Frederick, apparently not satisfied with TJPDC’s million-dollar, taxpayer-funded assault on private property rights (under the guise of regional “planning”), now is dispensing advice on how to squelch the speech of climate change “deniers.”

In a February 4 New York Times article about Tea Party activism and United Nations’ Agenda 21, “counterorganizer” Frederick openly presents her contra-constitutional game plan envisioned to mute citizen “critics” of the globalist green agenda:

Summer Frederick, the project manager for the Thomas Jefferson Planning District Commission in Charlottesville, Va., which withdrew its dues to Iclei and its support from a national mayors’ agreement on climate change late last year after a campaign by protesters, now conducts seminars on how to deal with Agenda 21 critics. (Among her tips: remove the podium and microphones, which can make it “very easy for a critic to hijack a meeting.”) [emphasis added]

While such a diabolical scheme could be effective if implemented covertly, Frederick’s hubris in brazenly discussing methods of disabling community dialogue at public meetings displays either abject arrogance or abject stupidity—or perhaps both.

As stated on its web site, the TJPDC has a noble purpose:

The mission of the Thomas Jefferson Planning District Commission is to serve our local governments by providing regional vision, collaborative leadership and professional service to develop effective solutions.

Yet the TJPDC’s promised mission of “service” is perverted beyond reclamation when a $52,000 per year government employee (Summer Frederick), supervised by a $110,000 per year government employee (Stephen Williams), flagrantly works to promote an anti-American personal agenda while proposing the undermining of foundational American rights—all in the name of “planning.”

Mr. Williams, maybe it’s time to remove Ms. Frederick’s microphone, podium, and employment contract.

Charlottesville, Virginia, a political stronghold of Marxist-leaning Democrat elected officials, has a serious white-on-black racial discrimination problem.

Charlottesville, Virginia, home to a concentration of socially evolved progressives (e.g. pro “marriage rights” and abortion on-demand), has a serious white-on-black racial discrimination problem.

Charlottesville, Virginia, a politically enlightened community, which voted 80% Democrat in the most recent State and Federal elections, has a serious white-on-black racial discrimination problem.

Charlottesville, Virginia is a community apparently populated with liberal white racists. Or so implies University of Virginia Professor Walt Heinecke’s recent proposal to Charlottesville City Council: Charlottesville Commission on Human Rights, Diversity, and Race Relations

According to Heinecke’s report, Charlottesville, Virginia’s serious white-on-black racial discrimination problem is manifested in racially prejudicial hiring practices in private employment—practices that cannot effectively be addressed by existing State and Federal equal-employment laws.

According to Heinecke’s report, Charlottesville, Virginia’s serious white-on-black racial discrimination problem is manifested in racially prejudicial rental practices in private housing—practices that cannot effectively be addressed by existing State and Federal fair-housing laws.

And, most surprisingly (to some), community conversations suggest that Charlottesville, Virginia’s serious white-on-black racial discrimination problem is manifested in racially prejudicial employment practices inside Charlottesville City Hall—an institution run by Democrats and for Democrats essentially since its inception.

Professor Heinecke envisions the proposed Human Rights Commission as a government-appointed body endowed with investigative, prosecutorial, and judicial powers—a body empowered to impose fines and condemn with public consternation “convicted” transgressors deemed “guilty” by Commission appointees.

While Charlottesville City Hall was the only named violator of existing equal-opportunity statutes during a recent City Council discussion on racism, that avowedly racist institution apparently is exempt from prosecution under Heinecke’s plan:

To engage in anti-discrimination enforcement activities including the investigation and resolution of claims of discrimination in private employment and housing as defined by a new City Ordinance. The Commission would have the power to hold hearings, conduct investigations, issue reports, impose fines and remedies. We recommend that the Commission should be structured to be eligible for designation as a Fair Employment Practices Agency (FEPA) in a contract with the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC). That means it would receive and process complaints of discrimination in private employment from residents of Charlottesville. [emphasis added]

How could Charlottesville City Hall, arguably the City’s most egregious and prodigious racial offender—an organization that allegedly has institutionalized racist employment practices—be exempt from the Commission’s mandate?

According to Mayor Satyendra Huja, it will not. In January 23 interview on WINA’s The Schilling Show, Huja categorically stated that he would not support Heinecke’s proposal if the Commission exempted government from its purview:

SCHILLING: Why would we exempt the government [from Charlottesville Human Rights Commission oversight] when they are acknowledged as a problem by at least several councilors? Or do you disagree with that?

