Date published: 3/9/2010

Sickle-cell anemia deserves attention

As parents of and advocates for those who suffer the debilitating, devastating effects of sickle-cell anemia, we were encouraged by the March 3 editorial ["Striking a cord"].

In the current national health care debate, with its drama and divisiveness, it was refreshing to see the cooperative efforts of those in our state legislature addressing the long-neglected needs for relief for the more than 70,000 minorities (predominantly African-Americans) nationwide who suffer from this disease.

We thank Del. Bob Marshall for introducing the bill to promote education for the healing potential of umbilical-cord blood.

Our continued gratitude goes to Sen. Edd Houck in his role as chairman of the Senate Committee on Education and Health for his consistent, outstanding commitment to the cause of sickle-cell diseases, and our congratulations go to the Davis family for their courage and persistence.

All have helped to make this disease and its ramifications more visible and its ultimate cure possible.

Lawrence A. Davies and Janice P. Davies

Fredericksburg

The writers are co-presidents, Fredericksburg Area Sickle Cell Association, Inc.

RICHMOND – Here in the former capital of the Old Confederacy, where resistance to the supremacy of federal law has a long and tortuous history, a new battle is being waged over a question that could undercut a key part of President Obama’s health care proposal: whether Washington can require that most Americans have health insurance.

The Virginia Legislature this week is poised to become the first state to pass legislation that says citizens cannot be required to have medical insurance.

Dozens of other states are considering similar measures, possibly setting the stage for one of the greatest tests of federal power over the states since the civil rights era.

If states are allowed to opt out of the mandate, the foundation of Obama’s effort would be undermined, turning the nascent revolt here into one with national implications.

The debate goes far beyond a disagreement with the approach to health care coverage taken in Massachusetts.

Rather, Virginia’s lawmakers are focused on constitutional questions and the power of states to run their own affairs.

“The administration is trying to shift from a government by social compact, agreement between elected officials and citizens, to a government where the leaders tell the subjects what to do,’’ said Virginia Delegate Bob Marshall, a Republican and chief sponsor of the measure. “That is not what the American Revolution was about.’’

Versions of the bill have passed the Virginia House and Senate, with final passage considered all but certain. The Republican governor, Bob McDonnell, supports the measure.

Opponents of the Virginia bill say it is reminiscent of the region’s history of fighting the federal government, harking back to the 1950s when Virginia launched what is known as “massive resistance’’ to federally ordered racial integration of schools.

“If you take the subject out, this is the exact same thing that happened with massive resistance and all the states’ rights arguments,’’ said Delegate Jennifer McClellan of Richmond, a Democrat whose office is decorated with pictures of President Kennedy and President Obama. “If a state thinks the federal government is overstepping its authority, the state can’t just say, ‘I’m not going to do that.’ It is the court’s job to do that.’’

Proponents of the measure argue that there is no parallel to the past, stressing that this issue has nothing to do with race relations.

The concept of requiring citizens to purchase health insurance has been backed by many Democrats and Republicans alike in recent decades, but some Republicans have become vocal opponents in the last year as Democrats have pushed their agenda.

Called an “individual mandate,’’ it is seen as a basic component of a sweeping overhaul of the health insurance industry.

With millions of healthy people paying premiums into health plans, the cost of insurance should come down – or at least rise less quickly, advocates said.

Also, insurance companies would no longer have a reason to deny coverage for preexisting conditions, because consumers would no longer be allowed to game the system by waiting to purchase insurance until they got sick.

But anger about Obama’s health care proposals – fueled by Republican warnings about a “government takeover of health care’’ – has generated resistance in statehouses, and legislators across the country are watching Virginia’s effort.

The National Conference of State Legislatures says similar bills or state constitutional amendments are being proposed in at least 32 states.

In Arizona, for example, voters will have a chance to approve a constitutional amendment this fall that would “preserve the freedom of all residents of the state to provide for their own health care.’’

Obama won Virginia in the presidential election, but that was followed by the 2009 election of McDonnell as governor, which was interpreted partly as an ebb in enthusiasm for the president’s policies.

The effort to reject a federal mandate is not only a challenge to Obama’s proposal but also to Obama himself. The president is a former constitutional law professor who has rejected claims from Republicans that his proposed mandate is unconstitutional.

