Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli has discovered the fastest way to get everyone mad, do what you are suppose to do. Here is today’s Cuccinelli Compass.
January 1, 2012
Dear Friends and Fellow Virginians,
As many of you read yesterday in the news (link here for the story) I was considering supporting an effort to change the rules to allow the full range of presidential candidates on Virginia’s ballot on March 6th.
I obviously feel very strongly that Virginia needs to change its ballot access requirements for our statewide elections. However, after working through different scenarios with Republican and Democratic leaders to attempt to make changes in time for the 2012 Presidential election, my concern grows that we cannot find a way to make such changes fair to the Romney and Paul campaigns that qualified even with Virginia’s burdensome system. A further critical factor that I must consider is that changing the rules midstream is inconsistent with respecting and preserving the rule of law – something I am particularly sensitive to as Virginia’s attorney general.
My intentions have never focused on which candidates would be benefited or harmed, rather I have focused on what is best for Virginia’s citizens, as hundreds of thousands of Virginians who should have been able to make their choices among the full field of presidential primary contenders have had their number of choices reduced significantly.
My primary responsibility is to the people of Virginia, and how best to fulfill that responsibility in these particular circumstances has been a very difficult question for me. I believe consistency on the part of public officials is an important attribute. And I believe that Virginians are best served by an attorney general who consistently supports the rule of law. That leads to my conclusion that while I will vigorously support efforts to reduce the hurdles to ballot access in Virginia for all candidates, I will not support efforts to apply such changes to the 2012 Presidential election.
I do not change position on issues of public policy often or lightly. But when convinced that my position is wrong, I think it necessary to concede as much and adjust accordingly.
Sincerely,
Ken Cuccinelli, II
Attorney General of Virginia
When our attorney general — or any of our leaders — avoid playing favorites and just do their jobs, that can prove personally costly. However, when our leaders do that, they are doing what is best for our children. Quick fixes are just too shortsighted. So please support Cuccinelli. Let him know you support the rule of law.
When we raised the bar too high for viable candidates to qualify, we “legally” eliminated otherwise good candidates. Stupid, but we did it, and there is no honorable legislative fix.
So the matter has to go to court. Perhaps a judge can open up the race. Perhaps not. Whatever the judge decides will most likely increase the acrimony. Consider the possibilities.
- If a judge affirms the status quo, those who supported the candidates who have been denied the opportunity to compete will quite rightly feel cheated.
- If a judge overturns the decisions of election officials, he will most likely do so because those officials have either been dishonest or ignorant. For one reason or the other, they did not follow proper procedures. Of course, there is also the possibility the judge is being partisan.
Whenever something that should have been decided at the polls is decided by the legislature or in court, we get nothing but more trouble. However, if Romney’s Virginia supporters want to win by making it extremely difficult to get on the ballot, they are forgetting something. There are 49 other states, and it is not going help Romney if he looks too much like he is part of a sneaky Republican establishment.
Act first, think later. Hence the announcement one day that emergency legislation would be proposed, followed by the retrenchment the next day. One does not want to discourage ultimate reflection, but one can still deplore the knee-jerk publicity approach that so frequently defines this AG’s approach to his public responsibilities.
Mr. Cuccinelli’s celebrity is and it doesn’t reflect badly on him. He’s a natural and it isn’t his fault that he is adored by so many people.
However, behind that rock star image, he is a man of principles, integrity and passion for doing those things that are right for the Commonwealth. Who was that who said, “A wise man knows not”? I believe it was Socrates. The Attorney General recognized that making this sudden change may actually magnify an already complex problem. We all know what happens when elected officials rush to change policy. We only have the Congress to look to for that answer. If more elected officials thought through their actions, admitting their errors, we might all be better for it. Let’s also remember that the Attorney General has committed to fixing the problem but he has only allowed the proper time to do so.
It looks like a win-win situation for all, especially the voters. Anyone who was going to vote for a Newt Gingrich or Rick Perry should have no problem voting for Mitt Romney since all three men share the same views on many issues. They are basically the same establishment, middle of the road politicians who tend to compromise. Mitt Romney just looks better and is organized.
On the other hand, those who tend to be more anti-establishment and lovers of small government can vote for Ron Paul. These voters may consider themselves, frustrated with business as usual, evangelicals, Tea Partiers, Constitutionalists, economists, traditional conservatives, and libertarians. Some of these supporters may also be Independents, Democrats, and liberals who want a genuine change. They may appeal to a senior statesman and principled maverick like Paul.
Mitt Romney and Ron Paul actually represent the two types of candidates GOP voters seek in the Commonwealth–a moderate or conservative. Four years of conservative activism for Constitutional government is now a real ballot choice. For those who prefer the mainstream compromiser, they have a choice as well. Now is the time for the Virginian GOP voter to put their money where their mouth is.
Updated…
Mr. Cuccinelli’s celebrity is what it is and it doesn’t reflect badly on him. He’s a natural and it isn’t his fault that he is adored by so many people.
However, behind that rock star image, he is a man of principles, integrity and passion for doing those things that are right for the Commonwealth. Who was that who said, “A wise man knows not”? I believe it was Socrates. The Attorney General recognized that making this sudden change may actually magnify an already complex problem. We all know what happens when elected officials rush to change policy. We only have the Congress to look to for that answer. If more elected officials thought through their actions, admitting their errors, we might all be better for it. Let’s also remember that the Attorney General has committed to fixing the problem but he has only allowed the proper time to do so.
