Standards and Expectations

Along with other Virginia Senate halucinations

May a committee of the Virginia Senate act on behalf of the entire body? That appears to be question raised by a group of Senate Democrats and, if the answer is yes, it would contradict legislative norms presently held most everywhere.

Maybe there’s an exception in Albania, I don’t know.

Generally-speaking, a committee is a functional part of the larger whole and, while it may be authorized to advise the body, it may not act on behalf of the entire legislative body except in very limited, specific circumstances or when expressly granted such authority.

Do most committee actions prove determinative? Yeah. Sure. But only within in the context of the legislative process and the operations of the entire Senate. A committee may be discharged from the consideration by the body.

In short, the dog rules, not the tail of the dog.

In this lawsuit, filed Tuesday in the Fairfax County Circuit Court, nine members of the Senate, all Democrats, insist that a single legislative committee --- in this case, the Senate Privileges and Elections Committee – may act alone to reject a group of Gov. Glenn Youngkin’s college and university board appointments.

You have to hand it to them. If successful, the Commonwealth could save a boatload of money. Why pay 40 people to serve in the Senate, when we can get along just fine with a fraction of them?

These clever Democrats argue that Youngkin, by insisting his board appointees remain legitimately in place, is in “open defiance of the Constitution of Virginia and 50 years of tradition in the Commonwealth.”

Tradition? Really? Tradition favors the Virginia General Assembly doing little or nothing. When it comes to gubernatorial appointments, the tradition in Virginia seldom involves discussion, debate or anything resembling analysis.

Even as the Democrats took after Youngkin’s appointments, Sen. Adam Ebbin (D-Alexandria) noted that “99 percent of [the governor’s] choices had been moved forward.”

Right. That’s the way this has long worked. There is, after all, no existing legislative apparatus for comprehensive (or even superficial) review of the governor’s appointments. The General Assembly could certainly change things around — perhaps creating some minor bureaucracy to handle it — but it has not done so.

Even so, Ebbin says these particular Youngkin nominees “failed to meet the expectations and standards that we hold for these boards.”

What? No one holds nothing. There are no expectations and standards.

Perhaps Ebbin was trying to make a funny joke, I don’t know. Chuckle. Chuckle.

A few years ago, Sen. Ghazala Hashmi – just recently crowned the Democratic Party candidate for lt. governor – rose on the Senate floor and scotched one of Youngkin’s appointments to the state Board of Education, saying that the woman was “unqualified.”

Another rib-tickler. The qualifications for membership on the Virginia Board of Education are right up there with the expectations and standards. They are zippo.

So, what are these senators doing? Are they simply engaged in a furious little dance, attempting to conjure up standards, expectations and qualifications out of thin air?

Yup. They’re just making stuff up to see if they can get away with it. It’s willful, capricious and unambiguously partisan.

In a statement, Virginia Senate President Pro Tempore L. Louise Lucas (D-Portsmouth) said “This lawsuit is not about politics — it’s about preserving the constitutional balance of power that has served Virginia well for centuries.”

Excuse me, it’s politics.

It entails some ironic balance, too. For decades, the Virginia General Assembly used its committee structure to deny consideration of the Equal Rights Amendment – a testament to the expansiveness of Virginia’s democratic instincts.

In the 1950s, Virginia Rep. Howard W. Smith murdered civil rights legislation in the crib by never letting bills he opposed escape the House Rules Committee he chaired. “Smith sided with the ultra-segregationists,” said his biographer, Bruce J. Dierenfield.

That’s an ultra-understatement. Rigid adherence to the committee structure is, by definition, anti-democratic. It narrows down the number of people involved in public decision-making. It has historically throttled progressive lawmaking.

And the Democrats are for this? Are you kidding?

As a practical matter, this merry band of Virginia Senate Democrats has blown up the process for filling college and university appointments. It’s never been perfect. It varies from administration to administration. More than 20 years ago, Gov. Mark Warner reformed the procedure and began relying upon a non-partisan commission to find the best people for these important and influential posts. That idea faded.

Could be a good time to reconsider.

“These nominees were rigid ideologues,” Ebbin told The Washington Post after the suit was filed. “They posed a threat to the universities’ integrity, inclusivity, and academic freedom.”

That is factually untrue. It is an unsupportable statement.

How else can this be put? It makes you a whopper wizard, reality-wrecker and a baloney-barista.

Or, at a minimum, it certifies your Platinum Membership in the Era of Trump.