Category: 99th House District

On my “Lee Anne Washington (R) is either completely ignorant, or an outright liar; take your pick.” post:

1. Lee Anne Washington said,

   I am neither completely ignorant, nor a liar. I simply stated my position on issues that have arisen either via recently proposed legislation or via recent public debate. I am sorry that you expended so much effort to misconstrue and take issue with what is clearly a policy statement. Next time, if you need a clarification, why don’t you just call me?

Yes, the infamous, “that’s not what I said” defense. Sorry to rehash, but here is what she said in a letter to The Free Lane–Star:

I know Virginians cannot tolerate illegal aliens receiving in-state college tuition, driver’s licenses, welfare, and state benefits. I pledge cooperation with federal immigration authorities. Remove these incentives for illegal aliens, and they’ll stop coming.

Anyone with a 12th grade education (even from Caroline County) knows that she is saying that illegal aliens currently receive in-state college tuition and driver’s licenses when they don’t! (For more details on that, see the original post). Otherwise, she wouldn’t be using the present tense of “receive” and the future tense of “remove”, as well as saying “they [wi]ll stop coming”.

Am I the only one that had to take English in high school (or college)?

Further, no legislation has come forward (as she claims) that would affect either in-state college tuition or driver’s licenses. There has been no public debate regarding in-state tuition or driver’s licenses as she claims either. Why should there be? It’s been settled!

Instead of saying, “sorry, I messed up”, instead she has to use the usual “that’s not what I said” defense.

Vote Albert Pollard tomorrow folks.

From Lee Anne Washington’s letter to The Free Lance-Star:

I know Virginians cannot tolerate illegal aliens receiving in-state college tuition, driver’s licenses, welfare, and state benefits. I pledge cooperation with federal immigration authorities. Remove these incentives for illegal aliens, and they’ll stop coming.

[…]

Like Rob Wittman, I’ll base my policy decisions on scientific evidence, not emotion and questionable anecdotes.

Repeat after me: ILLEGAL ALIENS DO NOT RECEIVE IN-STATE TUITION.

My proof?

From the Richmond Times-Dispatch: Bill to bar illegals at colleges advances:

All state public colleges and universities — even those with policies that do not prohibit enrolling undocumented students — charge out-of-state tuition to those students in accordance with state and federal law.

RT-D: Immigration bills advance:

Some schools say they do not admit undocumented students but do not verify legal residency status if the student claims to be a U.S. citizen on the application and pays out-of-state tuition.

RT-D: Education restrictions advance:

The [illegal] students may attend public K-12 schools and currently can attend several state colleges as long as they pay out-of-state tuition, which can be double or nearly triple the cost of in-state tuition.

RT-D: Colleges’ admittance of illegals opposed:

Undocumented students pay out-of-state tuition, which can be double and nearly triple the cost of in-state tuition.

[…]

As with other state schools, students would have to supply documentation of legal residence to be considered for in-state tuition or any kind of state or federal aid.

And finally, check out the hoops that you have to jump through to get in-state tuition (p. 3).

Second, repeat after me: ILLEGAL ALIENS DO NOT RECEIVE DRIVER’S LICENSES.

From the Virginia Department of Motor Vehicles: Acceptable Documents:

To apply for a driver’s license, learner’s permit, commercial driver’s license (CDL), or CDL instruction permit you must bring two identification documents, one proof of legal presence, one proof of Virginia residency, and proof of your complete social security number (if you have been issued one). Anyone applying for a CDL or CDL instruction permit is required to provide a social security number. To apply for a photo identification (ID) card you must bring two identification documents, one proof of legal presence and one proof of Virginia residency.

[…]

All documents will be subject to verification, which may delay the issuance of your license, learner’s permit or photo identification card.

As for welfare benefits, from The Washington Post: Illegal Immigrants in Md. and Va. Out-Earn U.S. Peers, Study Says:

Randy Capps, a researcher at the nonpartisan Urban Institute who studies welfare use by immigrants and their children, said illegal immigrant families appear to be largely limiting themselves to programs such as subsidized school lunches and Medicaid. Regarding the program most commonly associated with welfare — cash assistance to needy families — fewer than 1 percent of illegal-immigrant households nationwide and in Maryland and Virginia use the benefit, compared with 3 percent of native households in Virginia, 5 percent of native households in Maryland and 5 percent nationwide.

