What happened in Virginia’s 2021 General Assembly session?
Michael Pope
Welcome to Transition Virginia, the podcast that documents the ongoing transition of power in Virginia. I'm Michael Pope.
Thomas Bowman
And I'm Thomas Bowman. Today on the podcast, the 2021 General Assembly Session is a wrap. What happened? What didn't happen? What's next?
Michael Pope
We're gonna break it all down for you with an all star panel of journalists. Joining us is the legendary columnist for the Richmond Times Dispatch, Jeff Schapiro, thanks for joining us.
Jeff Schapiro
Thanks for including me. I am...I am not worthy.
Thomas Bowman
And returning to the podcast, our friend, the all good politics and policy reporter for the Roanoke Times, Amy Friedenberger. Thanks for returning to the podcast.
Amy Friedenberger
Thanks for having me back on. I feel like it has been too long since I've participated in a podcast and hopefully we can do one in person again someday in the future.
Michael Pope
Yes. 100%. Agreed. Well, Amy, I want to start with you, because you were there in the belly of the beast in the Senate Chamber. I was, I have to admit, super, super jealous of you, Amy, because every time the camera panned over to that part of the Senate floor, there you were like for the whole Session, where I was locked in my house, in front of my computer screen. Give us a sense of what it was like to be in that sort of makeshift ad hoc Senate chamber. What was it like to be there day in and day out?
Amy Friedenberger
Um, it was, it was kind of as time went on, I felt like it seemed like this was the new normal for the Senate. You know, we were set up. The House of Delegates was meeting virtually and the Senate was in person at the Science Museum. And so the senators were all spread out at their tables, and the media was in a kind of a penned in area. And so it's a little different. You know, it's a little harder to kind of get people to come over to you, you have to gesticulate wildly at them to get their attention. And so yeah, it was great. I'm a big believer, though of being there in person as much as possible. Just so they know that the media is watching.
Michael Pope
Yes, 100% agreed. Would- did the gesticulation work, like if you waved your arms would Saslaw come over and talk to you? How did that work?
Amy Friedenberger
Well, Saslaw is always coming over on his own, you don't need to you don't need to get that man to talk to you. The others, yeah, you gotta just have to keep waving or text somebody to say, "Hey, get so-and-so's attention. I want to talk to them." So yeah, they would come over. I debated at one point getting a sign, but I didn't know if Madam Clerk would like if I was holding-
Michael Pope
No props, no props allowed in the Senate.
Amy Friedenberger
Right. "Come over here, Senator so and so."
Michael Pope
Well, Jeff, let me ask the same question of you but sort of in reverse. What was it like for you covering an entire Session not being there in person?
Jeff Schapiro
I am, I am wringing my hands wondering what I missed, what we missed, because we weren't there. Though, a bow to Amy for bravely soldiering on. And you know, Michael, you and I have discussed this, a lot of what we do as reporters, what lobbyists do, what legislators do, is it boils down to just sort of showing up. There's a lot of serendipity in our respective lines of work. And I'm afraid that, with the virtual, the emphasis on the virtual, one, one thing that is not present is serendipity.
Thomas Bowman
Let's talk about some of the bills that got passed out of this General Assembly Session. What can Virginians look forward to starting in July, or whenever they become law?
Amy Friedenberger
Well, goodness, there is so much that the Democrats accomplished in their second year of having the majority in the Legislature and you know, of course having control of the Executive Mansion as well. You know, they're gonna abolish the death penalty, which is a huge deal for a Southern state to do this. Marijuana legalization kind of, you know, you have to read through, if you don't want to read through the really lengthy...what, how many pages? Is it 200 something pages? You know, there's there's a lot of details to it basically, they're not going to legalize marijuana until 2024. There was a lot of pushback from like criminal justice groups and legalization advocates who felt like, you know, that wasn't, they didn't go far enough on it.