HUJA: I don’t think, uh, I was unaware that the government was exempt from any consternation…

SCHILLING: Oh, they were. Go read, uh, go read Mr. Heinecke’s proposal. It exempts the government; it is only…

HUJA: I see no reason…

SCHILLING: It is only for private landlords and private businesses

HUJA: I see no reason if you’re going to have commission, uh, the government should be exempt. Uh, no reason for it.

SCHILLING: So you wouldn’t support it under any circumstances if the government was exempt?

HUJA: Well, uh, shouldn’t be exempt.

SCHILLING: So you wouldn’t support it under any circumstances if the government was exempt? In this final proposal, if it came before you, you wouldn’t do that.

HUJA: I, I don’t understand why government is exempt; I don’t see any reason.

SCHILLING: Okay, so you wouldn’t support it.

HUJA: No.

Hear the Huja/Schilling exchange on the proposed exclusion of government from Human Rights Commission purview:

Given Mayor Huja’s additional stated concerns about the $200,000-$300,000 annual cost of the Commission on Human Rights and the lack of data to support its necessity, Heinecke’s current proposal may be DOA before Charlottesville City Council without significant modification.

Regardless of Council’s ultimate action on Heinecke’s remedial proposition, the question remains: Why would Professor Heinecke and his Community Dialogue on Race “working group” champion a proposal that exempts Charlottesville City Hall, purportedly the city’s most notorious racial malefactor?

(Satyendra Huja photo courtesy of Charlottesville Tomorrow.)

It was with great fanfare that Charlottesville’s $95,000+ per year spokesman, Ric Barrick, announced the selection of Chris J. Engel as city’s new Director of Economic Development (DED) in a January 12 news release:

The City of Charlottesville is proud to announce the appointment of Chris J. Engel as the next Economic Development Director for the City…Engel is currently the Assistant Economic Development Director for Charlottesville and has been employed by the City since 2005.  His first day in the new position will be February 1st.

Next, Engel’s stellar qualifications were trumpeted by Charlottesville’s educationally under-qualified City Manager, Maurice Jones (himself the beneficiary of a $170,000+ public salary):

“During his time with the City, Chris has proven himself to be an effective leader in our organization and in the community,” said Charlottesville City Manager Maurice Jones.  “He has the credentials, the skills and the vision to build off of the great success we have had in economic development during the last decade.”

But what of Charlottesville’s long-time Director of Economic Development, Aubrey Watts (recipient of a $160,000+ public salary)?

The release explains that he has chosen to relinquish his official Economic Development title in order to lighten his workload:

The announcement follows the decision by the current director, Aubrey Watts, to concentrate on his duties as Chief Operating Officer and Chief Financial Officer as well as to manage the transition of the Charlottesville Redevelopment and Housing. [sic]

Conspicuously absent from Barrick’s missive was any reference to compensation. Watts, in assuming temporary responsibility for shepherding a leadership transition in the city’s Housing Authority, has shed what was a permanent responsibility as the city’s Director of Economic Development.

Therefore, a downward salary adjustment is anticipated, right?

Wrong.

A January 12 request to Barrick for information on the adjusted salaries of both Engel and Watts was only partially answered on January 19:

From: “Barrick, Ric” <BARRICK@charlottesville.org>
Date: January 19, 2012 05:42:39 PM EST
To: ‘Schilling Show’
Cc: “Brown, Craig” <Brownc@charlottesville.org>
Subject: RE: Director of Economic Development Chosen for Charlottesville

Rob

The paperwork for that promotion has not been received into Human Resources as of yet.  As soon as it is gets in I will send you a note as to the results.  As for the second question, Mr. Watts’ current salary is $160,929.60 but that did not change with this reassignment of responsibilities.

Ric

Omitted from Barrick’s initial response was requested information on Mr. Engel, currently employed as Charlottesville’s Assistant Director of Economic Development. The threat of a FOIA request prompted the city spokesman finally to answer eight days after the information was requisitioned:

From: “Barrick, Ric” <BARRICK@charlottesville.org>
Date: January 20, 2012 04:20:04 PM EST
To: ‘Schilling Show’
Cc: “Brown, Craig” <Brownc@charlottesville.org>
Subject: RE: FOIA Request Chris Engle’s New Salary Re: Director of Economic Development Chosen for Charlottesville

Rob

Chris’ base salary in his new position beginning February 1st will be $115,000 but that will change a bit once it is entered into the payroll system by HR and his hourly is figured out and applied in the system.  That has not been done yet as they just today received his paperwork.  His current salary is $86,028.80.