It is completely reprehensible and unbecoming of anyone running for elected office to be so completely ignorant (or to lie) about the laws that they will be making.

She claims that she will “base [her] policy decisions on scientific evidence, not emotion and questionable anecdotes”, instead she decides to not tell the truth to people in the 99th District.

It’s not often that a candidate makes me vote against them, but Lee Anne Washington has just succeeded in accomplishing that.

From The Free Lance-Star: Pollard should be more experienced than this!:

Pollard should be more experienced than this!

Many of us have noticed that large “Pollard” signs have suddenly appeared around the district.

On closer inspection, it appears that these signs have been recycled from the previous state Senate campaign, with the lower portion cut off.

There is nothing wrong with that. The problem is that in cutting off the bottom, those who posted the signs have also eliminated the mandatory authorization line, which must be part of any political advertising.

In Title 24.2 of the Code of Virginia, Chapter 9.5 includes instructions for including the statement “Paid for by [Name of candidate or campaign committee]” on campaign materials.

Those instructions also state that “any disclosure required by this section shall be displayed in a conspicuous manner.” Under 24.2-955.3 of the code, certain penalties are prescribed for violation of these laws.

These signs have begun to appear throughout the district. Just curious: How can someone with such vast experience in government service have overlooked such a simple requirement?

Jeff Gerau

Caroline

Amazing job there getting it wrong.

From § 24.2-955:

The disclosure requirements of this chapter apply to any sponsor of an advertisement in the print media or on radio or television the cost or value of which constitutes an expenditure or contribution required to be disclosed under Chapter 9.3 (§ 24.2-945 et seq.) except that the disclosure requirements of this chapter do not apply to (i) an individual who makes independent expenditures aggregating less than $1,000 in an election cycle for a candidate or (ii) an individual who incurs expenses only with respect to a referendum.

From § 24.2-955.1:

As used in this chapter, unless the context requires a different meaning:

“Advertisement” means any message appearing in the print media, on television, or on radio that constitutes a contribution or expenditure under Chapter 9.3 (§ 24.2-945 et seq.). “Advertisement” shall not include novelty items authorized by a candidate including, but not limited to, pens, pencils, magnets, and buttons to be attached to wearing apparel.

[…]

“Print media” means billboards, cards, newspapers, newspaper inserts, magazines, printed material disseminated through the mail, pamphlets, fliers, bumper stickers, periodicals, website, electronic mail, and outdoor advertising facilities. If a single print media advertisement consists of multiple pages, folds, or faces, the disclosure requirement of this section applies only to one page, fold, or face.

“Radio” means any radio broadcast station that is subject to the provisions of 47 U.S.C. §§ 315 and 317.

[…]

“Television” means any television broadcast station, cable television system, wireless-cable multipoint distribution system, satellite company, or telephone company transmitting video programming that is subject to the provisions of 47 U.S.C. §§ 315 and 317.

Nowhere does it say that campaign signs (with the exception of billboards) have to have disclaimers on them. You can, of course, put disclaimers on them if you want but you don’t have to.

No local candidate had disclaimer information on their campaign signs on the side of the road in the last general election.

When Robert Wittman was running for reelection for his 99th House of Delegates seat his signs did not have disclaimers either.

After the general election, when Wittman was running for the Republican nomination for the special election for Virginia’s 1st Congressional District and after he won the nomination: he reused the same signs — ones that didn’t have disclaimers on them.

If this is the best that Lee Anne Washington supporters can come up with, she’s really in trouble…

The Journal Press: Republican Lee Anne Washington is facing Democrat Albert Pollard for 99th District seat:

Republicans have now assured Democrat Albert Pollard the he will not get a free ride on February 19.

White Stone attorney and Town Council member Lee Anne Washington is now the Republican candidate for the 99th District House of Delegates position that was vacated one month ago, when Delegate Rob Wittman resigned from the elected position in order to begin his duties as a U.S. Congressman. A special election will be held on Tuesday, February 19.

[…]

Questions emerged about the single mother’s family and Washington corrected the record, explaining that she is not a President George Washington descendant but a cousin or niece, many times removed.

I may not have the best of them “book smarts”; but how could anyone be a descendant of President George Washington when he had no biological children?!

What next? Is she going to say she’s a descendant of Robert E. Lee or Thomas Jonathan “Stonewall” Jackson?

New prediction: Albert Pollard win with 75% of the vote (up from my prediction of 70%).

(H/t: Fred2Blue)