Two Loudoun Supervisors Backtrack On Important Campaign Promises
March 24th, 2008 by joe
Just some interesting points to note:
Stevens Miller: “It doesn’t take a study to know that when the employers stop hiring them, undocumented aliens won’t come here anymore…That’s why I want to see an end to the employment of illegal aliens in Loudoun.”
Andrea McGimsey: “We must crack down on businesses that lure illegal immigrants to our community… this situation is not fair to honest businesses that that hire legal employees and must compete with unscrupulous businesses which hire illegal immigrants for low wages.”
(It almost sounds like Ms. McGimsey was on board with the Honest Business Network and the entire Honest Business concept.)
Here is another blast from the past:
Stevens Miller Calls for Plan to End Illegal Employment
“The main ’service’ an illegal immigrant comes to Loudoun for is a job,” said Dulles district supervisor candidate Stevens Miller. ”I oppose illegal immigration and want to see effective measures to fight it. That’s why I want to see an end to the employment of illegal aliens in Loudoun.”
The Broadlands resident said he agreed with the July 17 vote by the current board, calling for county staff to study the problem, but added that, “while it’s refreshing to see Dulles supervisor Snow study a question before he votes on it, it doesn’t take a study to know that when the employers stop
hiring them, undocumented aliens won’t come here anymore.”Saying it was time for private industry to clean house, Miller said, “I call upon Mr. Snow to ask his friends and donors in the NVBIA to deliver their own report, outlining their plans for preventing the illegal employment of undocumented residents, and for denying membership in NVBIA to anyone who refuses to abide by such a plan.”
Miller reiterated his belief that a blanket denial of services would be bad for the county’s honest residents. ”No one should have to shop at the grocery or ride a bus with anyone who’s been denied a flu shot. False solutions like that only create more problems than they solve. Eliminating illegal employment is the true solution.”
END
In spite of all their faults, the previous Loudoun County Board of Supervisors had sent on November 30, 2007, as part of their legislative package to the Virginia General Assembly support for action to allow local authority to deny building permits and business licenses to companies employing illegal aliens.
Everyone who pays attention to this issue knows that corrupt hiring practices are the reason we have an illegal immigration problem in Loudoun County. Companies who can hire employees under the table, or hire subcontracting companies who are themselves illegal, have a tremendous advantage over companies who play by the rules. Illegal employment is cheap, and allows companies to bid lower for jobs. Consequently, trades such as carpentry, drywall installation, siding, roofing, plumbing, and many others, are no longer available to American workers, because illegal workers have driven the wage base down to levels that no American worker can survive on.
As one of their first acts in office, however, both Stevens Miller and Andrea McGimsey voted on January 3, 2008, to rescind this legal-hiring enforcement recommendation.
The motion to rescind passed 5-4, with Supervisors Waters, Buckley, York and Delgaudio opposing, which means the change of heart by Miller and McGimsey is all that is keeping Loudoun County from having a pro-enforcement Board of Supervisors.
This entry was posted on Monday, March 24th, 2008 at 1:30 pm and is filed under Politics, immigration. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
March 24th, 2008 at 4:43 pm
Joe:
Thanks again for the information.
You have motivated me to ask Supervisor McGimsey a couple of $64,000 questions.
Might I suggest others do the same to both Supervisors McGimsey and Miller.
Supervisor McGimsey :
As a resident of the Potomac district and active member of Help Save Loudoun, I would like an explanation and comment from you on an article appearing in today’s, NovaTownHall Blog. The article points out differing positions taken by both yourself and Supervisor Miller on the subject of Illegal Hiring in Loudoun County. Public statements by the both of you during the election indicated to voters that you were on board, or in general agreement with the previous boards actions regarding the practice of hiring illegal aliens in order to gain a marketplace advantage over those contractors and companies who obey the law.
According to Novatownhall you were quoted as saying :
” We must crack down on businesses that hire illegal immigrants to our community….this situation is not fair to honest businesses that hire legal employees and must compete with unscrupulous business which hire illegal immigrants for low wages ”
I could not agree more with this statement. What happened ? You went from making a rational reasoned statement in order to get elected and then turned around and took an opposite position with your vote on the board. I think you know that these two positions do not square with one another. Which position represents your take on this most important issue ?
Being very involved as well as having dealt with numerous elected officials regarding illegal migration and its effects on Loudoun County, I find that elected politicians not always, but usually fall into one of four groups.
