Chichester Must Go

28th District GOP Candidate Forum – May 15th

2007-05-14T22:02:00.000-05:00

For more information see www.staffordgop.com.

Do NOT Support Stuart!!!

2007-05-01T22:18:00.000-05:00

NOTE to Richard Stuart: This post will come down when you renounce the endorsement of John Chichester.

This blog does not have an official Republican Candidate that it is supporting as of yet, however, each contributor and supporter is free to support who they wish. However, this site does stand against the nomination of Former Commonwealth’s Attorney Richard Stuart. (See more on Stuart at NLS.) Disgraced State Senator Chichester has endorsed Mr. Stuart. I have waited weeks since the endorsement for Stuart to make some kind of assurance that he is not another Chichester. This has not happened. This convinces me that Stuart in nothing more than a Chichester puppet. This site will focus its efforts to making sure that neither a liberal Republican nor a Liberal Democrat wins in the 28th District.

We did not work so hard to remove Mr. Chichester to have his clone.

Why I still support John Van Hoy (and why you should, too)

2007-04-25T11:44:00.000-05:00

Well, things have been quite entertaining in the 28th State Senate District since I last made my views known. Back then, we had only one Republican candidate, John Van Hoy, although it looked like some others would jump in. Indeed, three have - Richard Stuart, John Myers, and Joe Graziano - and all are making themselves known - Stuart by the endorsements of John Chichester and Bill Howell (Free Lance-Star, h/t Virginia Virtucon), Myers by the endorsement of SWAC Girl, and Graziano by an unnamed blogger who sings the candidate's praises via comments in every post (s)he can find (note to whats-his/her-name: that's no criticism; your dedication is a sight to see). Despite all of this, I'm sticking with Van Hoy.

Stuart is the easiest to dismiss. I take it straight from the Chich's mouth (FLS) "He said he's backing Stuart because Stuart's fiscal philosophies are in line with his own." Stuart himself would "never say never" on tax hikes, which means I will always say never with him in a Republican nomination contest.

As for Myers, while his military service in Iraq is certainly admirable, his views on taxes are an anathema (Free Lance Star):

Myers said he's a social conservative but a "fiscal realist"--he doesn't like taxes but believes that taking a "no tax" pledge is akin to promising to cut state services.

With all due respect, that is a nonsensical statement.

That leaves Graziano. To be fair, Graziano is showing himself to be a fairly good right-winger (he even sends up Myers - without naming him - in this Virginia Virtucon interview). However, he simply doesn't have Van Hoy's history in the district. Graziano has run two races in Stafford (Supervisor in 2003, County GOP Chairman in 2004), and lost them both. Van Hoy, by contrast, led the Stafford GOP Committee for over a decade, and has served on several local organizations in the area. Stafford knows him very well, and the nominee will need to be as well-known in Stafford as humanly possible.

The fact is, Albert Pollard will be a strong candidate. I don't think he'll be as strong on the Northern Neck as he was before (remember, he did not run for re-election as a Delegate after voting for Mark Warner's tax hike in 2004), but he's no slouch out there. We need someone whom Stafford voters know as one of them, with a long history of local involvement. Van Hoy has that; Graziano doesn't.

So, in the choice between two good candidates, I have to go with the one I feel has the best chance against the tax-hiking Pollard. That person was and is John Van Hoy.

Cross-posted to the right-wing liberal

Chichester’s Seat May Actually be Filled by a True Conservative

2007-03-15T17:39:00.000-05:00

NLS examines the new state of the campaign for Chichester’s seat. He concludes that if a Republican wins the 28th district (see NLS’ next post), the candidate will have been a conservative (not like Chichester). The chair of the local party, Bob Hunt, failed to act quickly and decisively to have a primary. In the end the result is that the 28th District will be having a convention which will give the advantage to a Republican. NLS did a great job of analyzing this so I will not attempt to reinvent the wheel.

Is Chichester trying to steer Republicans away from John Van Hoy?