Jeff Schapiro
Well, you know, this is reefer light. You know, there were about a half dozen legislators who, Democratic legislators, who oppose this. Legislators of color, you know, one of their concerns is, and I think perhaps the Governor is going to address this in an amendment or two, is that with weed not fully legal until 2024, at least until the bill has passed, you know, there's a whole swath of the populace that, you know, potentially vulnerable to continued prosecution. And we've seen ample evidence that, you know, more people of color than white Virginians are busted for marijuana. And so I think this is this is one of the the stickier elements of all this. I think, largely overlooked, essentially, it flared a bit in those final debates is that, this is not just Virginia becoming the first Southern state to legalize marijuana, we'd be joining 15 other American states. This is a step as New Jersey took early last week, enacting a bill that will create a tax scheme that will generate a lot of money that is intended to go back into communities, principally communities of color, that have been, you know, adversely affected by the emphasis on prosecuting for smaller amounts of marijuana. And those dollars would essentially support jump-starting this whole new industry, a weed, a recreational weed industry, that would have a presence in these neighborhoods, and perhaps enliven their economies somewhat.
Michael Pope
I've got a question about marijuana legalization. I never quite understood the logic of waiting for the legalization part of it. I mean, I totally understand waiting for the commercial sales, because you got to stand up the new agency, and you got to create the regulations and that takes time and okay, I understand that. Why wait for 2024? Why not do it this summer? Like what was the logic behind not doing it now?
Jeff Schapiro
I think part of it has to do with, and you know, Amy working for a Western Virginia newspaper with a large rural readership, this is a state, despite the domination of its suburbs and cities, that includes a good deal of rural territory where Virginia's cultural conservatism endures. And I think that there is, particularly on the Senate side, there's a real attentiveness of this that, you know, if we're going to do this, in Virginia, we don't want to do it in such a way that we appear to be ramming it down everyone's throats.
Thomas Bowman
Virginia Democrats are really trying to position Virginia to put its best foot forward as the leading state in the New South. And so in addition to eventually legalizing marijuana, and in addition to getting rid of the death penalty, they're also taking some steps to address their past. And one of those things is getting rid of the Byrd statue sitting on Capitol Square. Jeff, what went into that decision and the debate there among the Democrats and the Republicans in the General Assembly? Was that controversial at all?
Jeff Schapiro
Oh, absolutely. I think most telling about that legislation is who sponsored it. Jay Jones, a Black, Democratic, young lawyer, legislator from Norfolk, who's also a candidate for the Democratic nomination for Attorney General. You know, there is certainly a social justice element to this. But there is, as well, a note of political ambition driving it, as well. The you know, Byrd, of course, a segregationist, a governor before he was senator and you know, perhaps the, you know, the dominant political figure in Virginia, from the mid 20s to the mid 60s. There are a good deal of nuance in this statue debate. That likeness of Byrd, not a very flattering likeness, I might add is, is one of the senator holding a copy of the federal budget. And setting aside for a moment all that is associated with Byrd and massive resistance, the state's defiance of the Brown decision in 1954, that rather than desegregate public schools, Virginia took steps to close them. But you know, Byrd was a was a figure who also modernized Virginia's government, he streamlines things he got us to the short ballot, now that the Virginia only elects you know, three people statewide, three offices statewide, as opposed to, I think was seven or, or eight, that was all about clearly consolidating, you know, his and conservative largely Democratic control. But Byrd was also a stickler for balanced budgets and disciplined spending. And it was on Byrds watch that the bond agencies began this grading system, was 1928. And Virginia is the only state that has had the highest possible credit rating from Wall Street, AAA, you know, it's the gold standard, since that system was was initiated. And to some degree, that's, that's a result of the parsimony with which Byrd insisted Virginia manage its finances. And it is, if you will, to some degree, the parsimony with which Virginians have come to expect their elected officials to manage the public's finances. So Byrd, despite his troubling record on race, and by the way, one would point out, that it was during his governorship, that Virginia also banned lynching, that was a widespread practice in the American South, and it continued well into mid century in in what was once called, "Dixie," that there's a lot of nuance that sort of shapes Byrd’s record, and that was mentioned maybe only once in debate, and that was by a Senator from out out Amy's way, Creigh Deeds.