Ric

Let’s do the math:

Current DED Aubrey Watts has seen his duties decrease by a value $115,000 per year (the amount soon being paid to Engel in order for him to assume Watts’ position), and yet, Watts will continue to receive $160,929.60 annually.

Assistant DED Chris Engel will see his already inflated yearly paycheck of $86,028.80 balloon by $28,971.20 (or 34 percent) to $115,000.

The average Charlottesville household, according to the 2010 United States Census, is earning just $39,030 per year (2009 figure).

How does that household income compare to the base salaries (excluding benefits) of select, highly compensated Charlottesville government “fat cats”?

C-ville "Fat Cat" Salaries vs. Median C-ville Household Income ($39,030)

Yet, life is easy for Charlottesville’s elite ruling class. With seemingly no oversight, these self-perpetuating white-collar government employees continue to feather their own nests while enriching themselves beyond measure—all at the expense of chronically overburdened and hopelessly unrepresented Charlottesville taxpayers.

At the ACSB January 12 organizational meeting, politically left-leaning member Eric Strucko—recently a champion of process and corruption reform—nominated Buyaki for chair. Establishment darling, Diantha McKeel, then nominated current board leader, Steve Koleszar, for another term.

The vote for Buyaki was 2-5, with only Buyaki and Strucko voting “yes.” “Republican” chameleons Pam Moynihan and Barbara Mouly sided with progressives Koleszar, McKeel and Ned Gallaway to seal Buyaki’s fate. The vote for Koleszar’s renewed chairmanship was a 5-2 mirror of the previous tally.

Listen to the shocking ACSB roll call votes on board leadership nominations:

For vice chair, Strucko again nominated Buyaki, while immediately thereafter Gallaway put forward McKeel. Buyaki received his own vote along with those of Mouly and Strucko. When asked for her vote on Buyaki, Moynihan paused for nearly six seconds before saying “no.” She was joined in dissent by McKeel, Koleszar, and Gallaway. The same 5-2 majority that supported Koleszar for chair subsequently elected McKeel as the ACSB vice chair.

Under Koleszar’s leadership, the Albemarle County School Board and Administration have been criticized for several high-profile bumblings: Kid Pan Alley’s student indoctrination; 111 missing laptop computers;  a controversial $2 million computer software system; a “block scheduling” debacle; and a wayward athletic director, amongst other recent scandals. None of these has been satisfactorily resolved, and the public largely seems to have lost faith in the board’s ability to capably manage the Division.

Koleszar, McKeel and Gallaway’s support for institutional status quo is not surprising, as they are closely aligned with Albemarle County’s liberal education and political establishments.

Strucko, to his credit and through his votes, has shown himself to be fiercely independent—more interested in competence and transparency than in politics.

Mouly and Moynihan, however, sought Republican support in recent elections. Their unexplained votes for continuing liberal ACSB (mis)management may leave previously supportive Albemarle County Republicans scratching their heads; and the turn-votes certainly will ensure that the board’s only reliable reformers continue to play defense rather than offense in the year ahead.

Crozetians and Western Albemarleans awoke to welcomed news on December 8, 2011, as the Crozet Gazette and Charlottesville Daily Newspaper reported that the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors had voted to direct county staff to send out an RFP, or request for proposal, to build the new Crozet Library.

A part of the Jefferson-Madison Regional Library (JMRL)—which is the public regional library that serves the City of Charlottesville, and the counties of Albemarle, Greene, Louisa, and Nelson—the Crozet Library has been in need of expansion for quite some time: the building, which is a former train station in downtown Crozet, is so small that when the library takes inventory of newly released books, staff has to remove an older book from the stacks to make space.  Additionally, in late 2011 the fire marshal determined that no more than 50 people should safely occupy the Crozet Library at any given time.  Library programs, such as lectures, routinely draw crowds of over 50 patrons, so some events have had to be held at the neighboring Crozet Elementary School on Crozet Avenue.

The creation of a new home for the Crozet Library has been on the backburner for years, as the newly designated Library Avenue just south of downtown Crozet has lay vacant for the past two years.  Conservatives, libertarians, and constitutionalists who are upset with the performance of our area public schools and the graduates they are producing should consider lending their support to the JMRL and become library advocates for the following reasons.