2007-03-13T12:45:00.000-05:00

You would certainly think so by looking at this Free Lance-Star piece on the state of the race in the 28th District:

Sen. John Chichester's decision to retire leaves the state 28th Senate District seat open for the first time in 29 years.
. . .
John Van Hoy, a Stafford businessman and former chairman of the county's Republican Party unit, had planned to challenge Chichester in a primary, and now says he is still running and has filed the necessary paperwork to become a candidate.
Also considering a run for the Republican nomination are Del. Rob Wittman of Westmoreland County; Cord Sterling, who formerly worked for Sen. John Warner, is vice-chairman of the
Stafford Republicans and a member of the Commonwealth Transportation Board . . .

For the record, Delegate Wittman voted "Yes" on "Republican" tax hike, while Sterling was non-committal (Free Lance-Star); only Van Hoy opposed the tax hike.

Meanwhile, when Chichester was asked to comment on the race to replace him, he had this to say (emphasis added):

Chichester has his own thoughts about who he'd like to see replace him--and a campaign account of at least $300,000 that could help such a candidate. He said both Wittman and Sterling would be good, qualified candidates and that he wouldn't support one over the other.

Notice anyone missing from his list? Yup, there was no mention of John Van Hoy. Now, Chich can support whomever he wants, but Republicans in the 28th District have to ask themselves if anyone Chich holds in such regard should be allowed anywhere near the Senate Chamber. I say No, and thus I support John Van Hoy.

Cross-posted to the right-wing liberal

Chichester is Gone!!!

2007-03-12T14:47:00.000-05:00

After a 29 year reign of terror Senator John Chichester has decided today to “retire” as apposed to getting voted out of office. After reading Chichester’s press release (you can find it most anywhere, but NLS had it up first), I am saddened to report that Chichester did not “wake up one morning to realize what he had done to Virginia and decide to do the only responsible thing” as I had hoped. He instead driveled on as any defeated politician does. Here are some of the lowlights:

Chairing the Finance Committee brings many things – not the least of which is a respect for the complexity of real life and the need to balance many worthwhile and competing interests, while maintaining the highest fiscal integrity. That balance can’t be achieved without a firm grounding in all aspects of the enterprise that we call state government.
The job of chairman brings a steep learning curve, and the learning never ends. It is a full-time job, and one that is all-consuming. In order to be successful, the Finance Committee chairman must be willing to live and breathe the state budget on a day-to-day basis. He must be willing to trade instant gratification for the state’s long-term prosperity. He must be willing to advance positions that are sometimes unpopular. He must leave behind parochial interests and think ecumenically, because the chairman’s district becomes the entire Commonwealth and her assets.
The rewards are many, but there is a price to pay. That price is exacted both physically and through the yoke of responsibility for Virginia’s financial health, economic prosperity and fiscal structure that accompanies the position, not just for two months that one is in Richmond, but for 365 days of the year.

I hope and pray that his words do not ring true. Virginia has suffered too much under his ideological tyranny.

But alas, Chichester must be commended for doing the right thing, even if not for the right reasons. Chichester was absolutely right when he said, “In 1978, when I first ran for this office, I said that the seat in the Senate belonged to the people and not to me.” Chichester has turned the seat back over to the people!

This is a great victory for Virginia and the Chichester Must Go movement. Chichester Must Go started as a small grassroots movement in the minds conservatives in Virginia. Chichester Must Go and its supporters merely provided the catalyst for what was already there.

I would like to personally thank D.J. McGuire for his contribution to this effort. Thank you also to the many blogs that supported this movement:

Finally, thank you to the many fine citizens of Commonwealth for their support. It is the pressure you put on Chichester that was the real cause for his “retirement.”

As for what will happen to Chichester Must Go, we will enjoy this victory and then look toward the future. All suggestions are welcome.

On the retirement speech

2007-03-12T12:32:00.000-05:00

I must admit, I admired Chichester's class; he could have taken the Russ Potts' route and hurled bitter invective at his opponents, but he chose not to do so. Then again, I hear he has a "horse" in the primary to succeed him.