Michael Pope
You know, speaking of senators out Amy's way, wondering about a bill that Senator Suetterlein had that I was personally interested in as a journalist, which has to do with election returns. I love looking at precinct returns to see where candidates are strong, and where they're weak, and which precincts they do well in, which precincts they don't do well in. And of course, Suetterlein wanted to require all of those absentee votes, which of course, exploded in recent years, to be recorded in their home precincts. Amy, what did you make of the debate on that bill? And sort of how things ended up with that?
Amy Friedenberger
Yeah, that was one of only maybe a couple election related bills that didn't go through, but one that I thought maybe a Republican sponsored that would make it, and from Senator Suetterlein’s, you know, telling is that, you know, he's not he is for the record, not somebody who bought who has been spewing the conspiracies and misinformation about the election. But, you know, he was hearing a lot from a lot of residents who are just very active in politics. So they're always looking, you know, deep into the electoral returns, just to see what the turnout is. And so, you know, when all of the absentee votes were all dumped into the Central Precinct tally, it didn't really provide a good glimpse of how the precincts were voting and what the turnout was there. And so it kind of, it can be kind of confusing for people to understand what's going down at the precinct level. And from his position as an elected official is that, you know, you want to know how people are voting for you, you know, if you had a lot of people vote for you one year, and then suddenly you take a deep dive in a certain area, you know, maybe you want to spend more time doing outreach in that area, if it seems like maybe the voters out there are losing support for you. So he had wanted to have, you know, the precinct level absentee votes broken down. A lot of the registrar's sort of complained about that, you know, it would be a little more tedious to print out all these ballots by precinct level, so people could do absentee. So it seems very feasible. It just seemed like it was it was just meeting some resistance for logistical reasons.
Michael Pope
Resistance in the House? So the thing that's really what's striking about that bill is, there was only one no vote, Adam Eben of Alexandria, was the singular no vote in the Senate. So it was like not just popular, but very widely popular, but then the House killed it. So I mean, I guess that's one of the things too, although I believe they tacked it on to another bill that was successful. It was Senator Deeds, had a bill expanding the use of drop boxes. And they did put a sort of Suetterlein inspired, study onto that, so that we'll study it and then have a report in December and then so maybe in 2022, we can take action. So I guess it's not a total loss.
Amy Friedenberger
Yeah, it looks, you know, the Democrats spent a lot of this Session, essentially preserving a lot of the pandemic voting access measures that they put in place for the November election. And that had to do with the ballot dropboxes, the prepaid postage with absentee, the, quote, cure process. So, you know, if you send in your absentee ballot, and there was some issue on it, you know, a technical error, you still have the opportunity to fix it within a certain amount of time. So it isn't invalidated. And so that was among those. The one, the one that I was surprised that also went down in the House, Senator Favola wanted to permanently get rid of the witness requirement for the absentee ballot that are sent by mail. And that one, I think, also maybe got tacked on to part of this study that's going to happen? You know, it was interesting, you know, the Legislature took the policy position that it was fine for the November election, but I guess they wanted to take more time to examine that issue before making it permanent, which was also peculiar, because you know, there are quite a lot of states that don't require this witness signature. So I'm not sure what, what what needs to be reviewed.
Jeff Schapiro
And one and one would note that just in terms of the nuts and bolts of campaigning that institutionalizing many of the steps that were taken to, you know, make for easier voting during the plague, this past fall, mean that an important aspect of politics will actually start a lot sooner, and probably cost candidates more money. And that's voter mobilization, getting out your vote, because we were all accustomed to voting in person. Most of what we saw and heard from the campaigns were, you know, people showing up at our doors, telephone calls, leaflet drops, in the final run up to in person balloting. Now, that's going to be going on for days and days and days, it means that candidates are going to have to spend dollars and dollars and dollars, really pretty much from mid September forward, on on an expense that traditionally was made much later in the campaign.
