Comment from KM: There is no mention of uranium mining in the Schapiro commentary below. However, the commentary illustrates how easily disclosure requirements can be circumvented in Virginia. Investments in VA Uranium, Inc. can be easily "overlooked" by elected and appointed officials. If we cannot be assured that elected and appointed officials (or who will decide issues are not invested in uranium mining, how can we trust that they look out for Virginia;s welfare and not their own? Might they hide their conveniently hide the investment with a family member? A sad state of affairs. (The following article is just for info, not supporting any govt. entity)
Posted: Wednesday, April 3, 2013 12:00 am
http://www.timesdispatch.com/
Jeff E. Schapirojschapiro@
Richmond Times-Dispatch
Bob McDonnell, the earnest-sounding kid from Fairfax County, is governor of Virginia, an office to which he vowed to bring the sensibilities of his middle-class upbringing. That included ethical straightforwardness.
McDonnell is veering from it — again.
This time — as with last time and before that — McDonnell is tripping up over money. Again, it’s someone else’s. Again, it’s a large amount. Again, it’s perceived as having strings attached. Again, it’s explained away as much ado about nothing.
The latest: $15,000 from the politically active boss of Henrico County-based Star Scientific, Jonnie Williams Sr. The money paid for dinner at the Executive Mansion for about 200 guests at the 2011 wedding of McDonnell’s daughter, Cailin, to Chris Young.
The money, first reported by The Washington Post, was never disclosed by McDonnell because it was not a gift to him, the governor’s office said. Rather, it was for Cailin, who — unlike the governor — is not required by state law to provide an annual inventory of gifts, be it travel, entertainment or tchotchkes.
There are few requirements on disclosures by relatives. Officials must report investments and other holdings shared with members of their immediate family. They also must report paid positions, such as jobs and directorships, held by a spouse or child.
In addition to unnecessarily casting a pall over a joyous occasion, this episode of administration dissembling calls attention to Virginia’s porous ethics law. It relies almost entirely on self-policing, requiring elective and appointive officials and candidates to, in effect, tell on themselves.
This is a throwback to Old Virginia, when government was largely the purview of a privileged, well-mannered few — an “affluent minority,” as Times-Dispatch political reporter Jim Latimer put it. There were almost no official rules because gentlemen didn’t need them to know how to behave.
An overview of ethics laws by the National Conference of State Legislatures shows consistent inconsistency. That means what could be illegal in some states is legal in Virginia, including gifts to family members.
Alabama prohibits, with an important caveat, gifts to government brass and family members for “the purpose of corruptly influencing official action, regardless of whether or not the thing offered or given is a thing of value.”
But gifts are OK if they’re just that: gifts — because sometimes a politician and his kinsmen are simply fine folks with an agonizing sense of public mission.
In Illinois, the rule essentially is no gifts from no one. If you do business with the state or your business is regulated by the state, you are prohibited from giving anything of value to a government official or employee, or their immediate relatives.
Star Scientific has, over the past four years, supplied McDonnell and his political action committee with $108,500 in travel on the company jet, according to the Virginia Public Access Project. The firm and Williams have given McDonnell more than $9,600 in food, lodging and entertainment since 2011.
As a regulated venture, Star Scientific has issues not with the state government but with the federal government; specifically, an inquiry by the U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia into the company’s stock transactions.
However, Star Scientific — much as other companies do in a state where the business of government is business — looked to Richmond for help. McDonnell played host at the Executive Mansion for the launch of a Star Scientific dietary supplement. First lady Maureen McDonnell talked up the product at an investors conference in Florida.
The cozy relationship between Star Scientific and McDonnell is not an isolated example, especially of the headaches such entanglements have caused him.
When he was attorney general in 2007 — and readying to run for governor — McDonnell relinquished oversight of an investigation of cronyism and misuse of state property at the Department of Game and Inland Fisheries. Two years earlier, he had taken $25,000 in contributions from an apparent target of the inquiry: Dan Hoffler, an influential Hampton Roads developer and the agency’s former chairman.
Three former top officials were indicted. No charges were returned against Hoffler.
Ahead of his inauguration as governor in 2010, McDonnell reluctantly released a once-confidential list of transition advisers.
He had balked at making it public, citing gray areas in the freedom of information law. It read like a Who’s Who of business types, political activists and big donors — most with impeccable Republican pedigrees.