“I have decided that we will not seek re-election for another term.” – John Chichester

2007-03-12T12:10:00.000-05:00

Words worth repeating: “I have decided that we will not seek re-election for another term.” Yes those are the official words of Senator John Chichester. NLS has the entire press release from Chichester.
My take on this in moments.

The Chichastrophe May be Over

2007-03-12T07:57:00.000-05:00

Along with D.J.’s post Below , see V*CAP’s take from Friday Here. Rumor has it (and from a myriad of sources no less) that Chichester is packing his bags. One can only speculate as to why? Is he scared of a challenger in the Republican Primary, is he afraid of defeat by his own Democratic kind, did Chichester Must Go send him reeling, or is did he wake up one morning to realize what he had done to Virginia and decide to do the only responsible thing, resign. Honestly, I hope it is the latter.

I must remind everyone that this is merely a rumor, and we have seen more than are fair share here at Chichester Must Go. His announcement could come as early as today. If true, this would be the ultimate success for the cause.

To give you a little recap of what happened, here is how it has gone down so far:
VCAP had the first scoop on Friday followed quickly by Bacon’s Rebellion and Virginia Virtucon. Saturday the Virginia Blogosphere was alive with rhetoric regarding the Chichester rumor: Chichester Must Go, Black Velvet Bruce Li, The Right-Wing Liberal, and Mason Conservative. The Ward View and Elephant Ears took up the storm on Sunday. Today Renaissance Ruminations and your’s truly have pitched in their takes.

We will keep you up to date as this story unfolds. . . .

Ding Dong, the Chich is . . .

2007-03-10T23:04:00.000-05:00

. . . well, "dead" would be inappropriate, cruel, and wrong.

The point is, he's going, going . . . he's gone!

I have it on very good authority that Chich will call it a career on Monday. This will remove a cloud no larger than a man's hand from the Commonwealth. All who stood up to oppose him (not the least of which the anonymous founder of this blog) deserve the thanks of all Virginians (well, except yours truly, I enjoy the rough and tumble of politics way too much for this to be considered anything but a labor of love).

There is, of course, the matter of replacing Chich; as that's not entirely germane here, let me simply provide a link to my thoughts on the matter here.

A Challenger May be Emerging

2007-03-06T11:09:00.000-05:00

Black Velvet Bruce Li notes HERE that a challenger may be emerging in the 28th District to defeat Chichester in the Republican Primary. Riley, Not O’Reilly of the Virginia Virtucon picks up the story calling for the 28th District to Draft John Van Hoy for State Senate. Both of these stories make compelling arguments for Van Hoy, but as Jamie Radtke of VCAP commented, “a decision needed to be made yesterday. If this is going to happen and have a chance, it needs to happen without further delay, debate or discussion.”
I whole heartedly agree. The question is will Van Hoy run? Residents of the 28th must make their voice heard loud and clear. Chichester Must Go, and someone must step up to the plate now.

The "fire out there" grows

2007-03-05T13:44:00.000-05:00

Chalk up another blogger for the campaign against Chichester: Renaissance Ruminations.

Tommy Denton tries his hand at comedy

2007-02-27T07:15:00.000-05:00

That was the only thing I could imagine he was doing when he came up with this line (Roanoke Times - emphasis added): "On transportation, even conservative pillars in the Senate like John Chichester . . ."

Thanks, Tommy; I haven't had a laugh that good in a long time.

Transportation Passes in Spite of Chichester

2007-02-24T18:48:00.000-05:00

Bearing Drift did a great job of live blogging the transportation frivolity in the General Assembly.

The two Repu… (I can’t even say it) Senators who voted against the bill were Potts and you know who, Chichester. This should be the last straw. If anyone was on the fence on the Chichester issue, this shows that Chichester is against any kind of progress in this state. Chichester votes like a Democrat. He is a Democrat. He could probably win as a Democrat. In fact we are starting the Draft Chichester to Run for the Democratic Nomination for his Senate Seat Movement (DCTRFTDNFHSSM).

It looks like Monday should be interesting in Stafford.