Thomas Bowman
Okay, real quick, because we're running out of time for this segment, let's talk about what the Legislature did finally to remedy some of the circumstances around COVID. After multiple attempts across multiple Sessions, they finally extended some type of paid sick leave this time to though to the home health care workers and health care workers generally. Amy, can you tell us what the General Assembly did around paid sick leave?
Amy Friedenberger
Yeah, this is something that Delegate Elizabeth Guzman, who is running for Lieutenant Governor, has been pushing for quite some time. And she always had a much broader bill covering, you know, a lot more workers across Virginia. And she had been gradually whittling it down, mostly because she needed it to pass the Senate, which is a lot more friendly to the business community than the House has been. And so it looks like it's going to be certain home health care workers. What is it, you may have to help me here on it's like medic...
Michael Pope
They sort of narrowed this bill in a way that it does not apply to the private sector. So it only applies to the home health care workers. They get money from the federal government. So it basically says to the private sector, "Hey, we're not asking you to do this."
Amy Friedenberger
Yeah.
Jeff Schapiro
I mean, the impact of that is also it potentially has is a big help for, for home health care workers who are dealing with, you know, a lot of lower income clients as well.
Amy Friedenberger
And I think that I think that will essentially be the limit of that. I think that's all that she's going to be able to get through. I believe during some of the Senate debate, Senator Norman, or maybe Senator Obenshain had asked if, you know, what if what if Governor Northam sends us back with amendments to expand it and I think Senator Saslaw said, "He won't vote for it." So I think she has she has reached the thresholds.
Thomas Bowman
Okay, well, one step at a time. And in segment two, we'll get to some of the things that didn't happen this Session, but we're gonna take a break. We're here with journalists Jeff Schapiro at the Richmond Times Dispatch and Amy Friedenberger of the Roanoke Times. When we return, we'll talk about what didn't happen, and how that might shape our view of 2021.
Michael Pope
And we're back on Transition Virginia. We're going to talk about missed opportunities, things left undone. What did not happen this year and what do we make of that? So open question here to the panel. What is the most significant thing that did not happen this year?
Amy Friedenberger
I think the one that a lot of people were expecting something to happen on, because it was receiving a lot of attention, was repealing mandatory minimums from the state code. The Virginia State Crime Commission, at the beginning of this year, had endorsed abolishing all mandatory minimum sentences from the state code. That's something like 200 plus offenses. When it came time that it was introduced in the General Assembly, the Senate had a version that was going to repeal, you know, the vast majority of them I think, except for class one felonies, the House took a much more conservative approach, which is I know that it's rare to say that they're taking the more conservative approach than the Senate. But they were mostly just limiting it to drug offenses and some firearm offenses. And so my understanding from talking with senators and delegates was that, once that hit the conference committee and a handful of senators and delegates went to go discuss that, is that they were just so far apart that they just couldn't get around to doing anything.
Michael Pope
So far apart how? Like what were the different sides on that?
Amy Friedenberger
I mean, the Senate just really felt committed to it needed to be much more, from what I heard, you know, the Senate was willing to narrow it down a little bit. But that you know, that it just seemed the House was not, you know, willing to even go back with a pared down version of the Senate proposal. Delegate Mike Mullen, who was a prosecutor, he, you know, had called the Senate version controversial. And so he gave a speech on the last day when they were closing out on Saturday, just kind of lamenting, getting anything done on it, but I know that Senators Morrissey and Surovell were really, you know, also digging in their heels that needed to be more comprehensive.
Jeff Schapiro
And, of course, this is all part of the larger debate. It's of particular relevance to the to the Republicans. And that is, you know, the law and order themes that were really essential to the Republican Party's ascent or reascent, starting in 1993, with the election of George Allen as Governor. You know, elected on a promise to do away with parole and require full sentences for felons. And there was a dust up on this toward the in the closing hours of the of the Legislature over over the parole board and whether it has been sufficiently transparent in handling those few cases of of parole, eligible felons. In the City of Richmond, a police officer was shot dead in 1979. The individual who was convicted in that that shooting, was eligible for parole, was granted parole, but there seemed to be a lot of questions about how open the parole board was in handling this case. Mark Obenshain, a Senator from Rockingham County up in the valley, a law and order guy if there ever was one, an unsuccessful candidate for Attorney General, has been banging on this or was banging on this issue in the final days of the of the General Assembly.