Clean government, a theme of his gubernatorial campaign, seemed an afterthought during McDonnell’s term.
He failed to establish an ethics commission. His proposed ban on political contributions and gifts to the governor from firms seeking state contracts was restricted to large contracts and exempts the lieutenant governor and attorney general, both of whom can sway state business.
McDonnell also pledged tougher disclosures for lobbyists. The idea died in the General Assembly.
Comments from KM: This appeared in yesterday's Roanoke Times. Please note rebuttal following Van Ryan's editorial which has been submitted to the Roanoke Times.
A troubling result on uranium
Tuesday, April 2, 2013
The stars could hardly have shown brighter on the prospects of allowing uranium mining in Virginia than in 2007.
Van Ryan claims Virginia Uranium has made a compelling case for lifting the ban on uranium mining. Not so. In actuality a compelling case to keep the ban has resulted from the various reports which have been issued on the subject.
She indicates that the Uranium Working Group was created by the General Assembly. It was not. Governor McDonnell created the UWG.
Ms. Van Ryan neglects the fact that in addition to uranium mining, mills will process the ore and necessitate disposal of radioactive and hazardous wastes which will require hundreds of years of oversight and maintenance at taxpayer expense.
She also neglects mention of the large and growing number of individuals, elected officials and business leaders who constitute the "keep the ban coalition". Coalition members may be viewed at http://keeptheban.org .
Ms. Van Ryan appears ignorant of the fact that the Danville Pittsylvania Chamber of Commerce, after looking at reports and interviewing people, decided to support the ban.
She appears unaware that more than 50 physicians at Danville Regional Medical Center signed and submitted a petition to legislators in support of keeping the ban and indicated they would relocate if the region opened to uranium mining.
Ms. Ryan should know, as an energy writer, that the yellowcake from Coles Hill will be sold as a commodity on the global market and not necessarily find its way to any of the existing reactors in America.
As an energy writer, perhaps she will investigate the question of how much fossil fuel will be needed to mine uranium, build and operate the mill and machinery at Coles Hill over its lifetime.
Van Ryan neglects to mention that the Senator Watkins, patron of bills that may have resulted in lifting the ban, were withdrawn by the patron. Watkins' proposal to single Southside out for the East Coast radioactive waste repository met with fierce opposition from elected officials and citizens in both Virginia and North Carolina.
The fact is that peer-reviewed science has outlined challenges and risks to health, water and the economy associated with uranium mining, milling and centuries of radioactive/hazardous waste storage.
Virginia is not willing to take that risk.
Karen B. Maute
Pittsylvania County
This time — as with last time and before that — McDonnell is tripping up over money. Again, it’s someone else’s. Again, it’s a large amount. Again, it’s perceived as having strings attached. Again, it’s explained away as much ado about nothing.
The latest: $15,000 from the politically active boss of Henrico County-based Star Scientific, Jonnie Williams Sr. The money paid for dinner at the Executive Mansion for about 200 guests at the 2011 wedding of McDonnell’s daughter, Cailin, to Chris Young.
The money, first reported by The Washington Post, was never disclosed by McDonnell because it was not a gift to him, the governor’s office said. Rather, it was for Cailin, who — unlike the governor — is not required by state law to provide an annual inventory of gifts, be it travel, entertainment or tchotchkes.
There are few requirements on disclosures by relatives. Officials must report investments and other holdings shared with members of their immediate family. They also must report paid positions, such as jobs and directorships, held by a spouse or child.
In addition to unnecessarily casting a pall over a joyous occasion, this episode of administration dissembling calls attention to Virginia’s porous ethics law. It relies almost entirely on self-policing, requiring elective and appointive officials and candidates to, in effect, tell on themselves.
This is a throwback to Old Virginia, when government was largely the purview of a privileged, well-mannered few — an “affluent minority,” as Times-Dispatch political reporter Jim Latimer put it. There were almost no official rules because gentlemen didn’t need them to know how to behave.
An overview of ethics laws by the National Conference of State Legislatures shows consistent inconsistency. That means what could be illegal in some states is legal in Virginia, including gifts to family members.
Alabama prohibits, with an important caveat, gifts to government brass and family members for “the purpose of corruptly influencing official action, regardless of whether or not the thing offered or given is a thing of value.”
But gifts are OK if they’re just that: gifts — because sometimes a politician and his kinsmen are simply fine folks with an agonizing sense of public mission.