The beginning of the end for Chichester's career could come on Monday

2007-02-22T21:36:00.000-05:00

On Monday, February 26, the 28th Senate District Republican Committee (i.e., the GOP committee for John Chichester's district), will entertain a motion to disassociate Chichester from the local Republican Party. It could mean the beginning of the end for John Chichester politically. Here's why.

In Virginia, the law allows an incumbent to choose his method of nomination. Republicans like Chichester almost always choose a primary, which by law must be open to independents and Democrats. Thus, Chich can thwart the will of the party by controlling the method of his nomination.

However, as part of the legal brouhaha over the validity of open primaries, the State Board of Education has acknowledged that local parties can "disassociate" incumbents, and thus deprive them of pulling stunts like the open primary (see Cory Chandler's comment in Bacon's Rebellion). The committee can even go so far as to call a convention (i.e., a caucus, which usually attracts genuine party members as it requires folks to sit through a meeting of 1-3 hours - depending on the size of the gathering - before casting a vote).

The point is this: if the local party disassociates Chichester, it means Chich can no longer determine the process of his nomination, the committee does. Not only does it mean Chichester may lose in a convention or closed primary, but more importantly, it returns control of the nomination process to the party.

That is, if the committee moves to disassociate. Right now, that's up in the air. In fact, one person holds the fate of disassociation in the balance - Stafford Republican Committee Chairman Bob Hunt. If Hunt votes for disassociation, it passes; if he doesn't, it fails.

So, if you wish to see Chichester finally put to pasture, make yourself and your views known to Mr. Hunt. Please be civil and respectful, and ask Hunt to vote in favor of the disassociation measure.

If Hunt can be convinced, we may finally see the beginning of the end of John Chichester's political career.

Cross-posted to the right-wing liberal

Chichesters’ Wingman Retires

2007-02-22T17:49:00.000-05:00

Russ Potts, the cohort of Senator Chichester, announced today that he will not be seeking reelection. With Potts gone this begs the question will Chichester loose some of his power. With one of the Three Blind Mice no longer able to support him, Chichester will have to look elsewhere. It will only make him look more liberal when he joins the Democrats in voting.

This is a decisive victory for the movement against Chichester. Thank you Mr. Potts, good-bye, and good riddance.

Now its your turn Chichester!

Chichester worms his way into the transportation conference

2007-02-22T12:57:00.000-05:00

How, you may ask? He does it by keeping the brakes on the conference committee finalizing budget amendments. Check out the money quote (pun intended and apropos) by Chich in the Free Lance-Star:

Chichester, however, told senators yesterday that he'd rather have the transportation talks concluded before the budget is finalized.
That's because the transportation plan may include spending $250 million a year from the general fund--something the House wants and Chichester doesn't--and if that's the case, budget writers may be more "cautious," Chichester said.
"We have to move forward with caution, because if this bill that comes back after we complete our work we don't know whether we're going to be faced with a $250 million a year outlay, and if we don't know that, we have to conduct ourselves with some degree of caution in dealing with our budget," Chichester said.

On one level, this is just responsible budgeting - Chich et al would be fools to write budget amendments without knowing what (if any) effect the transportation folks will have on the money available.

On another level, however, this gives him more influence than an ordinary legislator outside the conference committee could ever have on the final product. I'm guessing Chichester is prepared to make abundantly clear where he wants the general fund money that the conference shifts over to transportation, and use this to inflict maximum political damage on the chances of the conference report passing the Senate. This is all but certain to make the conference more willing than it would otherwise be to seek his "advice" on their plans.

Now, I'm no fan of the transportation "compromise" (there's no need for tax increases of any kind in a budget that has risen 60% in six years), but Chichester has always pushed for higher taxes than the House and Senate leadership on this issue. If I'm right on this, and Chichester has managed to make himself a de facto conference committee member, it all but ensures whatever comes out of the conference will be even worse than we thought.

Is the conference committee taking out ALL of the tax hikes?

2007-02-21T14:32:00.000-05:00

I'm not sure how to react to this Richmond Times-Dispatch piece on the plans of the transportation conference committee, at least not entirely. Jim Bacon over at Bacon's Rebellion certainly has his view, and normally I would agree with him wholeheartedly.