Michael Pope
You know, another bill that failed was a bill introduced by Delegate Kelly Converse Fowler that made it through the House on cyber flashing. Now, this was one of the cringe worthy discussions from this year. You may remember last year, there was a similar cringe worthy bill that had to do with massage parlors and happy endings. And there was some very difficult conversations that it was difficult to listen to, I should say. And then this year, there was some, again, cringe worthy discussions about essentially sending dick pics and sort of prosecuting people for sending unwanted obscene photos. Again, this made it out of the House. And then when it got to the Senate, there were the the Senate panel killed it. And there was some hurt feelings there because there was of the senators who killed it, they were all male, and there was thinking that they didn't quite get what was going on. Amy, what did you make of that discussion?
Amy Friedenberger
Well, I will say that the Senate Judiciary Committee has always, I think, to me the most entertaining one to follow, just because a lot of the senators come up with these scenarios that, you know, could get, you know, somebody could trap somebody in some kind of bill that they're putting through, sort of, you know, these unintended consequences. And so, you know, their position was that this language about sending unsolicited sexual photos is just so broad. And, you know, proving intent, you know, is really key here, there were just like, you know, people were floating, you know, "Somebody could send a picture of the Statue of David, and now you're going to get, you know, charged," as if, as if that's really, you know, what's gonna start happening is we're gonna have people, you know, lined up in the courthouse over, you know, pictures of artwork, but that was sort of what it was about. And I think it was a little, it was a little hard to watch, it looked like, the Delegate was kind of just getting a little bit emotional, you know, trying to plead with these older men, who are sort of being a little a little dismissive, sort of seemed a little, a little jokey at times, that she just wanted them to give a fair hearing to her bill. And they were kind of just ready to shelve it.
Michael Pope
And you know what happened in that discussion that you don't see much of, the Attorney for the Committee was, I don't say he was dismissive, but I got the sense the lawyer for the committee didn't particularly like it, or didn't necessarily like the way it was structured, or was there something about it that he felt like maybe it wasn't complete or something? What did you make of that discussion?
Amy Friedenberger
Yeah, he was kind of posing scenarios too and took issues with it, and seems like he didn't have any kind of solutions to fix it up to to deal with it then. So I don't know if this is something that's gonna come back in the future. So we'll see.
Jeff Schapiro
By the way, if you think this is bad now, it wasn't too long ago that lawyers were in the majority in the Legislature. And this sort of, shall we say, scenario building, which can border on the ridiculous, was, was really something of a of a high arch then. But, you know, the the optics of older guys talking about an issue with apparent measure of, I don't know, levity, maybe, that is particularly startling for women. I, I expect we're going to be hearing more about that in a campaign context when, come this fall, when the House is up, but certainly in in 2023, when some of these senators are standing for re election when, what we presume will be, fresh districts.
Thomas Bowman
Okay, regular listeners to the show, might recall that Lee Carter came on to discuss his bill to repeal Right to Work. That endured some political machinations during the Session, and what was all that drama and how did it end? Jeff Shapiro, I'll throw that to you.
Jeff Schapiro
Lee Carter, a self identified Democratic Socialist, tried to tack legislation, repealing Right to Work, a bill on the that was on the floor of the House. I guess he found out he just doesn't have that many friends and in his own his own Caucus. This is a hyper sensitive issue among Democrats. Of course, the Right to Work law, it's a it prohibits union membership as a condition for a job. It is it has long been an article of faith among politicians, Democratic and Republican. Governor Ralph Northam made very clear in a personal meeting with the head of the AFL CIO, the Labor Federation and here in Virginia, that he would veto any legislation that does away with this, this ban on compulsory union membership. And it is, to some degree, one of the issues with which Democrats somehow enhance their their more moderate images. And so I think what you saw and that, that vote to stop this on the House floor, was a very, very deliberate effort by Democrats to, you know, preserve that, that moderate image. That's not an interest of Lee Carter, again, as the as an avowed Democratic Socialist, and, you know, an occasional Lyft driver, he's got a lot to say about working conditions, how friendly Virginia is to labor or, or not, and, you know, whether Virginia is supportive of things such as a more than a livable wage, but uh, but substantial minimum wage.
