Table of Contents

Virginia Hunting Dog Owners' Association

Vote November 4, 2003

2003 General Assembly Candidate Analysis

Sportsmen’s chief legislative support is found in the Shenandoah Valley, rural Piedmont and in Northern Neck. As urban area populations with little understanding of or exposure to our hunting traditions mushroom, our influence in Richmond is reduced, wildlife budgets are cut and hunting restrictions are imposed. Hence, it’s necessary for us to recognize and nurture our supportive delegates and senators, while simultaneously attempting to educate the others.

Only sixty of 140 November 4th races have two candidates competing. While the state is nearly balanced politically, legislators here, like others across the U.S., have redistricted the Commonwealth into "safe" Democratic and Republican voting areas. In some instances, only token opposition will be offered. By most estimates, as few as 8-12 of the fall elections will be party-competitive. Despite this, sportsmen’s votes could decide several key contests. Even more important, we need to vote for supportive legislators and send the others a message.

This candidate analysis combines our earlier primary election reviews of the open seat contests with one for incumbent legislators running for reelection. The open seat review was based on a set of hunting and animal ownership questionnaire responses. This fall’s incumbent candidates were largely judged on their votes over the 2002-2003 General Assembly sessions. Current legislator evaluations were divided into four support areas,

·         Department of Game and Inland Fisheries’ (DGIF) budget and independence,

·         Rational and effective animal welfare laws

·         2nd amendment related measures

·         Non-voting support of Virginia hunters and hunting dog owners.

These four areas were tested sixteen times over the last two voting years and during DGIF’s March 2003 rulemaking. The House of Delegates had more germane votes than did the Senate and the area tested most heavily was support for rational and effective animal welfare laws. Rather than reproduce a 140 X 16+ matrix of voting results, the incumbents’ actions were converted to + and – designations. The high/low House scores were 4+ to 3- and those in the Senate 2+ to 2-.

For example: sponsors of Del. Thomas’ 2002 amendment to restore DGIF funding and legislators who intervened in DGIF’s 2003 proposed telemetry collar and dog training rulemakings on behalf of VHDOA’s opposition each earned 1 point. Sponsors of Del. Watts’ 2002 HB773, animal warden child abuse investigator bill, and those opposed to Del. Cline’s 2003 HB2798, omnibus concealed handgun bill, each received a –1 demerit. In the instance of a bad bill, its sponsors were debited and legislators who voted against it were credited. The majority of General Assembly members earned 1+ to 1- aggregated scores and were assigned “C” grades. Legislators with scores falling above this range (A & B) and below it (D & F) deserve your special consideration and attention.

This analysis has a limited scope. We make no pretence of evaluating candidates' positions on taxes, education, medical care or social issues. To the degree that hunting and dog ownership are important to you, we offer this review to be combined with other, personal considerations to determine your vote on November 4, 2003. The lack of a comment on an open seat contest indicates that the candidates either failed to return our survey or that there was minimal difference in the responses.

House of Delegates

 

District

Candidate

Party

Incumbent?

Grade

Comment

H1

Kilgore

R

Y

C

 

H2

Phillips

D

Y

C

 

H3

Stump

D

Y

C

 

H4

Johnson

D

Y

B

 ENDORSE

H5

Carrico

R

Y

C

 

 

Graham

D

 

 

 

H6

Keister

D

Y

B

 ENDORSE

 

Morris

R

 

 

 

H7

Nutter

R

Y

A

 ENDORSE

H8

Griffith

R

Y

A

 ENDORSE

 

Emick

D

 

 

 

H9

Dudley

R

Y

C

 

 

Newbill

D

 

 

 

H10

Armstrong

D

Y

C

 

H11

Ware

D

 

 

 ENDORSE

H12

Shuler

D

Y

A

 ENDORSE

H13

Marshall, R

R

Y

C

 

H14

Marshall, D

R

Y

C

 

H15

Louderback

R

Y

C

 

 

Lewis

D

 

 

 

H16

Hurt

R

Y

C

 

 

Reynolds

D

 

 

 

H17

Fralin

R

 

 

 ENDORSE

 

Wyatt

D

 

 

 

H18

Athey

R

Y

B

 ENDORSE

H19

Putney

I

Y

B

 ENDORSE

 

Lipscomb

D

 

 

 

H20

Saxman

R

Y

A

 ENDORSE

H21

Welch

R

Y

C

 

 

Jackson

D

 

 

 

H22

Byron

R

Y

C

 

H23

Bryant

R

Y

B

 ENDORSE

H24

Cline

R

Y

 

 ENDORSE

 

Sheffield

I

 

 

 

H25

Landes

R

Y

A

 ENDORSE

H26

Weatherholtz

R

Y

B

 ENDORSE

 

Fulk

D

 

 

 

H27

Nixon

R

Y

C

 

H28

Howell

R

Y

C

 

H29

Sherwood

R

Y

C

 

H30

Scott

R

 

 

 

 

Thompson

I

 

 

 

H31

Lingamfelter

R

Y

A

 ENDORSE

 

Brickley

D

 

 

 

H32

Black

R

Y

C

 

 

Morrissey

D

 

 

 

H33

May

R

Y

C

 

H34

Callahan

R

Y

C

 

H35

McDowell

R

 

 

 

 

Shannon

D

 

 

 ENDORSE

H36

Plum

D

Y

D

 

H37

Petersen

D

Y

C

 

 

Rust

R

 

 

 

H38

Hull

D

Y

C

 

H39

Watts

D

Y

F

 

H40

Hugo

R

Y

C

 

H41

Dillard

R

Y

C

 

H42

Albo

R

Y

C

 

H43

Bolvin

R

Y

C

 

 

Sickles

D

 

 

 

H44

Amundson

D

Y

D

 

 

Kennedy

R

 

 

 ENDORSE

H45

VanLandingham

D

Y

C

 

 

Test

R

 

 

 

H46

Moran

D

Y

C

 

H47

Eisenberg

D

 

 

 

 

Hoff

R

 

 

 

H48

Brink

D

Y

D

 

 

Sass

R

 

 

 ENDORSE