The Virginian-Pilot has about the same opinion as I do about Jerry Kilgore’s election year ploy.

In an election year in a state where the death penalty carries considerable appeal, the title of Kilgore’s bill alone may ensure passage. It may also ensure votes next November. Perhaps that’s the real purpose.

But conscientious lawmakers should think before acting.

First, Virginia’s “triggerman” statute is motivated by the belief that death should be reserved for the worst-of-the-worst. Moreover, there are already exceptions to the rule, allowing death sentences for non-triggermen in cases involving hired killings, terrorism and organized crime.

Second, there’s no reason to tamper with jury sentencing in capital cases. To begin with, only citizens who believe in the death penalty can serve on a jury in these cases. Those who don’t are scratched at the start of the trial. If prosecutors can’t convince a pro-death penalty jury that execution is justified, then there’s probably a good reason. When there’s a deadlock, the sentence is life in prison.

But Kilgore would allow shopping for a new jury when the old one doesn’t suit. That’s excessive in a system that already tilts in favor of the death penalty.

It’s disappointing that those aspiring to higher office in Virginia feel so routinely compelled to beef up their “tough-on-crime” credentials just before an election.

As Virginia’s top elected law enforcement official, Kilgore should be interested in more than just hiking the number of executions. His indifference to the need for reforms to protect against false conviction reflects poorly on his judgment.

That he pushes only one side of the equation exposes “The Death Penalty Enhancement Act” as an election-year sham.

To say nothing of the fact that Kilgore is essentially attacking Lt. Gov. Tim Kaine for his religious beliefs.

I nominate John J. Dodson.

I’ll fess up: I talk on my cell phone while driving. Usually, I use a hands-free device. But that doesn’t matter.

…[P]hone talkers were slower than inebriated drivers to respond to traffic conditions and more likely to be involved in collisions. This study confirmed what others have found: It didn’t matter if drivers were using hands-free or hand-held phones; it’s the distraction factor that matters. When drivers are on the phone, their minds, and sometimes their eyes, are somewhere other than on the road. The term researchers use to describe it, “inattention blindness,” is chilling, because the driver’s seat is no place for any kind of blindness.

I won’t be happy if cell phone use while driving is outlawed. But I’d agree with anyone who proposes such a law. Just don’t expect it to happen here in Virginia. It’s likely unconstitutional. (see here)

Del. Chap Petersen (D-Fairfax), who happens to be my delegate, has a wonderful way of merging his ideas with the homey physical façade he’s cultivate, what with his bow-tie, rumpled shirt and impish grin. He’s got an unconventional view of the Lieutenant Governor’s job.

“The way I visualize it is, the lieutenant governor is akin to being the people’s governor,” said Petersen, a Fairfax Democrat who represents the 37th House District in the Virginia House of Delegates.

“It’s not a full-time position. It doesn’t bring with it a mansion in Richmond. You don’t have a security detail. The lieutenant governor is not tied down like the governor is,” Petersen told The Augusta Free Press.

“The person in that position can travel across the state to meet with citizens where they are one on one with no pretensions. And the person in the office can be free to serve as an advocate on issues that the people have deemed to be important,” Petersen said.

“My vision of being lieutenant governor is that I can be the lobbyist for people who can’t afford lobbyists,” Petersen said.

Petersen is one of four Democrats running for the party’s 2005 lieutenant-governor nomination.

He is also among a growing number of Dems who are not afraid to talk about fiscal responsibility.

“I voted against the original Senate proposal because I felt it was too excessive,” said Petersen of his role in the 2004 state-budget debate. “I was also opposed to any increases in the income tax. That is one thing that stands out as far as making Virginia competitive economically. Our income-tax rate is lower than that of some of our neighbors.

If there’s anyone I can see traveling the state to talk to folks about what’s on their mind, Chap is the guy. If that what you want out of an LG. What exactly else are they good for?

Who said that a moratorium on a national sales tax on Internet purchases “would be a significant infringement on state and local sovereignty, create considerable budgetary problems for local governments, and lead to unfair competition in the marketplace”?

That would be the same guy who “said through a spokesman that he does not ‘support any new taxes on purchases made on-line’ in response to a query from The Augusta Free Press on the ongoing efforts to have Virginia join 40 other states in a multistate tax compact styled the streamlined sales-tax project that is being designed to increase the collection of sales and use taxes on Internet-based retail sales nationwide.”

Answer: Tim Kaine.

Now why could that be?

Much has been made of the lack of transportation funding in Virginia and how it is the top priority of Virginia businesses. But I wonder if the business community will allow lawmakers like Dick Black get away with this.

As the last legislative session closed, Del. Richard H. “Dick” Black (R-Loudoun) told legislators that he had informed residents that transportation was a priority but that the new budget contained no significant funding for roads and transit.