When the charge of unconstitutionality was among complaints raised by Republicans at the recent health care summit in Washington, Obama dismissed the assertion as “talking points’’ with which he strongly disagreed.

But opponents insist an insurance mandate is not legal because there is nothing in the Constitution that gives the federal government the right to penalize citizens for failing to purchase something. That is different, proponents says, from specifically enumerated federal powers such as taxation, raising an army, or regulating commerce.

But if states such as Virginia opted out of the federal mandate, the plan could unravel.

Clint Bolick, a litigation specialist with the conservative Goldwater Institute who wants to test the mandate in the US Supreme Court if it passes, said Obama’s plan to mandate insurance coverage is nothing more than an effort to require one group of people to subsidize insurance for another.

“To the extent it would unravel an important component of the bill, we would be ecstatic if that happened,’’ Bolick said.

But other constitutional scholars said that the mandate is constitutional.

The federal law would take precedence over the state measures because it is a form of taxation, according to Yale law professor Jack Balkin, who recently wrote about the matter in the New England Journal of Medicine. He said it is appropriate under Washington’s authority to regulate interstate commerce, or the provision that enable the federal government to enact measures for the “general welfare’’ of the country.

The mandate is a tax because people would be paying a penalty only if they don’t have health insurance, just as they pay a penalty for failing to file taxes, Balkin said in the article.

State laws like Virginia’s proposal, Balkin said in an e-mail, “would be unenforceable unless federal health care legislation specifically provides for an opt out; it currently does not.’’

Former governor Mitt Romney, who pushed through the Massachusetts mandate for insurance under his health care plan, said yesterday on “Fox News Sunday’’ that requiring people to have insurance is the “ultimate conservative plan. We said people have to take responsibility for getting insurance, if they can afford it, or paying their own way. No more free-riders.’’

That prompted the Democratic National Committee to send out a press release saying that Romney supports a federal mandate. But Romney went on to say that Massachusetts “solved this at the state level – not a federal plan, but a state plan. This is a federalist nation. States should be able to solve their own problems.’’

A spokesman did not immediately respond to a question about whether Romney believes a federal mandate is unconstitutional.

Virginians pushing their opposition said Obama’s plan is nothing less than an intrusion on their basic rights.

“This is a penalty for doing nothing,’’ said Marshall, the delegate who is the chief sponsor. “Hey, I’m doing nothing, leave me alone.’’

Senator Fred Quayle, a Republican who is the state Senate’s sponsor, said the proposed mandate is unprecedented. “I don’t think in the entire history of this country there has ever been any act of Congress requiring a citizen to buy anything,’’ he said.

A number of respected organizations that have looked at the issue have said it is difficult to predict what the Supreme Court might decide.

The nonpartisan Congressional Research Service recently reported that determining whether the mandate is constitutional under the commerce clause “is perhaps the most challenging question posed by such a proposal, as it is a novel issue whether Congress may use this clause to require an individual to purchase a good or service.’’

© Copyright 2010 The New York Times Company

This is an except from the Richmond Times Dispatch, General Assembly Brief, March 5.

Another attempt to mandate health insurance for autistic children was turned aside on the House of Delegates floor yesterday.

Del. Robert G. Marshall, R-Prince William, sought to amend a bill that would allow health maintenance organizations to offer to small businesses health insurance that does not mandate insurance coverage, but Speaker of the House William J. Howell, R-Stafford, ruled the amendment was not germane.

“It’s coming, sooner rather than later,” said Del. Ward L. Armstrong, D-Henry. “The problem of autism is hurting our children, hurting our families.”

Del. R. Lee Ware Jr., R-Powhatan, whose subcommittee twice defeated legislation to mandate autism coverage, agreed. It is getting closer to passage but not this year, he said.

Congress hasn’t even passed Obamacare yet, but if and when it does, Virginia’s General Assembly has already fired the first round in what could be a major legal showdown with Washington over the limits of federal power.

On Thursday, the oldest legislative body in the Western Hemisphere became the first state to enact legislation that prohibits the federal government from forcing its citizens to purchase government-approved health insurance. The measure was sponsored by two Northern Virginians – State Senator Jill Vogel, R-Warrenton, and Del. Bob Marshall, R-Manassas – who also co-signed a Feb. 24 letter to President Obama protesting state legislators’ exclusion from his recent health care summit.