Thomas Bowman
You know, I find interesting about that policy, that Mike Alllers, the Republican challenger to Lee Carter this year, actually supports repealing Right to Work. I find that notable about where the working class electorate is in Manassas City.
Michael Pope
You know, one thing that struck me about the debate on this is that, I mean, Jeff Schapiro was talking about the, how sensitive this is. And it's actually, that's a sensitivity that cuts both ways, because you get the sense from Democrats, they don't want to alienate their friends in labor, and they don't want to make their friends in labor mad. And they certainly want the support of their friends in labor. But they also don't want to make the business community mad. And they want to continue to get the support from the business community. So they are trying to sort of thread this needle in a way where they don't get anything accomplished, because the Governor would just veto it anyway. But they also aren't seen as opposing anything. So I mean, it's a difficult balancing act they were trying to do.
Thomas Bowman
Alright, let's take a break. We're here with Jeff Schapiro of the Richmond Times-Dispatch and Amy Friedenberger of the Roanoke Times. When we come back, we're going to look at our crystal ball to figure out what might come next.
Michael Pope
And we're back on Transition Virginia. We're going to peer into the future. The first thing we need to talk about is the immediate future with Governor Ralph Northam's role in the process. Now he gets to consider all 900 something bills on his desk, and he can amend them just about any way he sees fit. What can we expect from the Governor and any amendments that he might put onto any of these bills?
Jeff Schapiro
Well, we know for sure, he's going to have something to say about legalization of marijuana. There's a good deal of hand wringing over, you know, the bill that was that was sent him as we discuss it at the top of the program. So that's something to look for as well.
Michael Pope
Before we move on from that, any predictions there in terms of what the Governor might do?
Jeff Schapiro
I would not be surprised if the Governor chooses to, shall we say, encourage the Legislature to accelerate the timetable by by which weed is fully decriminalized.
Michael Pope
This summer? So like in terms of possession being legal, that the Governor might amend the bill in a way that would make possession of marijuana legal by this summer?
Jeff Schapiro
Perhaps this summer, or you know, maybe he does, he comes up with some Solomonic third way that maybe shoots for say January 1, to give everyone a little bit more time to wrap their heads around this.
Amy Friedenberger
And it's also nice sometimes to kick the enactment of certain things past the elections and when he's about to go out the door.
Jeff Schapiro
In other words, in other words, leave it to a future General Assembly to basically have this debate all over again. Don't know about that.
Thomas Bowman
Terry McAuliffe chimed in with something to say on this issue too, I believe, right? Toward the 11th hour?
Jeff Schapiro
Yeah, I think McAuliffe was trying to take credit for somehow moving along negotiations. This is a this is a great McAuliffe tactic. I'm sure you all remember back in 2013, when the Bob McDonald was Governor, a Republican who had been elected on this, you know, no new taxes package. But plank, you know, ended up supporting a big tax increase for transportation and McAuliffe, then, you know, an active candidate for Governor, second go round, was front and center in terms of, you know, urging the Legislature, Democrats and Republicans, to push forward this package of tax increases for roads.
Michael Pope
You know, on that issue of the marijuana bill, and all of the many behind the scenes, closed doors, not open to the public, not open to the press machinations that was going on with that conference committee, so you saw McAuliffe saying, "Hey, look at me, I'm part of this process." We did not see Governor Northam saying, "Hey, look at me. I'm part of this process." But undoubtedly, he was part of that whole negotiation. Right? I mean, is it possible that he's already got his game plan for how he wants to deal with this marijuana Solomonic activity?