1. Those who lack a real understanding of the issue. These politicians are simply ignorant of the facts and have yet to develop a sense of the dynamic nature of the problem. Those belonging to this group can evolve through education, information and rational thought.
2. Those who are simply opposed to any local immigration reform. These politicians usually campaign how they vote. Their opposition to immigration reform is heartfelt. These are the wrongful believers as I like to call them.
3. Those who have an agenda, usually associated with outside alliances. Experience has shown that often candidates who campaign one way and vote yet another when elected belong to this group. Having placated voters in order to get elected, they now must serve those outside interests.
4. Those with an honest and complete understanding of the issue and the ramifications of inaction.
Many of us want to know what group you belong to ? Your recorded positions during the campaign and your actions to date are troubling to say the least. Had you and Supervisor Miller not reversed course on this issue, Loudoun county would be making real progress towards needed local reform. Our jurisdiction would not be seen as having surrendered the issue. This perception is very dangerous in that illegals from Prince William County are now migrating to Loudoun. You as an elected official will have to deal with the myriad of issues this brings.
It is your responsibility to first serve the needs of Loudouns Lawful taxpayers. I look forward to your response.
Regards
Greg Stone
Help save Loudoun
March 24th, 2008 at 8:00 pm
Greg, obviously the answer is number 3 for Ms. McGimsey. I’ve said here before and will say again, you guys were out-single-issued in the Loudoun election. You got some lip service so the VLF slate could dovetail into their standard development-bashing. Now the election is over, and you guys can go whistle. As for Mr. Miller, I don’t know what the story is with him. It seems I’m not alone in that, either.
March 24th, 2008 at 11:01 pm
Go lick your wounds somewhere else, Subby.
What we HAVE seen from the new board is backbone to look at the big-ticket developers ..and tell them no. Are you sore about that? You bet you are. But then I see a second, and much more important initiative come forth from this new board. The STALLED the School Board Steamroller…which both boards before them seemed unable to do. Imagine…democrats,independents, and republicans all working together to demonstrate fiscal restraint in the face of the onslaught that is the LC School Board…
Joe, you tend to catch more flies with honey than is possible with vinegar. I will readily intervene and speak with this board. I very much believe that they are human and will listen to all sides. You are confusing your view of their intent using your memory of the last “holier-than-thou” board. Two different animals, Joe. Two different approaches, friend.
March 25th, 2008 at 2:19 am
Yes, I hear you, and I want to give these guys a chance. But that January 3 vote was pretty blatant. What in Zeus’ name was that supposed to be?
And following what happened in Richmond this year, with Dick Saslaw saying “the message from the November election is that illegal immigration is not a big issue with Virginians” as he proceeded to help kill nearly every legal employment bill that came through - I wonder how much that January 3 vote by Miller and McGimsey fed his concept of what the November election message was.
If these two had simply stuck with what they campaigned on for the January 3 vote, that would have been one less very prominent jurisdiction telling the GA, “illegal immigration … fuhgedaboudit!”
So their vote, in my view, had consequences, and I think this entire ESL mess relative to what Prince William County has experienced tells us that messages matter.
Miller and McGimsey slapped the citizens, and I guess this is the citizens slapping back. Other than that, I have nothing at all against either of them.
March 25th, 2008 at 7:25 am
Dean, you might catch more flies with something other than flaming road apples yourself.
Why should Greg or anyone else have to wheedle tax-paid public servants into keeping their very recent campaign promises? And who crowned you the intermediary to do the same? That’s nearly as self serving as you telling me to get off Joe’s blog. Joe will remove me if he wishes.
School budget is another thread, so back to topic. Ms. McGimsey falls into group 3. This is standard practice for some in Loudoun, as I also said before when discussing this issue before the election.
The 2002 sales tax referendum was a prime example. The anti growth groups jumped on the anti tax bandwagon, and some of the anti tax people were happy enough to grow the groundswell of their issue. Only trouble was, by election day it wasn’t really their issue any more. That tax was now all about sprawl, which is caused by building roads.
Sprawl also causes global warming, obesity, divorce, cancer, and ADD-HD.
Just like it is the only cause of illegal immigration.
So it all makes sense, see? Now that this board is going to save the planet (see McGimsey’s comments on going paperless) from sprawl, there will be no more illegal problem, so why vote in line with their promises? They’re going to fix it at the source!