In an ominous sign for the president’s top domestic priority, five Democrats in the Virginia Senate joined 18 Republicans to vote for the Virginia Health Care Freedom Act in a state Obama won handily less than 18 months ago. They were, perhaps, influenced by the 2,400 grassroots activists who trekked to Richmond last month to oppose federally mandated insurance coverage.

A constitutional amendment passed earlier in Arizona, but has yet to be approved by voters. It will be on the ballot in November.

Legislators in more than 30 other states are also considering similar bills based on the American Legislative Exchange Council’s Freedom of Choice in Health Care model.

The Tenth Amendment Center has a map of pending health care “nullification” bills that challenge the federal government’s jurisdiction based on its reading of the Constitution.

So even if Obamacare passes, this brewing constitutional battle could delay enactment for quite some time.

DEL. BOB MARSHALL, R-Manassas, is known for his often strident pro-life positions, but the witnesses he brought to a recent hearing of the Senate Committee on Education and Health left legislators more misty-eyed than mystified.

At issue was Mr. Marshall’s bill promoting education on the healing potential of umbilical-cord blood. To illustrate, he invited the Davis family from Texas to testify, notes Scott Leake of the Thomas Jefferson Institute.

Mr. Davis explained that his older son was born with sickle cell anemia, a devastating disease that may be ameliorated by cord blood. The Davises were unable to find a match–until they were blessed with a second son, whose umbilical-cord blood provided just the cells needed to help his big brother.

The testimony of the family–including the two little boys–moved even jaded lawmakers. “The only superfluous moment,” reports Mr. Leake, “was when Chairman [Edd] Houck, who by Senate procedure had to pose the question, asked if anyone wanted to speak in opposition to the bill. Since Beelzebub, Mephistopheles, and Satan were absent, no one spoke.”

The bill passed 15-0.

The House of Delegates and Virginia Senate easily approved budget bills yesterday, but the hard part, trying to reach agreement on widely different bills, lies ahead.

The two bodies now have about two weeks to fashion a budget on which they can agree before the scheduled March 13 adjournment.

After almost four hours of partisan wrangling, the House passed its budget bill 61-38, with all the Republicans and two independents voting for it and all Democrats voting against.

The Senate plowed through its budget-balancing plan in about an hour, approving the package 30-10.

“I’ve seen some difficult budgets but never as tough as this one,” said Sen. Charles J. Colgan, D-Prince William, a 34-year veteran.

Only Republicans voted against the measure. They included two from the Richmond area, Stephen H. Martin of Chesterfield County and Ryan T. McDougle of Hanover County.

In the House, Del. Lacey E. Putney, I-Bedford, chairman of the House Appropriations Committee, acknowledged the difficulty in making $4 billion in cuts to balance the budget.

“However, I believe that the budget before us today strikes a sensible balance between meeting the core commitments that we as politicians like to talk about and the burden placed on the taxpayers who must foot the bill.”

But Del. Ward L. Armstrong, D-Henry, the House Democratic leader, said the cuts would fall most heavily on the poor and needy.

“We are opening rest areas and closing schools,” he said. “I would resign before voting for this budget.”

More jobs will be lost among state workers and public schoolteachers because of the budget cuts than will be gained by Gov. Bob McDonnell’s proposed jobs-creation package, he said.

Putney said the Democrats shouldn’t complain about the cuts because they had a chance to vote for a tax increase in January and didn’t. On Jan. 21, delegates voted 97-0 to reject former Gov. Timothy M. Kaine’s $2 billion proposal to increase the income tax.

But Del. Kenneth W. Plum, D-Fairfax, said yesterday that the vote on the tax-increase proposal was a political “trick” designed to put Democrats on the spot because the measure had no chance of passage in the Republican-controlled House.

“Show me the money,” Del. David B. Albo, R-Fairfax, said to Democratic critics of the austere spending plan.

Both bills rely on a lowering of state contributions to the public employment pension fund to generate about $508 million.

Plum likened this to payday lending and said the state could be heading toward “a downward spiral” of debt.

But Colgan and Putney said the action would not put the state at risk.

Both bodies endorsed continued car-tax relief, tagging more than $950 million a year to reimburse localities for reductions in the levy on personal motor vehicles.