First, libraries are overall cost effective and spend far less of taxpayers’ money than the government schools.  For example, depending on what number you look at, the total operating budget for the JMRL is around 6 million dollars per year.  Contrast this to the annual operating budget of the Charlottesville City Schools alone at 69 million dollars, and it is easy to see that libraries are feeding much, much less from the public trough and display greater efficiency for it: in Charlottesville, the average core per-pupil spending is 16,141 dollars per pupil, per year.  This ranks among the highest in the state, yet math and reading scores are serially lagging.  The cost per person who patronizes the library is far less than that, and considering the population it serves, the JMRL is actually among the most heavily used public libraries in America.  Circulation data support this claim.

Also, librarianship as a profession is very rewarding, but is not known for being extremely well-paying, and instances of librarians and library workers milking the system are few and far between.  Contrast this with some public school administrators in central offices who routinely draw six-figure salaries and have little to show for it.

Second, there are far fewer opportunities for socialist indoctrination of area youth in the public libraries.  This community has in recent years unearthed controversies in the public schools, such as the recent Kid Pan Alley episode, and when a high school teacher was caught on camera saying that America should “convert” to socialism!

Here is a more general example: it is a common belief that Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s New Deal pulled America out of the Great Depression.  This is what students in high school American History courses by and large “learn” through their reading and instruction.  In reality, this enlargement of the public sector prolonged the misery of the Depression; had the federal government followed a free market direction, the economy would have returned to pre-1929 output in a few to several years.  Due to FDR’s expansionist policies, the Depression did not end until the Second World War.  Teachers may mean well, but they and the history textbooks their school districts adopt do not tell the truth about the New Deal.

I graduated from a public high school in Virginia seven years ago, and it was only afterward when I, as an adult, was able to read up on the Great Depression and American History on my own, using books of my own choosing, rather than the choosing of a group of teachers.  The availability of choice and competition in the free market is far better than a one-size-fits-all textbook.  The Jefferson-Madison Regional Library is a great place to learn about American history by considering a variety of books, not the one book that is given the stamp of approval by public schools.  The library is probably the only place in town where you are guaranteed to find copies of the left-leaning A People’s History of the United States, by Howard Zinn, and its conservative counterpart, A Patriot’s History of the United States, by Larry Schweikart and Michael Allen.  It is through our public libraries that some citizens are replacing their indoctrination with an education.

Third, the JMRL boasts a voluminous selection of items that circulate to patrons.  The selection and diversity of items greatly outnumbers even the largest bookstores.  I am aware of libertarian arguments that government should not be competing with the private sector, and frankly, I am sympathetic to libertarian concerns and am willing to listen.  I enjoy patronizing large bookstores such as Barnes & Noble as well as small mom and pop used bookshops. However, I also know that there is more or less a free market in this country – it’s not perfect, but free enterprise is the most productive supplier of human needs and economic justice.  Private booksellers do not seem to have the same selection as public libraries, either because the free market will not allow it, or because private booksellers are unwilling to stock their shelves with the same ferocity.  Public libraries are more likely to possess rare, out of print books that private bookstores do not carry.  This makes visiting the public or university library nearly mandatory for those conducting serious research.

Liberals and progressives praise libraries because they see them as institutions that support democracy, and because libraries are cultural “equalizers.” It is because of public libraries, they argue, that even the poorest among us can have access to books.  Frankly, I am happy that they are happy; however, I have no interest in “spreading the wealth around.”  I have always felt that President Obama has not spent enough time in libraries, and has spent too much time “community organizing.”  I am advocating for public libraries for a different reason, because they are a better and cheaper tool for learning than are public schools.  Thomas Jefferson said that he could not live without books, and a society that is going to march toward freedom and liberty needs to be knowledgeable and well-educated.  I recommend that conservatives and libertarians “grow. learn. connect.” at their library, and I hope you will join me in a library near you!

Note: The author is a Charlottesville resident who works as a library support specialist with the Jefferson-Madison Regional Library.  He has taught math at a public school and has ran for School Board.  Opinions expressed here are his own, and do not necessarily reflect an official position of the JMRL.

An October 17 Daily Progress story trumpets the lawless group’s intentions for the park, if they are granted special permission to camp there:

Occupy Charlottesville protesters asked the City Council on Monday to suspend the 11 p.m. curfew in Lee Park, which they are occupying.

Speakers from the group said that they feel the group is within the spirit, if not the letter, of the law, in that they want to keep the park safe, clean and healthy. [emphasis added]

A November 19 OC Facebook posts again states the group’s objective to maintain the park:

We will be having group park clean-up over the next few days to get the park neat and shiny: Tonight at 6pm, Sunday 10am, and Monday 10am. Feel welcome to stop by and pitch in whenever you can though. The to-do list includes: Trash/recycling/compost disposal, Common tent re-organization, Leaf raking, Sign posting, General pick up, additional seating. Any more needs we can be sure to cover? [emphasis added]

The Special Events Permit issued to Occupy Charlottesville clearly delineates the group’s practical and financial responsibilities upon their departure:

• Any damage to park shrubbery, flower beds and or trees resulting from your organization’s special event will require reimbursement for any repairs or replacement
• Participants will be responsible for cleaning up the park area after the event.