Jeff Schapiro
I mean, that's entirely possible. I, you know, I know that, you know, the press has reported, widely reported that, you know, Northam was, you know, in on those final negotiations, and, you know, a governor can do a lot of creative things with his amendment powers. And for the most part, for the most part, the amendments that he's going to offer will be put to up or down votes on the floor of the House and Senate when all this is being reconsidered during the the Spring Session of the Legislature. That also means that there are fewer opportunities for mischief. And I suspect that that's something that the Governor made clear to legislators as they were winding down on the marijuana legalization legislation.
Amy Friedenberger
And Northam has been, you know, I think, quite savvy, too, in sending down amendments that he knows that when he puts it to a floor vote that he can get through, I think one of the most impressive ones was just the back and forth that we could not get funding a couple years ago, for Interstate 81 and it was tolls, and it was taxes, and it was tolls, and it was taxes, and then it ended up just being, you know, another study or something. And he put them all to a floor vote on putting getting a revenue stream with taxes. And, you know, a bunch of a bunch of Republicans even voted for it. So I think, you know, he's very good at being strategic at, you know, forcing everybody to take a vote on something that they've sort of, you know, were avoiding.
Jeff Schapiro
As I said, the, the opportunity for antics diminishes.
Michael Pope
So after all of the Governor's amendments, there's the veto Session. Anything we can look forward to there? I mean, any maybe any vetoes we might be looking forward to or I mean, other than the marijuana bill, any other sort of big developments or other shoes to drop here?
Jeff Schapiro
Oh, I would watch the budget. There are lots of things that can be accomplished through the budget that, you know, the Governor may may use it as a vehicle for something that may have may have fallen by the wayside during the the 46 days of the worthies we're at we're at work, and there's a lot in that budget that people prize and that will be particularly valuable in this legislative and gubernatorial election year. One in particular, I was pleased to see Dave, our collegue David Rests, down the Newport News Daily Press in Virginia pilot write about this that, you know, I 64, which between Richmond and and Hampton Roads, is becoming, you know, Virginia's answer to the Long Island Expressway. You know, the world's largest parking lot, that it is now would be funded for there is in the budget, full funding to fully expand that important stretch of Interstate between Chesapeake and Richmond, which can mean a lot in terms of getting around, not just in terms of the economy, but tourism.
Thomas Bowman
Okay, and there's also going to be another Session on redistricting that we can look forward to. When do we think that Special Session is going to occur? And do we have any idea what the result might look like?
Amy Friedenberger
I'm not entirely positive, but we also probably will be expecting a Special Session action to expand the Court of Appeals. And I would envision that they may be one at a time that all together, they can't elect judges during a Veto Session. And so they had passed the legislation to do that. But Charniele Herring, the House Majority Leader had wanted to take time to vet more judges. And so that might, I'm guessing that'll happen a little later this year. So I don't know if they're going to try to get it all done together. So we don't have just a whole bunch of Special Sessions going on.
Jeff Schapiro
Yeah, and the thing about judge shiftss, I mean, this is this is political patronage. And it is, it is controlled by the majority party. The Constitution requires that judges are elected. That's the word in the Constitution. And, you know, the Democrats, of course, having been in the minority for the better part of two decades, delight on planting on the benches, many of their friends and fellow travelers as possible. Republicans, I've tried to make a point of talking point of this, that what it means is that Democrats want to pack Virginia's courts, with liberal judges who are going to be less tough on law breakers, particularly violent law breakers, then all of those Republican elected judges.
Amy Friedenberger
It's a little hard to claim that they're packing the courts whenever it's already stuffed with Republican appointees. So it's more like we're evening out the court maybe.
Jeff Schapiro
With the expansion of the Court of Appeals, and the likely domino effect that that's going to have in some of the, shall we say, lower courts, the Circuit Court, General District Court, it's certainly going to mean that Democrats have opportunities to put, shall we say, more like minded individuals in these Judicial Appointments.
Thomas Bowman
You know, it's interesting in that many of these judges or judicial appointments, if they occur, would be potentially the first time many jurisdictions get actually deliberately liberal judges. Even the last Democratic majority was far more conservative than it is today.