You may not recognize the pattern if you’ve only been here a few years Dean. (And please do spare me the huff-and-puff on your relatives who signed the Declaration and lived in Clark County in the 1640s. That doesn’t answer zip about your personal experience here.)
March 25th, 2008 at 6:21 pm
Shame on them. Ambitious politicians making promises they won’t keep? Who ever heard of such a thing? Good letter, Greg. Keep the pressure on. If even the government won’t hire legally, how can we hope to enforce legal hiring practices for business?
March 25th, 2008 at 8:11 pm
“Sprawl also causes global warming, obesity, divorce, cancer, and ADD-HD”
Why didn’t my doctor tell me that? If I move will the ADHD go away?
March 25th, 2008 at 8:18 pm
Well, it will go away from HERE, and go wherever you go.
March 25th, 2008 at 8:40 pm
Subby, NOWHERE did I tell you to go somewhere else. I did, however, tell you to take your whining elsewhere to people who will actually believe the horse manure that you’ve typed.
Joe
“And following what happened in Richmond this year, with Dick Saslaw saying “the message from the November election is that illegal immigration is not a big issue with Virginians” as he proceeded to help kill nearly every legal employment bill that came through - I wonder how much that January 3 vote by Miller and McGimsey fed his concept of what the November election message was.”
That is an interesting concept, and it may add a few grams to the balance. I do know that Miller and McGimsey (and several other Supervisors) are on a pro-business and pro-commercial tear…. maybe they’re overreacting to the obvious 4 year vaccuum of commercial tax base that preceded them…and trying to appeal to businesses to come to Loudoun (by avoiding an all-encompassing perception of awar on any prospective company’s hiring and screening process when they enter the county.)
I’d be interested in their responses, but I know that they’ll be a whole lot less eager to reply if they’re being pelted before they get to answer.
March 25th, 2008 at 9:31 pm
I was afraid of that!
March 25th, 2008 at 10:35 pm
Dean, good points. I guess we have a few years to accommodate ourselves with the new Board, and they with us. I do think they have had a chance to answer for January 3, and have not done so.
My general approach is not, pelt first and ask questions later. I spent a small amount of time with M & M at the Ben Dover Beer Bash, and they were both completely unapologetic about the fact they had no sympathy whatsoever for anything related to immigration enforcement. Ask Stevens or Andrea about this, and I am certain they will confirm it.
It was only later, after reading about it on Hoodathunk, that I became aware of the campaign postures of these two, and I dug into the Google archives and my own newspaper clipping (yes, I am very old school in some respects).
Comparing the Miller-McGimsey clippings, to the Dick Saslaw clippings, brought a disconcerting picture. So I fired off, as is my wont. As I said, they fired their own official shots on January 3.
I think this should be a long conversation, not between me and the supervisors, but between them and Loudoun’s residents. Let’s see how that ends up.
I regret if anyone interprets my public comments as ill-considered. They are not. I stand behind them. If the two supervisors have explanations mitigating their January 3 votes (not to mention their comments at the beer bash) I will definitely reconsider my opinion and will publicly acknowledge this.
The point is to get at the truth, at the best public policy position. If I can say I was wrong and get us all to that point, I will do so.
March 26th, 2008 at 6:15 am
Nice flytrap, Dean. Keep those flaming balls coming!
Thanks for clarifying–when you said go elsewhere, you didn’t really mean go, you meant stay, but only say what you can agree with. Got it.
Pro-business? Been reading the papers? Class A office just lost its best prospect on Route 28, and the application fees are about to go through the roof, with McGimsey quoted saying she’s looking forward to it.
They just voted down all but one cell application.
This is a PRO business tear?
Heed your own advice and stop pelting. You got the board you worked for, and in a year or so you might not feel the need to give them knee jerk defense any more.
March 26th, 2008 at 3:50 pm
10 Footer:
So far Ms McGimsey has yet to respond. I am not holding my breath. This appears to be a subject she would rather ignore.
Mr Miller did however, send me a brief email. I will not post it here, all I will say is that it was lacking and very similar to something I would expect from Supervisor Burton. Color me unimpressed.
The really ironic thing is these two were the Champions of putting the breaks on development. This was their issue, their cause and now they are carrying water for those same contractors and developers whom they previously demonized in order to get elected. There is not a dimes bit of difference in their respective positions on hiring illegals. The status quo is just fine.