Charlottesville City Public Works crews were on hand at Lee Park shortly after 7:00 this morning, attempting to deterg the site prior to public observation of the Occupiers’ reproach—an aftermath of filthy refuse.

While the fraction is the same, the numbers have been flipped. When it comes to bearing the financial burden for restoring Lee Park to usable condition, 1% made the mess, but 99% will pay to clean it up.

View the Lee Park “trashed” pictures that Charlottesville City doesn’t want you to see:

[Show as slideshow]

[View with PicLens]

Edd Houck, a longtime legislative partner of Planned Parenthood and a reliable pro-abortion (warning: graphic link) vote in the Virginia Senate is now desperately trying to convince uninformed 17^th District voters that party labels are not important, and that conservatives should vote for him.

Fatt chance, Edd.

Read Senator Chichester’s unintended poison-pen endorsement of fellow liberal Edd Houck:

EDD HOUCK FOR STATE SENATE

For Immediate Release, October 27, 2011

Contact: Craig Bieber (804)-307-6166

John Chichester Endorses Sen. Edd Houck

REPUBLICAN CITES HOUCK’S RECORD ON JOBS, EDUCATION AND TAX RELIEF

FREDERICKSBURG—Republican John Chichester, former State Senator from the Fredericksburg area, today endorsed State Sen. Edd Houck (D-Spotsylvania) for re-election in the 17^th District.  “Senator Houck worked closely with me and other Republicans to pass common sense legislation that helped to protect and create jobs, make critical investments in core services, and cut taxes,” said Chichester.

Speaking at the University of Mary Washington, Chichester noted Houck’s consistent and influential support for UMW, Germanna Community College and K-12 education.  He praised Houck’s efforts to cut the sales tax on food and income taxes while balancing the state’s budget and maintaining Virginia’s tradition of fiscal responsibility.  “Edd Houck’s re-election is crucial for this area and the entire 17^th District, Chichester continued.  “Party labels are not as important as someone’s commitment to principle and willingness to work in a bipartisan fashion to find solutions,” he stated.  “Edd will continue to be a leader on issues important to Virginians like improving our economy and keeping taxes low.”

“I am grateful to John Chichester for his very strong endorsement,” Houck said.  “During our service together on the Senate Finance Committee, we worked to maintain Virginia’s hard-earned reputation as one of the most business friendly and lowest tax states in the nation,” he stated.

“I strongly encourage all of my fellow Republicans and other friends in the 17^th District to send Edd Houck back to the State Senate,” concluded Chichester.

Sen. Houck is third in seniority in the 40-member Senate.  The 17^th District consists of all or parts of the counties of Albemarle, Culpeper, Louisa, Orange, and Spotsylvania and the City of Fredericksburg.

###

Paid for and authorized by Friends of Senator Edd Houck

 

Concurrently, Albemarle County Supervisor Dennis Rooker has scoffed at suggestions that United Nations ideology—promoted by homegrown internationalists and foreign agents—is infiltrating local government with a goal of undermining foundational American principles.

Despite being presented with incontrovertible evidence of such, Rooker has kept his head firmly planted beneath the comfortable sands of self-imposed ignorance. But facts affirm the accusation, and now, additional evidence is surfacing that dangerous infiltration is ongoing locally.

Over the objections of Rooker and Board of Supervisors’ chair, Ann Mallek, the International Council on Local Environmental Initiatives (ICLEI) recently was ejected from Albemarle County. Rooker pleaded for the County to retain ICLEI membership, touting numerous benefits without strings attached:

“It’s not a part of the United Nations. It’s not supported by the U.N. and it’s not governed by the U.N.,” Rooker said. “We have a tool that staff says is helpful, is inexpensive and that cannot be replaced by anything else that’s out there.”

Provably, Rooker was dead wrong about the lack of relationship between the two entities. Perhaps he might have been swayed on the ICLEI/Sustainability threat had he known that Jie Wu (aka Megan Wu)—the former ICLEI representative to Albemarle County—was (or is) a government official of the People’s Republic of (Communist) China. Her online biography lists her service to the PRC in their Ministry of Environmental Protection, and Wu was trained as a linguist at a university subordinate to the PRC’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs. There is no evidence that Wu has renounced her Communist Chinese citizenship or forsworn her allegiance to the PRC, and yet, through Albemarle County’s ICLEI membership, Wu received carte blanch access to sensitive, local government operational information and data.