However, there is one paragraph at the end of the RTD piece that has my head spinning:

Other signs that the transportation package will largely reflect the House's priorities: Conferees have stripped out a 1.5 cent-per-gallon increase in diesel fuel that would have equalized it with the 17.5 cents-per-gallon tax on gasoline. Also, an optional sales tax to pay for Northern Virginia projects has been replaced with an array of fees.

An array of fees? The House plan as passed did not use "an array of fees" for regional road projects, it used regional tax hikes that were objectionable on several levels. Perhaps the RTD authors (Michael Hardy and Jeff Shapiro) simply weren't paying attention, or perhaps, just perhaps, the regional tax hikes are gone. Hardy and Shapiro were pretty clear about the end of the diesel tax hike, which was also in the original House plan.

In other words, the conferees may have taken every single tax hike out of the plan. If so, and this is just about the largest "if" I have ever encountered, the conferees (almost all of whom are Republicans) may have managed to square the political circle and actually present a transportation plan that doesn't infuriate limited-government voters.

Of course, that depends on what kind of "fees" we're discussing (and whether or not Hardy and Shapiro are correct), but this could be the best news to come out of the transportation soap opera in a good long while.

Cross-posted to the right-wing liberal

In the News

2007-02-19T16:46:00.000-05:00

The Free Lance-Star has a great article on the movement to oust Chichester. The article mentions Chichester Must Go and the role that we have played in this grassroots movement. Where the Free Lance-Star does not entirely get it right is where they pin the movement against Chichester to be that of Anti-Tax Republicans. I would argue that the movement is more general about responsible government. I am not anti-tax – I don’t like taxes but at times they are necessary. Taxes have their place, but Chichester is in love with them. He wants higher taxes when we have a surplus. He always wants new taxes.

Chichester’s liberalism is not limited to taxes. There are many other issues that Chichester has left the Republican Party Platform on. Taxes, however, are focused upon because tax issues are the most common with Chichester.
Tax increase or no tax increase, transportation or no transportation, Chichester must go.

We made the Free Lance-Star

2007-02-19T11:55:00.000-05:00

Fredericksburg's local version of MSM comes across our little piece of the blogosphere (read here).

Chichester WON’T be Ruining Transportation

2007-02-15T14:03:00.000-05:00

As reported today by Raising Kaine via the Washington Post, Senator John Chichester will be conspicuously missing from the conference committee on transportation. The Senators who will be on the committee are Thomas K. Norment Jr. (R-James City), Phillip P. Puckett (D-Russell), Kenneth W. Stolle (R-Virginia Beach), Frank W. Wagner (R-Virginia Beach) and Martin E. Williams (R-Newport News). This is great news for those who are tired of the reign of Chichester. As the most powerful member of the Senate, Chichester should have had is pick on this committee. However, the grassroots movement to see him removed from power is having its first success. No Chichester or any of the other Three Blind Mice on the transportation conference committee means the possibility for conservative’s success on transportation.

This is one win for Chichester Must Go and a huge step for Virginians.

Meanwhile, Chich wants even HIGHER taxes

2007-02-14T13:38:00.000-05:00

As he was once again killing the House transportation plan (or so he thought) Chichester hinted that more tax hikes were - or in his mind, should be - on the way: "If you think we've solved transportation, you're wrong" (Richmond Times-Dispatch). In other words, he'll be pushing for more tax increases in 2008 - unless the voters of the 28th District send him into retirement.

Cross-Posted to the right-wing liberal

Even Chichester Reaps what he Sows

2007-02-08T18:32:00.000-05:00

Two days ago the dishonorable John Chichester and fellow blind mouse Senator Potts were out maneuvered for once on their own turf. Through the work of Attorney General Bob McDonnell and Lieutenant Governor Bill Bolling engineered a procedural maneuver that sent the Chichester-Potts transportation bill packing. Making a long story short, Chichester’s bill is all but dead. This is a major victory for those that believe that Chichester has had a death grip on Virginia politics and the Republican Party.