In Illinois, the rule essentially is no gifts from no one. If you do business with the state or your business is regulated by the state, you are prohibited from giving anything of value to a government official or employee, or their immediate relatives.
Star Scientific has, over the past four years, supplied McDonnell and his political action committee with $108,500 in travel on the company jet, according to the Virginia Public Access Project. The firm and Williams have given McDonnell more than $9,600 in food, lodging and entertainment since 2011.
As a regulated venture, Star Scientific has issues not with the state government but with the federal government; specifically, an inquiry by the U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia into the company’s stock transactions.
However, Star Scientific — much as other companies do in a state where the business of government is business — looked to Richmond for help. McDonnell played host at the Executive Mansion for the launch of a Star Scientific dietary supplement. First lady Maureen McDonnell talked up the product at an investors conference in Florida.
The cozy relationship between Star Scientific and McDonnell is not an isolated example, especially of the headaches such entanglements have caused him.
When he was attorney general in 2007 — and readying to run for governor — McDonnell relinquished oversight of an investigation of cronyism and misuse of state property at the Department of Game and Inland Fisheries. Two years earlier, he had taken $25,000 in contributions from an apparent target of the inquiry: Dan Hoffler, an influential Hampton Roads developer and the agency’s former chairman.
Three former top officials were indicted. No charges were returned against Hoffler.
Ahead of his inauguration as governor in 2010, McDonnell reluctantly released a once-confidential list of transition advisers.
He had balked at making it public, citing gray areas in the freedom of information law. It read like a Who’s Who of business types, political activists and big donors — most with impeccable Republican pedigrees.
Clean government, a theme of his gubernatorial campaign, seemed an afterthought during McDonnell’s term.
He failed to establish an ethics commission. His proposed ban on political contributions and gifts to the governor from firms seeking state contracts was restricted to large contracts and exempts the lieutenant governor and attorney general, both of whom can sway state business.
McDonnell also pledged tougher disclosures for lobbyists. The idea died in the General Assembly.
Comments from KM: This appeared in yesterday's Roanoke Times. Please note rebuttal following Van Ryan's editorial which has been submitted to the Roanoke Times.
A troubling result on uranium
by Jane Van Ryan | Van Ryan is an energy writer and retired communications professional who resides in Rockingham County, Va.
The stars could hardly have shown brighter on the prospects of allowing uranium mining in Virginia than in 2007.
Virginia Uranium Inc., the company hoping to develop the nation's largest known uranium deposit on a cattle farm in southern Virginia, made a compelling case for lifting a decades-old state ban on uranium mining. The change would save consumers billions of dollars over the life of the mine, create jobs and revenue and, perhaps most importantly, provide a much-needed boost for the faltering economy in southern Virginia, especially in Pittsylvania County.(NOT TRUE)
Federal bureaucrats, moreover, would have no say in the matter.
The decision for or against uranium mining would be made by the commonwealth of Virginia, which has plenty of experience with mining regulation. And so policymakers responded accordingly.
In 2007, the Virginia Department of Mines, Minerals and Energy granted VUI a permit to conduct exploratory drilling on Coles Hill, the tract of private land in Pittsylvania County that holds 119 million pounds of uranium.
Then, in 2008, the Virginia General Assembly began to weigh the possibility of writing uranium regulations. With that goal, the plan began to work its way through the legislature, culminating in the creation of a Uranium Working Group consisting of staff from the departments of mines, minerals and energy; environmental quality; and health.(NOT TRUE)
A vote on uranium mining, however, was not to be.
The Senate Agriculture Committee balked, effectively killing the measure for the 2013 session without a vote on its merits.(NOT TRUE)
Notwithstanding claims to the contrary by opponents, uranium mining is environmentally safe and an economically productive enterprise. (NOT TRUE)
As with all types of mining, radon is released in uranium mining and milling, but when managed properly, the health effects, if any, are vanishingly small.
Uranium mining supplies the fuel used to produce nuclear energy, a safe and reliable source of electricity that does not pollute the air or emit greenhouse gases. (NOT TRUE)
Nuclear-generated power from reactors like North Anna and Surry is domestically produced and not dependent on energy supplies purchased from unstable or unfriendly countries.(NOT TRUE)
Think about it: Reports indicate Coles Hill contains 119 million pounds of uranium, which is the energy equivalent of 4.76 billion barrels of crude oil. These figures help to explain its value to Virginia, job creation and economic growth.