Both budgets make deep cuts in public education and in health care. Putney said those areas largely were spared in previous budget reductions.

Plum complained that the Democrats were shut out of the decision-making process when the budget was adopted.

Only a handful of floor amendments were offered in the House yesterday.

Speaker of the House William J. Howell, R-Stafford, said Democrats were briefed frequently about the budget. He said he thinks the Democrats chose to fight the budget battle through floor debates rather than through proposing amendments.

Two Republican-sponsored floor amendments were adopted.

One, proposed by Putney, made use of $23 million in new federal money from the U.S. Department of Medical Assistance Services and $14 million in budget adjustments to create 178 new Medicaid waiver slots and to increase funding to make some school districts, mostly in Northern Virginia, more competitive with neighboring states in hiring. The Appropriations Committee learned of the increased federal funding Wednesday.

A second, proposed by Del. Kathy J. Byron, R-Campbell, would put the state on record against paying for abortions.

Lawmakers rejected amendments to restore funding for a soon-to-close adolescent center in Marion, to restore funding for 14 drug courts, and to ensure that state employees are not laid off on the basis of their sexual orientation.

In the Senate, an amendment to erase funding for Planned Parenthood, which provides abortion services, was defeated. Also defeated was a requirement that local election boards provide a paper trail of electronic balloting.

Advocates for continued state funding of local arts groups crowded the Capitol, but no amendment was offered in the House to restore money for the Virginia Commission for the Arts.

The House wants to eliminate 50 percent of the commission’s funding — $2.23 million — in the first year of the budget, and 100 percent of its funding — $4.46 million — in the second year.

The Senate budget would retain $4.46 million in arts funding in each year.

…………………………………………………………………………………………….

Contact Tyler Whitley at (804) 649-6780 or twhitley[at]timesdispatch.com .

Contact Jeff E. Schapiro at (804) 649-6812 or jschapiro[at]timesdispatch.com .

Del. Robert G. Marshall, R-Prince William, embroiled in a firestorm over his recent remarks on abortion, never has been reluctant to speak his mind — or to challenge fellow Republicans.

“Bob Marshall marches to his own beat, and sometimes that rhythm is in time with us and sometimes it’s not,” said G. Paul Nardo, chief of staff to House Speaker William J. Howell, R-Stafford.

It was Marshall whose lawsuit led the Virginia Supreme Court to throw out, as unconstitutional, the state’s 2007 transportation-funding package, which then-Attorney General Bob McDonnell, now governor, had approved and Howell had hoped would pave the way to Republican gains in that fall’s House elections.

And it was Marshall, perhaps the legislature’s most high-decibel foe of abortion, who took on — and nearly defeated — former Gov. Jim Gilmore two years ago for the GOP nomination to run for the U.S. Senate. Marshall labeled Gilmore, whom Marshall had pressured to intervene in a high-profile right-to-die dispute in 1998, as soft on abortion.

Marshall, a delegate since 1992, has been a lightning rod in the General Assembly throughout his career.

A devout Catholic who left the Democratic Party after it nominated George McGovern for president in 1972, he combines a black-and-white sense of morality with a keen mastery of parliamentary procedure, honed as a congressional aide and lobbyist.

“I do deeply respect his knowledge of the process,” said a frequent opponent, lobbyist Robley Jones of the Virginia Education Association, which traditionally leans Democratic. “He’s brilliant, if eccentric.”

Marshall held a news conference last week in which he urged lawmakers to scrap public funding for Planned Parenthood. But his quibble over cash quickly took a back seat to controversy.

Marshall said at the conference: “The number of children who are born subsequent to a first abortion with handicaps has increased dramatically. Why? Because when you abort the first born of any, nature takes its vengeance on the subsequent children.

“In the Old Testament, the first born of every being, animal and man, was dedicated to the Lord. There’s a special punishment Christians would suggest.”

Marshall’s comments, which gained national attention, spurred condemnation from McDonnell and advocates for the disabled.

Marshall issued a statement saying he regretted “any misimpression my poorly chosen words may have created” and then hardened his stance by saying his words had been misinterpreted.

Despite his knack for headline-generating imbroglios, Marshall is a survivor, turning back challengers for his seat even amid Prince William County’s recent shift from Republican stronghold to competitive hotbed.