Wu and ICLEI may be gone (for now), but Koren Manning remains. Hired by TJPDC Executive Director, Stephen Williams, Manning is a paid employee of the organization, responsible for Livability Partnership website maintenance, social media outreach, and data analysis among other duties.

Manning holds or has held membership in a secretive, subversive group known as Planners Network: The Organization of Progressive Planning. In their mission statement, Planners Network (PN) advocates undermining America’s present political and economic underpinnings:

Planners Network is an association of professionals, activists, academics, and students involved in physical, social, economic, and environmental planning in urban and rural areas, who promote fundamental change in our political and economic systems.

The Network’s stated goals and objectives read like a page from Marx’s Communist Manifesto (or Charlottesville/Albemarle’s 1998 Sustainability Accords):

We believe that planning should be a tool for allocating resources and developing the environment to eliminate the great inequalities of wealth and power in our society, rather than to maintain and justify the status quo. We are committed to opposing racial, economic, and environmental injustice and discrimination by gender and sexual orientation. We believe that planning should be used to assure adequate food, clothing, housing, medical care, jobs, safe working conditions, and a healthful environment. We advocate public responsibility for meeting these needs, because the private market has proven incapable of doing so.

We seek to be an effective political and social force, working with other progressive organizations to inform public opinion and public policy and to provide assistance to those seeking to understand, control, and change the forces which affect their lives. [emphasis added]

But their utopian, socialist aspiration does not end there. The current PN mission statement has been sanitized from the original. The version found in Network newsletters from the 1980s and 1990s includes the following additional self-descriptive language:

We oppose the economic structure of our society, which values profit and property rights over human rights and needs. This system perpetuates the inequalities of class, race, sex and age which distort human relationships and limit the potential for a decent quality of life. We advocate a shift in current national budgetary priorities to favor human services, social production and environmental protection over military and other nonproductive expenditures. [emphasis added]

A Communist Chinese national and a neo-Marxist planning-activist inside Albemarle County Government—each bought and paid for with taxpayer dollars—should raise red flags to even casual observers. But instead, there is deafening silence.

Albemarle County Government, through ICLEI membership and affiliation with the TJPCD has entrusted confidential and sensitive information to a representative of a government hostile to United States’ interests and to a member of a group that seeks to remake America into a socialist gulag. And, Koren Manning and Jie Wu may be just the tip of a melting iceberg.

If Marxists and Communists infiltrate local government establishment and Dennis Rooker doesn’t acknowledge their presence, do the infill-traitors still pose a threat?

I like National Public Radio. I just wish they weren’t getting my tax money.

After the primaries for the 2008 election, The Joan Shorenstein Center on Press, Politics, and Public Policy of The Harvard Kennedy School released a study that showed the media had given measurably more favorable coverage for particular candidates. National Public Radio was no exception.

Nor is this year an exception. Recently on Morning Edition, Andrea Seabrook filed a report on two Republican candidates. According to Ms. Seabrook, there are some Republicans who are anti-science or at least not prone to engage in “evidence based policy making.”

Ms. Seabrook’s concern was first for Michelle Bachman and based on two statements the candidate made, one recently and one in 2009. In the first, Bachman speaks about God trying to send a message to congress given the recent earthquake and hurricane in the D.C. area. An audio clip was played during the report and to me, and apparently everyone in Bachman’s audience, she was making a joke. Seabrook, though, remained skeptical. In the second, Bachman comments on the Swine Flu panic that ensued not long after President Obama took office. The candidate declared it an “interesting coincidence” that the last time there was a Swine Flu panic was during the Carter administration. Presumably, she was hinting at the penchant for Democrats to not let a good crisis go to waste. The reporter pointed out that the first case was actually in 1976 with President Ford in the White House. So, the comment was inaccurate and maybe a little weird, but I don’t recall Ms. Seabrook having any concern during the last primaries about Senator Obama’s claim of having visited 57 states or his belief that if he were elected President, the seas would recede.

