DPV, Miller again leave out important facts

I saw a TV ad for Stevens Miller last night, the first one I’ve actually caught. In it, Miller and the DPV make a rather bold assertion: that Tom Rust apparently has it in for autistic children, voting to deny them some kind of funding or insurance or something to that effect. As seems to be the norm for the Democrats this election Miller and crew are telling half truths about things.

Rust was a co-sponsor of the legislation to mandate coverage for autism, not an opponent. The bill, HB 1588, was not voted upon by the House. It’s been stuck in the Committee on Commerce and Labor, a committee Tom Rust is not on. There was a vote to discharge the bill from the committee voted upon but the bill itself was never sent to the floor. To suggest that Tom Rust voted against the bill is factually incorrect and I cannot believe Steves Miller and the DPV don’t know that. You know what that makes their claim about Tom Rust into.

Tom Rust, like Tag Greason, was committed to running a clean, issues-based campaign and was content to leave any mention of his opponents out of it. When confronted by people who deliberately misrepresent his actions, he has no choice but to respond. It should speak loudly to the citizens of Tom Rust’s district that his opponent feels it’s just fine to mislead them in order to get what he wants. How can they trust a candidate who intentionally misleads them regarding the facts?

They can’t. Tom Rust has proven himself an able public servant for 8 years and he’s well established in the community. The citizens of the 86th District would be far better served by re-electing Tom Rust as Delegate.

Advertisements

15 comments

  1. Ric, Since you’ve become a clear partisan hack. Here are some facts from a reputable source, The Washington Post. Are you calling the Post liars?

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/02/11/AR2009021104165_pf.html

    From the article:

    The bill quickly met resistance. The House Commerce and Labor Committee took no action on it, infuriating advocates who noted the unpleasant irony that the bill suffered the same fate as some of their children. “To receive the silent treatment was really stunning,” DiBari, 40, said.

    Jodi Folta, 39, an accountant who lives in Ashburn, said advocates were mystified by the actions of Del. Thomas Davis Rust (R-Fairfax), a member of the Commerce and Labor Committee. Rust appeared to be a friend of the cause, turning up at a rally on the capitol grounds, but he showed no effort to advance it, Folta said.

    “He’s on our unhappy list,” Folta said.

    Rust did not respond to a message at his office seeking comment.

  2. Sterling res, the committee took no action because it did not advance from the subcommittee. The only action that could be taken at the committee level was a vote to discharge, which would have sent it directly to the house for a vote, had it passed discharge.

    Hardly a valid treatment of the bill, and more of a desperate effort to up-or-down in the house.

    Plenty of issues take years to get out of committee–or subcommittee, as is the case here.

    All your quote from the article shows is the understandable frustration and confusion of parent activists, whose understandable frustration and confusion is being shamelessly exploited by the likes of Miller, with his big pots of partisan cash.

    Now, what was that again about a hack?

  3. Only a liberal partisan hack would consider the Washington Post a reputable source. But, hey, let’s go with it anyway.

    Am I calling the Washington Post liars? Perhaps not in the strict sense, but they are certainly misleading. The bill wasn’t in the Commerce and Labor Committee as a whole, it was in the subcommittee #1 and Tom Rust isn’t on that subcommittee. The Post’s story doesn’t make that clear at all, it just says Rust is on the C&L Committee. They are reporting as if Tom Rust was on the panel giving that bill “the silent treatment” as the quote says. He was not, and that’s a matter of the public record. That’s something you’d already know if you’d bothered to read the bill’s profile using the link I provided in the post.

    I think the people who don’t have Tom Rust on their “happy list” haven’t got the facts straight. With people like you spreading more disinformation, that’s not surprising.

    I think it’s you that’s the clear partisan hack. At least the folks on my side of the debate do the research.

    Good luck with that.

  4. Barbara, Do you trust Morgan Griffith? The Majority Leader in the HOD? If you do, then listen to this. …. http://tiny.cc/eulTS

    Oh, look, the GOP Majority leader is saying the autism bill couldn’t have died in subcommittee. The House Commerce and Labor COmmittee that Rust sits on had every opportunity to hear the autism bill. THey chose not to. Additionally, TOm Rust spoke right after Bob Marshall–who praise him he fought for these children. Rust didn’t agree with Bob. He didn’t mention Marshall. He ignored the issue.

    Bob Marshall fought for children and Tom Rust sided with Mindy WIlliams and other lobbyists who have never stood for anything so they stand for nothing.

    Ric, did you do enough research to find out what the real procedure is in the House? Do you know what the Majority Leader tells his minions? Or are you just getting paid to be Rust’s spinmeister. It’s a hard job for a candidate that has sold out and started doing whatever lobbyists (read Mindy Williams) ask him to do.

  5. Oh, Ric, how can you not admit you’re a partisan hack. You have RPV Network, Tag Team, Loudoun GOP blog network buttons, among others, on your sidebar.

    For your readers, it’s obvious that you care little about facts and instead are nothing more than another partisan hack site.

  6. Sterling res, answer me this–if the full committee was to save the day by voting to discharge directly to an up or down vote, where was Delegate Poisson?

    My understanding is that he was absent for the vote to discharge.

    Possibly quite understandable, because discharge is a last ditch Hail Mary, so perhpas an emergency phone call, constituent meeting, bathroom break, who knows?

    But since YOU are not a partisan hack, maybe you can explain what’s up with that?

  7. Barbara, this clown is just some Dem shill, possibly from Miller’s own camp. I’ve asked him pointed questions offering him the chance to come up with support for his allegations and he just keeps evading the questions. I’ve already told him that the autism bill wasn’t in the C&L Committee of the whole, which Tom Rust is on. It was in the C&L Subcommittee #1, clearly shown in the bill’s profile on the LIS system.

    Sterling Res is obviously not interested in facts, in spite of his frequent invocation of the word.

  8. res, I know Poisson isn’t on the committee.

    Bob Marshall BYPASSED the full committee, and introduced a motion on the House floor to discharge the bill from committee, even though it never went from the subcommittee, directly to the House, which is a procedural move as a last-ditch effort for an up or down vote.

    The motion IN THE HOUSE to discharge failed about 70/30, and Poisson was absent for the vote. It is the only vote anyone outside of the subcommittee could have participated in on that bill, and that includes more Loudoun reps that Rust, some of whom are Dems.

    Ric, I’m going to track down that link, because it gets to the heart of the intricacy of the lie being told. And since Sterling res is *not* a partisan hack (cough), I’d like to give them an opportunity to comment on Delegate Poisson’s absence for a vote res apparently considers crucial to the bill in question, and to Loudoun constituents.

  9. What IS funny is that sterling resident would actually post as a friggin’ know-it-all and than isn’t smart enough to understand parlimentary procedure or the membership and heirarchy of the committees in Richmond.

  10. I attended the Rust/Miller debate tonight. Miller all but let the cat out of the bag…his ads say “Tom Rust voted against education, choice, and covering autism”, but he basically admitted (in the heat of the moment) that he actually thinks that Rust didn’t put forth enough effort to get the bill out of the subcommittee so that it could be voted upon by the committee. Voting against something is different than not putting forth enough effort (in Miller’s opinion) to get a vote. Unless evidence is shown that there was an actual physical vote, and Rust voted “No”, the only reasonable conclusion is that the Miller/DPVA ads lie. Rust REALLY should make this clear to the voters and use Miller’s own words from tonight to prove it.

Comments are closed.