Thank you to McDonnell, Bolling, and most of the Republican State Senators!

For more on this see Bearing Drift, V*CAP, and Riley, Not O’Reilly.

Chichester’s Deeds Brought to Light

2007-02-06T23:31:00.000-05:00

Renaissance Ruminations has a post that everyone should read. “Virginia You’ve Been Chich-Slapped” explains the evolution of Chichester. It is the most comprehensive case yet against him. This historical take explains some of how Chichester has slowly sunk his talons into the Republican Party and Virginia. The article is best summed up:

“It is the immature mindset of a man who has always wanted to do things his own way
despite all counsel and advice…except now there is no counsel he will listen to…except his own ego.”

Can Chichester really lose a GOP primary? Yes he can.

2007-02-05T16:24:00.000-05:00

There are a lot of people in Richmond and Fredericksburg who assume John Chichester is invulnerable, based on his 2003 primary victory. I humbly - well, maybe not-so-humbly - disagree.

First of all, throughout the 2003 campaign, Chichester promised 28th District Republicans that he would "support our shared Republican principles of smaller government [and] lower taxes." He made it even clearer to the Richmond Times Dispatch, "I’m certainly not going to favor raising taxes" (Peter Ferrara). Four years later, he has broken his word not once (2004), not twice (2006), but three times (2007). He can no longer claim to be low-tax Republican now.

Yes, yes, they say, but Chichester is focused on transportation. Surely his suburban DC district will reward him for it - even Republicans.

To this I respond with a question: has anyone actually looked at Chichester's district? While suburban Stafford County is a large piece of the 28th, the fact is that Stafford, Prince William, and Fredericksburg actually accounted for less than half of the 2003 primary vote. The majority of voters and precincts were in the Northern Neck and Fauquier county. I'm guessing voters in the Neck will be far more focused on the higher gas taxes Chichester wants them to pay than the asphalt heading for NoVa and Hampton Roads commuter routes that few of them use. As for Fauquier, Chichester actually lost its precincts in 2003.

I'm not saying a Chichester defeat is inevitable, but I don't think anyone can say it's impossible.

Last Week in Chichester

2007-02-05T15:34:00.000-05:00

Last week the blogosphere came alive with a fervor beginning a grassroots effort to either remove Senator Chichester or pressure him to relinquish his position of leadership in the Republican Party. Ward Smythe has an excellent summary of the discussions regarding Chichester and the rest of the Three Blind Mice. In addition excellent posts have been made by Citizen Tom, The Virginian Federalist, and V*CAP. The call is loud and clear for someone in the 28th Senatorial District to stand up and run against Mr. Chichester. For the sake of the Commonwealth Chichester should relinquish his grip on the Senate or face being voted out of office.
Join the grassroots effort by emailing ChichesterMustGo@gmail.com.

Three Blind Mice

2007-02-02T19:36:00.000-05:00

Senator Chichester is at it again joined by the other two of the Three Blind Mice: Chichester, Potts, and Quayle. Chichester is bent on bringing an reasonable transportation down and once again raising taxes. It is the talk of Virginia’s blogs: Bearing Drift, Virginia Virtucon, The Virginian Federalist, and as mentioned earlier Southwest By Southeast. For too long Chichester has been undermining Virginia’s conservative traditions. From tax increases to transportation is their nothing the Chichester will not screw up?

Why Chichester Why Now?

2007-02-02T00:15:00.000-05:00

Senator Chichester has been a thorn in the side of Virginia for far too long. This site is long overdue. Chichester is more liberal than most any State Senator that I am aware of. Why now you may ask . . . This is the third time in as many years that Chichester has appeared in the Wall Street Journal. The latest article appeared yesterday morning. Southwest By Southeast has the full article. For too long Chichester has been allowed to be a leader in the Republican Party of Virginia and espouse some of the most liberal fiscal policies that the Commonwealth of Virginia has ever seen. Well this is it. It is time Virginians take their stand and take back their Senate.

Join the movement by emailing chichestermustgo@gmail.com.