The other Republican in science trouble is Texas Governor, Rick Perry. Apparently he questions the extent of human activity on global warming. He said, “Yes, the climate is changing. It has been changing since the Earth began… Scientists are coming forward and questioning the original idea that man-made global warming is what is causing the climate to change.” Hmm? That doesn’t seem too extraordinary. But that wasn’t the governor’s only infraction! He also spoke about evolution: “It’s a theory out there that has some gaps in it.” Here, I think Ms. Seabrook was gasping for air, but I’m not sure why she seemed so offended. That he called it a theory? If so, that’s odd. It’s called The Theory of Evolution after all. Or doesn’t she like the ‘gap’ part? But Darwin himself acknowledged the difference (and problem) between micro and macro evolution. Not okay to refer to that as a gap?

Anyway, that got me thinking: Are Democrats really the party of “evidence based policy making?” If so, how do we explain all those counter-productive policy preferences put forth over the years? A few examples…

During the primary debates in 2007, then Senator Obama was asked why he would raise the capital gains tax given that it has, in the past, led to less revenue for government. Even though raising the tax would adversely affect 100 million Americans who own stock, the president responded that he would do it anyway as a matter of fairness. He cited 50 hedge fund managers who were making too much money (in an apparently unfair fashion) as a reason for this. In other words, the President would hurt 100 million citizens and reduce revenue in order to get the 50 rich guys. That doesn’t sound practical or evidence based. It sounds petty and ideological.

Al Gore claimed the seas will rise 20 feet in the next 100 years. The United Nation’s (IPCC Panel) latest report said that it might be more like, well, 18 inches. Either way, the Left proposed the Kyoto Protocol. The environmentalist, Bjorn Lomborg, of the Copenhagen Consensus, says two things. First that Al Gore is all about hype. Second, that even if all of the Kyoto Protocol was followed by every country on Earth for the next 100 years, it would postpone the effects of global warming only by 6 years. And that would come at 150 billion dollars per year. He also says that the United Nations figures you could cure every malady on Earth for half that. That’s basic health care, clean drinking water, sanitation, and education to every human being on the planet. Slow global warming by 6 years or, for half the money, provide all that much-needed care to the poorest on the globe. But the Left’s concern curiously remains with Cap and Trade.

How about DDT? Malaria was nearly eradicated from the globe by the 1960′s due to the pesticide’s use. In 1962, Rachel Carson, in her book Silent Spring, predicted that the use of DDT would cause a cancer epidemic that would hit “practically 100 percent” of the human population, and worse yet, would thin out the shells of bird eggs. After seven months and 9,000 pages of testimony, an EPA administrative judge concluded “DDT is not a carcinogenic hazard to man… DDT is not a mutagenic or teratogenic hazard to man… The use of DDT under the regulations involved here do not have a deleterious effect on freshwater fish, estuarine organisms, wild birds or other wildlife.” Still, in 1972 the pesticide was banned. Today the UN estimates that a child dies every 30 seconds from Malaria. And today, Rachel Carson is still praised by the Left. Evidence based or agenda based?

Unemployment insurance: Google “effect of increasing the length of unemployment insurance” and you will find any number of studies for cities, states, and even nations that show that the longer government provides insurance checks to the unemployed the longer it takes for those people to take a job. In spite of that, Congress has now extended benefits twice to 99 weeks. So if shortening the time frame will push people back to work why have Democrats insisted on the extensions? Evidence and policy once again at odds.

Social Security: An account opened for you and guaranteed by the government to assist you in paying your bills once you have retired. Only there isn’t really an account and the money you get back represents a horrible rate of return as compared with just about any other investment. On top of that, when you die, excess funds that you earned aren’t inherited by your family; rather, they remain with government. And since poorer people die younger than the wealthy, the system is actually regressive. With average life expectancy as it is, we end up with young black men subsidizing old white woman. So why is this considered a third rail in politics? Precisely because it is politics. There certainly isn’t evidence that this system makes any sense economically.

The Left’s list of impractical, illogical, and problem ridden policies is endless: The Square Deal, the New Freedom, the New Era, The New Deal, The Great Society… The mercury-filled light bulb, the living wage, affordable housing, CAFE standards… All flawed. All with unintended consequences. All based on theory or merely a ‘feeling’ that it’s the right thing to do.

So, Ms. Seabrook, is the Left really where you go for evidence based policy?

The speech was delivered on Friday, October 21 at the Jefferson Area Tea Party’s “Free Speech Rights for EVERYBODY” Rally and Benefit, held in Charlottesville’s McGuffey Park.