Jeff Schapiro
Oh, absolutely. And I think that there's a, there's a, perhaps a larger issue here, particularly when looking at all of those Republican appointed judges. Many of them, many of them were coming over to the bench, from prosecutors offices. And that was very attractive to Republicans. But there was another reason for that, for a long time, anyone who was elected to a judgeship, enjoyed a perk that those of us in the private sector would adore. For every year a judge sat, he or she would get three years or more credit, toward their retirement. So it meant, you know, that one could sit as a judge for 10 years, then retire and enjoy benefits that assumed he or she had been a judge for 30 years.
Michael Pope
Tough work if you can get it.
Jeff Schapiro
Yeah. And and what's happened is, it's it's made for a very different judiciary, one that is, you know, rich in former prosecutors, and then a lot of younger lawyers who, you know, weren't much interested in the business of the law, you know, in that profession, you don't, you can't eat what you don't kill. And it meant, you know, making a nice living with a six figure salary, and one in which, you know, one pretty much controlled one's one's day, those were, those were very appealing features of a judicial appointment.
Michael Pope
One last topic here, before we wrap it up. I'm curious about our predictions on how the census or lack of information from the census, is going to shape things. There's one school of thought that says we might be looking forward to three consecutive years of House elections. I think nobody wants that to happen. There's another school of thought that says, next, this year, we would run on the old districts and then wait around for the new districts in the next election cycle. Assuming we don't get the census numbers in time, which I think every day it seems more likely that they're not going to be around in time for Virginia to redistrict, in time for the elections this year. Assuming we don't get the census numbers in time, what is our expectation in terms of this election cycle and future election cycles?
Jeff Schapiro
Take it away, Amy.
Amy Friedenberger
I feel like you kind of laid it out there. I am firmly in the camp of, "Oh, God, I hope we just don't just have elections forever." What we're like, heading toward. No, yeah, I feel like you laid out the scenarios of what we have to decide here, you know, fairly soon. I think, you know, there, there are people kind of preparing to run here. Now we have like a lot of people running and primary challenges lined up. So it all just remains to be seen.
Thomas Bowman
You know, this is not a non partisan process. It's only a bipartisan process. And I can imagine there might be a bipartisan desire to not run in three consecutive elections. It's going to be expensive, it's going to be a lot of work. And to your point, it's more opportunity to lose in a primary. That said, I can imagine Democrats might be salivating at the thought of being able to run in a federal year, where they would have juiced up turnout.
Jeff Schapiro
The last time this happened in 1981, 82, and 83, there was an interim election for a single year term, because the courts had found that Virginia had deliberately under the Voting Rights Act, which then had considerably more teeth than it does now, had deliberately put in place plans that diluted the voting strength of Black Virginians. So that interim election was a form of punishment. We don't necessarily have that problem now. But we do have some procedural obstacles. So if you look at the Constitution, there's a language in language in there that requires that the elections are held in new districts. Well, it's not likely that we're going to have new districts in time. So perhaps some state some steps will have to be taken by the courts. Maybe if you will, a friendly lawsuit so that a judge could then direct the Legislature to stand this fall in in House districts that, you know, are essentially the extent the existing election districts. And that next year, there would be that process of redistricting under again, this new bipartisan commission created under the Constitution by consent to the electorate, and then those districts would be in place for the 22 congressional elections, and then in place in 23, for the House next round of House elections. And then of course, the next Senate election.
Thomas Bowman
Okay, let's leave it there. There's always more to discuss, but we got to wrap it up. We're out of time for this episode. If you have comments or questions about what you just heard, or maybe you only want to tell us what you think about the show, write an email and send it to us at TransitionVApodcast@gmail.com so we can read it on the air. Subscribe to Transition Virginia anywhere podcast, follow the Transition Team on Twitter @TransitionVA and find us on the web at Transitionvirginia.com. Don't forget to like and subscribe so you can enjoy our next episode of Transition Virginia.
