Welcome to the Fan, Randy


Watch out, Mr. Forbes, you have a new constituent, and his name is Les Schreiber.

In recent years Virginia’s politics has appeared disjointed. In the past two presidential elections, the Democratic nominee has prevailed here. The current governor as well as both U.S. Senators, John Warner and Tim Kaine, are Democrats. Yet representation in the House of Representatives favor the House G.O.P. by a ratio of 8-to-3.  It is small wonder that some observers believe that Congressional Districts were drawn to protect the Republicans.  An article and a map in today’s RTD indicates that a federal court states that in order to achieve more balanced representation, the City of Richmond will shift from the congressional district of Bobby Scott, a Democrat, that of Randy Forbes, a Republican.

A quick glance at Forbes’ website indicates that he supports the usual G.O.P. platitudes on domestic policy.  Forbes, as one would expect, would repeal the Affordable Care Act.  The question for Forbes is: “How would a 62-year-old making $45,000 per year with a pre-existing condition be able to buy almost any health insurance?

Rep. Forbes also wants a balanced budget amendment to the Constitution. Quick, Randy-name five federal programs you would slash, and how much would be saved by each cut.

If Randy can not respond to these questions with specifics, he joins Rep. David Bratt sharing the coveted title of Fauxconomist.

Like so many of Dave’s followers, he espouses programs that he can not possible implement.

— D. Leslie Schreiber

There are currently no comments highlighted.

7 responses to “Welcome to the Fan, Randy

  1. this is what you get from the GOP on healthcare:

    God Forbid – they come up with a viable and credible alternative BEFORE you repeal!

    the GOP are shysters on this – but we vote for them!


  2. Welcome back, Les, I knew you couldn’t stay away for long!

  3. I remember the last time Democrats were laughing about a Republican congressman who was discombobulated by a map change. Hmm. That fellow had ten more years in office, as Governor and U.S. Senator. Then again, perhaps that is why you are trying to start picking on Forbes – you see him as a strong candidate with other options, should he choose to exercise them.

    I’m no expert on this case but when I saw who got hired as the special master, I knew the final map would have a partisan impact. And I knew the result would also be more elegant than the current map – which wasn’t hard to do. However, if Virginia gets a 12th House seat out of reapportionment, the GOP number could go back to eight in a few years. Or the balance could shift. Forbes came to the House of Delegates as part of a minority and I don’t think anybody thinks that situation could not reverse at some point – and partisan gerrymandering of congressional seats remains 100 percent legal.

    And Larry, “we?” You include yourself among the Republican faithful?

  4. @Steve – first congrats for sponsoring VANEWS… I dunno how much it costs to sponsor one day ( I give a piddling 50)… but we do have that in common.

    re: “we” – a collective “we”.

    my problem with Forbes and other Rs these days is that they fail in basic governance that their predecessors did not fail in – they did the deed – they got stuff done.. and yes it was not perfect and had flaws – two steps forward, one step back – repeat, rinse, do it – it’s the duty of a legislator.

    you cannot spend 8 years “waiting” for the next POTUS to be your guy and in the interim do nothing about major issues like health care and immigration other than obfuscate, block and symbolic “repeals”.

    what happens if they don’t get their electoral “wish” in 2016? Are they, then just going to continue another 4 years of waiting? When do they do something?

    I expect solutions from legislators – not ideological gridlock.

    If the GOP wants a different health care system – then stop lying to people about it -and do it – pass it – and if vetoed then go back and work it until it can pass …

    the GOP is a disaster these days. People like Forbes, like Price – listen to them talk about their version of health care… it’s totally bogus… they no more intention of actually doing anything than the man in the moon.

    yet “we” do elected them and I include myself in that “we” as a participant – who votes and abides by the vote but rankles at the idea that we can do nothing until the GOP finally gets control of the 3 branches of govt – OR – they’ll just rope-a-dope all of us til the cows come home- otherwise.

    where the “H” “E” double LL is “patient-centered health care” ?

    where is the “free market” alternative?

    we can’t know what their proposal is – until they take control of Govt?


    apparently – a majority of voters ARE satisfied with doing nothing until the GOP gets “control”.. I have to admit…

    but every time I listen to a guy like Forbes or Price talk about what to do about health care – you just know those guys have total contempt for being honest with voters.. it’s a charade…

  5. Great pice, Les.

    The decision also puts Brat at risk from more moderate Republicans.


  6. Great piece Les! I too am tired of gerrymandering diluting democracy.

  7. After the 1990 Census, the Democratic-controlled General Assembly put McLean-area GOP delegates Bob Andrews and Vince Callahan in the same district. And as Steve Haner notes, at the same time, the Democratic-controlled General Assembly put Congressman George Allen in the same district as another GOP congressman. I don’t recall a hue and cry over that.

    Similarly, after the 2000 Census, the GOP-controlled GA put Democratic Senator Leslie Byrne in the same district as another Democratic state senator. There was no hue and cry. Even Senator Byrne called is just politics. She didn’t like the result, but would clearly have done the same to the GOP had she been in the majority.

    After the 2010 Census, I had coffee with Democratic Senator Chap Petersen. I asked him what was likely to happen with redistricting. He told me the Senate would create districts as favorable to Democratic incumbents as possible, while the House would do the same for Republican incumbents. Seems to me that both Parties just did what every party in control of a legislative body does.

    I can see arguments for creating a nonpartisan commission to recommend new districts. I served on the Fairfax County advisory committee for the BoS in 2011. (Our unofficial marching orders were to create districts that did not force incumbents out of their districts and to try to keep communities of interest together.)
    A law creating a board or commission is one thing. But how does a court decide when political gerrymandering is wrong? How does it draw lines without itself becoming partisan gerrymanderers? Personally, I prefer the honest approach of a Chap Petersen than those who pretend they are nonpartisan, but really are, such as the Obama appointee to the Eastern District of Virginia bench who doesn’t know the difference between the Declaration of Independence and the Preamble to the Constitution.

    The most recent SCOTUS opinion in 2004, a plurality of the Court found redistricting to be a political question. Vieth v. Jubelirer involved legislative redistricting in Pennsylvania.

Leave a Reply