The decision to halt further consideration of the uranium-mining measure during the 2013 General Assembly session might not be the greatest threat to southern Virginia's economic recovery.
Potential economic dangers abound. But it fosters the spread of a disturbing idea: the view that Virginia and the nation can afford to forgo mining and industrial development despite the continued growth of our population and energy demand. If that notion becomes accepted thinking, the damage to our still-fragile economic recovery could be incalculable.
Federal bureaucrats, moreover, would have no say in the matter.
The decision for or against uranium mining would be made by the commonwealth of Virginia, which has plenty of experience with mining regulation. And so policymakers responded accordingly.
In 2007, the Virginia Department of Mines, Minerals and Energy granted VUI a permit to conduct exploratory drilling on Coles Hill, the tract of private land in Pittsylvania County that holds 119 million pounds of uranium.
Then, in 2008, the Virginia General Assembly began to weigh the possibility of writing uranium regulations. With that goal, the plan began to work its way through the legislature, culminating in the creation of a Uranium Working Group consisting of staff from the departments of mines, minerals and energy; environmental quality; and health.(NOT TRUE)
A vote on uranium mining, however, was not to be.
The Senate Agriculture Committee balked, effectively killing the measure for the 2013 session without a vote on its merits.(NOT TRUE)
Notwithstanding claims to the contrary by opponents, uranium mining is environmentally safe and an economically productive enterprise. (NOT TRUE)
As with all types of mining, radon is released in uranium mining and milling, but when managed properly, the health effects, if any, are vanishingly small.
Uranium mining supplies the fuel used to produce nuclear energy, a safe and reliable source of electricity that does not pollute the air or emit greenhouse gases. (NOT TRUE)
Nuclear-generated power from reactors like North Anna and Surry is domestically produced and not dependent on energy supplies purchased from unstable or unfriendly countries.(NOT TRUE)
Think about it: Reports indicate Coles Hill contains 119 million pounds of uranium, which is the energy equivalent of 4.76 billion barrels of crude oil. These figures help to explain its value to Virginia, job creation and economic growth.
The decision to halt further consideration of the uranium-mining measure during the 2013 General Assembly session might not be the greatest threat to southern Virginia's economic recovery.
Potential economic dangers abound. But it fosters the spread of a disturbing idea: the view that Virginia and the nation can afford to forgo mining and industrial development despite the continued growth of our population and energy demand. If that notion becomes accepted thinking, the damage to our still-fragile economic recovery could be incalculable.
rebuttal/commentary:
Ms. Van Ryan's April 2, 2013 commentary, a troubling result on uranium, neglects some pertinent facts.
She indicates that the Uranium Working Group was created by the General Assembly. It was not. Governor McDonnell created the UWG.
Ms. Van Ryan neglects the fact that in addition to uranium mining, mills will process the ore and necessitate disposal of radioactive and hazardous wastes which will require hundreds of years of oversight and maintenance at taxpayer expense.
She also neglects mention of the large and growing number of individuals, elected officials and business leaders who constitute the "keep the ban coalition". Coalition members may be viewed at http://keeptheban.org .
Ms. Van Ryan appears ignorant of the fact that the Danville Pittsylvania Chamber of Commerce, after looking at reports and interviewing people, decided to support the ban.
She appears unaware that more than 50 physicians at Danville Regional Medical Center signed and submitted a petition to legislators in support of keeping the ban and indicated they would relocate if the region opened to uranium mining.
Ms. Ryan should know, as an energy writer, that the yellowcake from Coles Hill will be sold as a commodity on the global market and not necessarily find its way to any of the existing reactors in America.
As an energy writer, perhaps she will investigate the question of how much fossil fuel will be needed to mine uranium, build and operate the mill and machinery at Coles Hill over its lifetime.
Van Ryan neglects to mention that the Senator Watkins, patron of bills that may have resulted in lifting the ban, were withdrawn by the patron. Watkins' proposal to single Southside out for the East Coast radioactive waste repository met with fierce opposition from elected officials and citizens in both Virginia and North Carolina.
The fact is that peer-reviewed science has outlined challenges and risks to health, water and the economy associated with uranium mining, milling and centuries of radioactive/hazardous waste storage.
Virginia is not willing to take that risk.
Karen B. Maute
Pittsylvania County