Democrats attribute this to Marshall’s emphasis on nuts-and-bolts, neighborhood-level politics, tending to a fast-growing constituency challenged by, among other things, traffic congestion and an influx of undocumented immigrants, of whom he has been critical.

Sen. Linda T. “Toddy” Puller, D-Fairfax, whose district includes part of Prince William, recalled a telephone message from Marshall in which he appealed for guidance in assisting a county resident who was a victim of domestic violence.

Puller, as supportive of abortion rights as Marshall is opposed, said, “I was surprised that he wanted me to help him. I was not surprised that he wanted to help a constituent.”

Marshall also has been a defender of children with disabilities. In the past two years, he has bucked the GOP in fighting for legislation that would require insurance companies to pay for treatments for autism.

Marshall and his wife, Catherine, married in 1976. One of their five children, son Chris, was killed as a young adult in a traffic crash in 2001. The delegate has been known to become visibly moved when discussing the tragedy.

In the legislature, because of his focus on highly emotional issues, Marshall often is viewed as a quirky caricature.

“In the early days, he was the butt of all sorts of stuff,” said Jack Knapp of the Virginia Assembly of Independent Baptists, adding that because of Marshall’s capacity for self-deprecation, the “antagonism is not as harsh.”

Until now, Marshall may have been best-known for his 1998 involvement in the right-to-die case of Hugh Finn, a television news anchor who was left brain-damaged by a car crash in 1995.

Marshall took the side of Finn’s blood family, which opposed the attempts by Finn’s wife, Michelle, to remove her husband’s feeding tube. He unsuccessfully petitioned a federal judge to intervene.

…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..

Contact Jeff E. Schapiro at (804) 649-6814 or jschapiro[at]timesdispatch.com .

Contact Andrew Cain at (804) 649-6645 or acain[at]timesdispatch.com .

FULL TRANSCRIPT:

Mr. Speaker, on Thursday February 18th, a press conference was held in the General Assembly, the purpose of which was to demand Planned Parenthood not receive any funds out of the state budget. Media attending included ABC News, Channel 8, CBN, The Washington Post, Richmond Times, The Virginia Pilot, The Associated Press and other fine news sources.

Next day press reports noted comments made at the press conference. Conspicuously absent from all the reports was the claim that any speakers at this press conference made statements calling handicapped children punishment from God for abortion.

Three days later on February 21, Capital News Service claimed that I did in fact make such a statement, yet, no other news service picked up this “alleged statement.”

Why? Because that statement was never said, period. All of Virginia’s professional journalists missed what a Capital News Service claims to have found? I encourage anyone to go to my web site, www.delegatebob.com to find the entire video of my comments and easily see for themselves, I never made such a comment. But it has been repeated endless times in print and electronic media without producing the smoking gun tape.

Of course, if some wish to make their own inferences, that is their prerogative. However, they should acknowledge that this is what they are doing. Furthermore, it is no one’s prerogative to claim I spoke words which never came from my mouth, have never been in my heart, and have never been in my public record. I’ve served here nearly two decades. I believe most of you know me well enough to know I would never make such a statement.

I have championed the rights of children that groups like Planned Parenthood think have no business being born. Everyone deserves a lifetime!

I acknowledge that my extemporary remarks mentioned “Nature’s vengeance” or “punishment.” I could have certainly used better words to explain the medical research findings which show a high incidence of complications following induced abortions. Accordingly, I have posted on my web site direct excerpts from 258 peer review studies from the National Library of Medicine as well as the results of research contracts with the US Public Health Service.

[In my actual floor remarks I made reference to an October, 2007 study from the Journal of Reproductive Medicine which presented findings from 59 English Language studies that induced abortion in the US is a direct cause of 31.5% of all Cerebral Palsy cases in the US, an excess of 22,917 early pre term births which result in 1,096 excess cases of Cerebral Palsy and a cost of $1.2 billion.-RGM]

Actions within Nature are not direct actions of God. It would have been better had I used the words “natural consequences” to convey my meaning. But even so, not one professional news source attributed a sinister meaning to my words.

Furthermore, my personal and public life show a respect for unwanted or disabled children, including our adoption of three of our own children, one of whom we were told by the adoption agency had a 50-50 chance of carrying a gene that would cause her death as a young adult. We found out years later she did not have the gene. My oldest son, now deceased, took personal care of his quadriplegic friend, taking him to school and sports events.

