
• Prince William County cut into five Senate districts from InsideNoVA.com focuses on the fundamental problem.
• Next up is congressional redistricting, but not soon from the Richmond Times-Dispatchconsiders the General Assembly will tackle congressional redistricting and the related issues. In addition, that article mentions law suits.
  

  The primary nominating contests for General Assembly seats have been scheduled Aug. 23.

  The Justice Department has 60 days to review the Virginia submission, then overseas ballots must be mailed within 45 days of the primary, so if the bill is sent to the Justice Department this week and it approves the plan, there should be time enough to hold the primaries on Aug. 23.

  Assessing the just-adopted plan, McDonnell said “additional improvements in measures of compactness and preservation of communities of interest would have been ideal.”

  But, he said, “no plan is perfect” and further delay could have prompted a legal challenge and turned the line-drawing authority over to the courts.

  He noted that three suits filed by individual citizens and pending in federal courts request court-drawn lines. The suits, however, would not go forward unless the plan going to the Justice Department is rejected.

  “Prompt action was required to preserve this inherently legislative function,” the governor said.

What Virginia’s Blogs Had To Say

In Pr. William sends redistricting map to DOJ for approval The Virginia Politics Blog reminds us that Prince William County is itself subject to redistricting. Make certain you check out www.pwcgov.org/redistricting.

In McDonnell signs redistricting maps, Moonhowler admits she finds the profusion of plans and the outrageous gerrymandering confusing.

Project Virginia, in Virginia Redistricting: Compare New & Old Districts offers a different view using google maps. Blue Virginia provides a pointer to the same maps in Maps of New Virginia Senate and House Districts.

Black Velvet Bruce Li offers an apt observation, Gerrymandering Is OK If Parties Agree How To Do It.

Bearing Drift provides a cute cartoon in Virginia Senate Passes New Redistricting Map; McDonnell to Sign.

Virgina Virtucon complains about the gerrymandering in a Governor McDonnell will sign new redistricting plan.

The bad news for Loudoun county is that the new 31st Senate district still stretches from Arlington to Loudoun county. Most of Loudoun county will now be in the 13th Senate district. Prince William county will still be split, but split into fewer senate districts than under the previous plan.