Watch Rob Schilling’s speech in full (video courtesy of Rick Sincere):

www.youtube.com/watch?v=wmRCYJOSJL8

The discussion took place at the October 17 City Council meeting as elected Democrats stumbled over themselves to extend grace to the petitioning leftists. These sought official absolution for their sin against society—acknowledged and flagrant violation of city code. Szakos gleefully complied by offering recompense to the admitted malefactors:

One other question I had: Is there a porta-potty at Lee Park? Is that something that we would be willing to provide, or to find a source for?

Never mind that Charlottesville’s homeless community gets no such accommodation from city government.

Never mind that taxpayers, not “the City,” would be footing the bill for the cartable crappers.

Never mind that the Occupiers were requesting permission to violate laws that the other 99% of Charlottesville citizens are required to follow.

Fortunately, Szakos’s harebrained idea was tabled, although it was seriously considered.

There should be no reward for transgression, because reward under such conditions undoubtedly will further anarchy. But in a place like Charlottesville City Hall—where the truth has been exchanged for a lie—it appears that no idea is too outrageous for proposal, no idea is too stolid for consideration, and ultimately, perhaps, no idea is too odious for implementation.

See Kristen Szakos make her unbelievable “free” porta-potty proposal:

www.youtube.com/watch?v=L1RD2Adk8Uw

Almost worse than the concept of vote-purchasing with “free” government food, is that the monies expended for this boondoggle are siphoned from the city’s Capital Improvements Program, which is described as follows:

The Capital Improvement Program Fund (CIP) provides funding for streets, public buildings, land and other capital assets, which generally have a useful life of 5 years or more and cost more than $50,000. City Council, in their Adopted Budget Guidelines, has set a policy to allocate an amount no less than 3% of the General Fund budget for capital improvements.

The bizarre proposal for misappropriation of public “capital” tax dollars to sponsor neighborhood “celebrations” was brought forward last fall by Neighborhood Development Services Director, Jim Tolbert. In a pitch to City Council, Tolbert described his vision for the program:

Also, included would be funding for neighborhood based events and celebrations and for capacity building initiatives to help increase participation in neighborhoods or to get information out to help citizens become more involved in our government. We would anticipate that most grant requests would be between $250 and $5,000. [emphasis added]

Sensing opportunity to buy—with taxpayer dollars—additional votes for Democrats in upcoming elections as well as to increase general affection towards government, Tolbert’s scheme unanimously was approved by council through the body’s consent agenda.

The bureaucracy involved in gaining grant approval is mindboggling, requiring a convoluted seven-page process explanation and untold staff hours in submission review, evaluation, and scoring.

In keeping with the city’s Marxist sustainability agenda, brownie points are awarded to applications that promote delineated “Sustainability Values”:

• Project contributes to environmental health or our ability to effectively address climate change.
• Project will have a positive effect on the local economy and minimizes costs to the community, now and over the long term.
• Project supports responsible stewardship of public resources.
• Project contributes to social equity by meeting basic needs, benefiting vulnerable populations, promoting community safety and cultural awareness, or building community relationships and neighborhood cohesion.

Flummery aside, in spite of the stringent application process, profligacy is rampant in the solicitation and awarding of Neighborhood Grant funds. An evaluation of the Greenbrier Neighborhood Association’s (GNA) application to fund an October 9 Neighborhood Social, shows five tubs of ice cream (12.5 gallons) to be purchased at a cost of $300.00, or $24.00 per gallon. Several local grocery stores offer ice cream at less than $5.00 per gallon, a savings of nearly 80% over the city-paid price. And in the spirit of benevolence, Charlottesville City Government agreed to pick up the cost of a “bounce house” in order to enliven the soiree, even though the neighborhood’s application listed that expense as being covered by their association as a grant “match.” All told, this neighborhood’s “free” ice cream social set back Charlottesville taxpayers a cold $716—that’s $237 more than was requested by GNA. Predictably, the grant was approved (and possibly aggrandized) by Tolbert’s Neighborhood Development Services Department.

All of this is taking place concurrent with a Charlottesville School Board discussion on permanently banning ice cream from division grounds in order to combat a childhood “obesity epidemic.” So, while on the one hand, the State (city government) plies youth (and adults) with free ice cream at a neighborhood soiree (ironically held at Greenbrier Elementary), on the other hand, the State (city schools)—under funding governance and supposed oversight of Charlottesville City Hall— is classifying the frozen concoction as a dangerous substance not to be served on school property.

In a city with widespread crumbling infrastructure and millions in unmet capital needs—both exacerbated by years of executive mismanagement—it makes little sense to hand out capital improvement funds as if they were…ice cream. That is, of course, unless the city is Charlottesville, the mayor is Norrishood, and the governing body is totally devoid of common sense.