And I am sure you cannot forget my bills to provide health insurance for autistic children which almost got me kicked out of the Republican Caucus for my hardball tactics, as well as my decades of pro-child, pro-women legislation. And this year I authored the cord blood bill to help disabled children and First Responders, which this House unanimously supported.

I also have proposed HB 334, which passed the House of Delegates 95-2, and which requires women undergoing abortion to be offered medical articles concerning possible complications in future pregnancies, a bill which Planned Parenthood opposes.

There are powerful interests which seek to prevent this information from reaching women. And, there is the tragedy of Planned Parenthood, which endorses pre-natal diagnosis to eliminate the live birth of persons with disabilities.

The disabled and their families are reacting in part to words I never said, never meant, and don’t believe. I served here almost two decades. You know these news accounts are not fair. But I continue to apologize to families for the fallout from all of this.

I take my oath of office seriously, and believe it is important to protect my constituents by ensuring full transparency about a procedure that may adversely impact their future reproductive health. That is why I strongly believe that Planned Parenthood, which performs roughly one-fourth of all abortions nationwide and opposes protecting women with this vital information, should not be funded by Virginia taxpayers.

Children, whether wanted or unwanted, intended or unintended, “normal” or disabled, of any background or are blessings from a loving God. I have held this view from the first day I came here and will hold it to the last day that I serve here. I will continue to fight on their behalf and on behalf of the courageous families who care for these wonderful children.

As to the VCU run Capital News Service, I forgive you for making this slanderous claim about me and my life.

Nevertheless, there remains the journalistic obligation for Capital News Service to correct the record and to publically acknowledge the following:

• You never gave me a chance to defend myself.
• You never checked with me to verify whether I believed your claims or that my meaning was as you suggested.
• You have made inferences about my words, but presented them to the public as if I actually said them.
• Your web site claims to present my full comments but a transcript of my actual comments made available by CBN and now on my website shows you ended my comment in mid sentence and omitted my reference to a VCU study of adverse complications from induced abortion relating to low birth weight and premature birth.
• Your report as to what was allegedly said was NOT verified by professional colleagues or a video of the original press conference.
• You are using equivocal meanings to the terms Nature and God to make a claim about children and the Creator that I never made and don’t believe.

Let the truth be known.

Thank you Mr. Speaker.

FOX 5 Exclusive Interview

Updated: Tuesday, 23 Feb 2010, 11:52 PM EST
Published : Tuesday, 23 Feb 2010, 8:33 PM EST

Source: Courtesy of Fox 5 News
Bob Barnard
bob.barnard[at]foxtv.com
By BOB BARNARD/myfoxdc

MANASSAS, Va. – Delegate Bob Marshall will refer to scripture when explaining his anti-abortion beliefs. But the longtime Virginia lawmaker says he wants to set the record straight about a published report claiming he said God punishes some women who’ve had abortions by inflicting their subsequent children with disabilities.

“Wrong. Never happened. I don’t believe that,” Marshall told Fox 5 News in an exclusive interview in his hometown of Manassas Tuesday night.

The Republican has represented the Manassas area in the Virginia House of Delegates for 19 years. And he’s an unabashed opponent of abortion.

“A child, whether it’s wanted or unwanted, planned, unplanned, born in birth, not born in birth, is a result of sexual assault, is perfect or is disabled, is precious in the sight of God,” Marshall proclaims.

It was during a news conference last Thursday announcing legislation to end state funding for Planned Parenthood that Marshall made the following statement: “The number of children who are born subsequent to a first abortion who have handicaps has increased dramatically. Why? Because when you abort the firstborn of any, nature takes its vengeance on the subsequent children.”

Marshall blames a Virginia Commonwealth University student journalist who attended that news conference for twisting his words in a blog posting.

“I never mention God punishing women,” Marshall told us. “I talked about ‘nature’s vengence’ and I regret those terms. I should have said ‘natural consequences.’ It’s just like somebody who drinks alcohol to excess and gets a liver problem. You can’t blame God for that. You did it to yourself.”

A medical researcher by profession, Marshall cites numerous studies to back up his claims that abortions can have serious medical consequences.

See the NewsEdge report of our one-on-one interview with Delegate Marshall by clicking the video tab.