“The public can take a cynical view and ask, ‘Can we really believe these guys ever?’ I think it’s a betrayal of the people of the state of Virginia,” he said.

In the upcoming session, Black said, he was optimistic about transportation funding in part because of the pressures lawmakers are feeling. He said he would introduce a bill to protect money designated for transportation.

Everyone knows that “protecting” the Highway Trust fund won’t do much to address the underlying problem. But Black runs on his record of opposing any and all new taxes. Will the Va. business community allow Black and others to get away with their fraudulent stand?

For the life of me I can’t understand lawmakers like Sen. Bill Bolling, R-Hanover, who insist on coddling red light runners.

“I do not support the use of cameras at intersections,” he said.

“In my judgment, this is an inappropriate infringement on individual civil liberty.”

Well, in that case, let’s take cameras out of bank lobbies. After all, they’re an infringement of the right to rob, I guess. Or how about searches at airports. Don’t hijackers have some rights, too?

Del. L. Preston Bryant (R-Lynchburg) is losing his seat on the House Appropriations Committee, according to the Washington Post. Some see it as House Speaker Bill Howell’s revenge for Bryant’s ;leadership of “the gang of 17” Republicans who supported the tax hikes last year.

Howell might want to consider who’s ox he’s goring.

“It is a move reflective of a man who is worried about holding on to his position of power and has to make a move to satisfy the far right,” said James Hazel, co-chairman of a political action committee whose mission is to support the Republican moderates.

“The speaker must think that the business community is naive in the extreme to believe that this is not a move based on retribution,” said Hazel, a Republican business executive and former Warner policy adviser.

The Leadership for Virginia PAC was formed to support delegates like Bryant. He’ll undoubtedly get their dollars if the GOP presents a primary competitor. The more interesting question will be the PAC’s role in elections pitting a Democrat against an incumbent anti-tax Republican.

And it’s not the first vengeful move by the speaker; nor is Bryant the only victim.

Shortly after the assembly finished its bitter 115-day session in May, Howell kicked Bryant off the Joint Commission on Health Care. Dumped from the same commission was Del. S. Chris Jones, R-Suffolk, who also was a leader in the revolt against the House leadership.

Del. G. Glenn Oder, R-Newport News, lost his seat on the Virginia Housing Commission. Oder too voted for the tax-increase compromise and had written a newspaper column promoting higher taxes Gov. Mark R. Warner, a Democrat, sought to meet needs in education, health care and law enforcement.

And you’ve got to wonder what respect is given the chairman of the Appropriations committee.

The dropping of Bryant had been rumored for weeks, but some delegates seemed surprised. Del. Vincent F. Callahan Jr., R-Fairfax, chairman of the budget panel, apparently learned of the Bryant departure yesterday after being called by a reporter.

“Preston is a very valuable member of the Appropriations Committee and I’d like him to stay,” he said.

“You need a certain amount of discipline, but in this case the Speaker has made a public statement that there would be no recrimination,” Callahan said. “That’s always the best policy, conciliation rather than recrimination.”

Howell told delegates in the spring that he would not punish them for supporting the tax increase. Later, after he booted Bryant and Jones from a health-care commission, the Speaker clarified that he was not punishing them for their tax vote but for “other things,” which he declined to enunciate.

Bryant’s departure chagrined senior members of the budget committee.

Del. J. Paul Councill Jr., D-Southampton, described Bryant as “a moderate, middle-of-the-road member.”

“I hate to see him slapped around like that,” Councill said. “I hate to see some of these people who try to use good common sense and act with something other than politics in mind get treated like this. It’s part of the problem we have up there.”

The Staunton News-Leader asks if we are really as Christian nation as we purport to be.

Here in the Commonwealth, Attorney General Jerry Kilgore is already running for governor on a platform that would “enhance” the death penalty and extend the reach of state-sanctioned murder to people who did not even participate in a killing. Kilgore also wants to treat gang crime as terrorism. The logic is that since the public is terrified by gangs, gang crime constitutes terrorism. Ergo, the anti-terrorism laws passed by 33 states in the wake of 9/11 – Virginia among them – are ripe for the picking to prosecute street thugs.

Wrong. All good people are terrified of crime – even small crimes – all crime terrorizes. That does not mean we should mete out the death penalty to shoplifters and burglars.

Vengeance is not a Christian value. Hate is not a Christian value. Justice, applied fairly, is.

There are adequate statutes on the books that can be used to sentence murderers, gangsters and rapists to hard time – even death, should their crimes call for it under state law – without “enhancement.”

Forgiveness and a belief that others might find the light and see the errors of their ways – those are Christian values. We are mightily sick of perversion of the law in the name of politics and vote-winning. Turning our laws into vote-winning machines is a sin of pride and a manifestation of the egotism of politicians. We must do better than that.

Margaret Edds sets the record straight.