It looks like a win-win situation for all, especially the voters. Anyone who was going to vote for a Newt Gingrich or Rick Perry should have no problem voting for Mitt Romney since all three men share the same views on many issues. They are basically the same establishment, middle of the road politicians who tend to compromise. Mitt Romney just looks better and is organized.
On the other hand, those who tend to be more anti-establishment and lovers of small government can vote for Ron Paul. These voters may consider themselves, frustrated with business as usual, evangelicals, Tea Partiers, Constitutionalists, economists, traditional conservatives, and libertarians. Some of these supporters may also be Independents, Democrats, and liberals who want a genuine change. They may appeal to a senior statesman and principled maverick like Paul.
Mitt Romney and Ron Paul actually represent the two types of candidates GOP voters seek in the Commonwealth–a moderate or conservative. Four years of conservative activism for Constitutional government is now a real ballot choice. For those who prefer the mainstream compromiser, they have a choice as well. Now is the time for the Virginian GOP voter to put their money where their mouth is.
Scout – Still sniping, but I suppose the people you vote for never err and never have to recalculate. What Cuccinelli did is admit that he could not rightfully do what he hoped to do. Such is a rare admission from any politician. That’s a bad thing?
Go back and look at that news article. Cuccinelli’s knee did not jerk. Others backed the move, but sometimes the cost-benefit analysis is difficult. Here was the question. Does the advantage of allowing other viable candidates on the ballot outweigh the investment in time, resources, political capital, and the unfairness to the candidates who candidates who did meet the requirements of the petition process? Initially Cuccinelli was not certain. Then he decided it did make sense to get the other candidates on the ballot. Then when he took up the task he decided he could not make it work as he had hoped. Such is the nature of the difficult work.
Therefore, Cuccinelli will propose changes in future elections. Given what we have learned from this one, we need to make some changes.
Catskillsgirl – Interesting way of looking at it, and I thank you for the comment. If we cannot change the status quo, it is a decent way of seeing the glass as half full.
Not sure how others will view this matter. I guess most Republicans will agree on Cuccinelli, but I suspect you put more trust in Romney and Ron Paul many. Personally, I think Romney too likely to flip-flop, and I regard Ron Paul’s foreign policy as isolationist. Nonetheless, I concede either would be an improvement on Socialists we have currently in charge.
A bit of reflection and consultation would have have spared him the climb-down, Tom. But, as you say, one should not discourage pols from coming to a correct position, even if they lack the discipline to think things through before they make their first public utterances. I don’t fault Cuccinelli for his volte-face on this one. On balance, the willingness to concede error is a far more valuable public trait than the ability to come out guns-blazing in the immediate aftermath of a situation. Nonetheless, I don’t think it an unattainable ideal to find persons willing to serve in public office who have the ability to think about issues for a day or two, consult others who are affected and who are known for sound historical knowledge and policy judgment, weigh whether the issue is within their official purview as servants of the people, and then issue a proposal for how things should best be dealt with.
This apparently has never been an issue before so why was it so “difficult for the others to get on the ballot, in a state the size of VA it shouldn’t have been a problem. They all knew the rules going in and you can’t change horses in the middle of the stream just because it doesn’t suit your agenda. Paul and Romney got their signatures and the others could have had they just done the work ahead of time.
I also bet that if Gingrich wasn’t a homeboy they would have just tough shit.
phoebe53 – It is an unfortunate fact, but from time-to-time we all get taken in. We forget that when we have a good question, we must pursue the answer.
Consider why we have blogs. We have a biased news media. We must pursue answers. To overcome the bias, we must put those answers before each other.
Thus, I humbly suggest you read the following.
http://hotair.com/archives/2011/12/29/va-gop-chair-we-sent-memo-on-petition-verification-in-october/
http://www.varight.com/opinion/dear-rpv-i-hereby-retract-my-signature-on-romneys-primary-petition/
http://biggovernment.com/cjohnson/2011/12/27/how-the-virginia-gops-short-sightedness-led-to-the-ballot-access-mess/
http://www.ballot-access.org/2011/12/25/virginia-2011-independent-candidate-for-legislature-has-big-impact-on-2012-presidential-primary/
What changed is that RPV CHANGED the rule whereby the petitions were accepted.
We don’t have blogs because we have biased media, CT, we have blogs because we crave communicating with one another. This technology provides an opportunity to meet at the General Store in the town centre without any concern for distance or weather or condition of roads or even expense. We all just get together and talk. “Answers” may or may not result. The questions are what it is all about.
Scout – You speak of emotion. I address the practical. Both have their place.
Do we crave company? Of course, we do? Do questions, new possibilities, arouse our curiosity? Of course, they do.
But practical concerns also drive us. Because we need the Truth, we seek answers. Yet because God’s creation is beyond our comprehension, whenever we find an answer, it raises more questions.
Huh?
By the way, I don’t recall speaking of “emotion”. I guess that’s the reading disability thing again.
I agree that God’s Creation (and God) is beyond our comprehension, for what it’s worth. Not sure what that has to do with allegedly biased media and their relationship to the popularity of blogs.