Before anyone chimes in about this issue being moot due to the economy , save it.These development interests know full well the pendulum will again make its way back in the other direction, it always does. When it does, they will be positioned to capitalize by having cheap eager labor at the ready.
Wait until 2009 or 2110 when the number of illegals flocking to Loudoun county due to changing conditions in adjacent jurisdictions overwhelms the school budget. Only then will the members of both boards, county government and do nothing Democrats pay attention. Then it will be too late requiring far more painful policies to repair the damage.
The simple fact is this: We have created the perfect storm. We have allowed the school budget to consume 70% of all tax revenue while at the same time permitting schools to become a haven for illegals.Our fiscal stupidity coupled with our inaction due to state and federal mandates is going to flush our once decent quality of life right down the crapper.
March 26th, 2008 at 10:18 pm
G… I concur. I was only trying to see if they’d respond to the allegations (and not have to do so in a hailstorm, either).
I’ve not had the chance to speak with either of them yet, but I feel they have room to move on this, so don’t paint then just yet. Miller’s response may have dissappointed me, and Andrea’s non-response is troubling… But as I say, I haven’t seen either of them…and WE ARE in the middle of School Board and Budget wars right now. Their plates may be full…
Subby.. I thought I told you to sulk somewhere else, before you trip over your lower lip.
March 26th, 2008 at 11:39 pm
Andrea McGimsey usually takes a week or two to respond to emails from my experience. Give her some more time.
Tonight I emailed Miller and McGimsey using their words from above. Curious how they will respond.
The other thing that we need to consider, that not all illegals are in the construction or service sectors. I would believe that there are many in the tech sector here on visa overstays working at our LoCo technology companies. Locally, many in this sector are from China, India, and Pakistan, and I suspect when the BOS says they are worried about keeping and attracting business, it is these, and those like them.
Doesn’t make it right, but losing iDirect, AOL or Verizon would be more of an economic hit than losing say Pepe’s Lawn Care.
March 28th, 2008 at 8:58 pm
Dan, I tend to agree with your reasoning. I know that the School budget is heavy and forefront right now. Andrea hasn’t gotten back to me, which means she’s really busy.
And those tech businesses are exactly the bulk of the commercial contributions and we need more like them. We can deal with illegals, but the difference in people’s perception of exactly which ones you’re preparing to go after can get skewed by the opponents and it has the propensity to blow up in the Supervisor’s faces if the wrong opinion gets in front of a prospective Loudoun business tenant.
March 28th, 2008 at 9:01 pm
By deal with, I refer to correct a problem with.
By perception, I mean putting a message out that could be misconstrued by it’s opponents, and firing off all sorts of rumors that end up right in front of Big Box county suitors.
March 29th, 2008 at 12:18 am
10FTAB,
We need the tech businesses, yes, but the effect of illegal aliens on wages in the tech sector is very profound. Salaries are down 20-25% compared to what they were 6-8 years ago. This business sector maintains they need these foreign workers, but if there is an insufficient worker pool, basic law of supply and demand tells you the salaries should be trending in the other direction.
Ultimately, we need to to do something about all of the illegal residents. Can we pick and choose to ignore legal infractions ? I thought Congress was the only place where legal trespasses are routinely overlooked.
But me thinks we do need to prioritize, as I do not think that is these tech workers that are paying little or no taxes while enjoying many public benefits. Even still, this too remains a problem to be solved.
March 29th, 2008 at 9:58 am
Dean, what should we all conclude if “Andrea” doesn’t get back to you either?
Call it sulking if you like, but I tend to think that is your usual projection.
You worked hard to get this board elected, and are still making such a continuing point of how well connected you are with them, that I can see a bit of butt covering on your part when they go against their campaign promises.
They screwed up on this, and it remains to be seen whether or not they care.
You can speak on their behalf all you want, but it don’t cut the mustard if they vote against their words.
March 29th, 2008 at 10:26 pm
“You can speak on their behalf all you want, but it don’t cut the mustard if they vote against their words”
Amen Suburbanite! That really is the bottom line, these two said one thing and at the first chance they got they broke their very clear campain promise.
March 30th, 2008 at 6:24 pm
so 10 toes worked to get these two elected?
March 30th, 2008 at 10:03 pm
Dan is right about we can’t look the other way when it comes to the industry that uses illegals. Regardless of the consequences to the county economy, the BOS must do the right thing and go after these law breakers. In the end it will be more beneficial for the county and the country. We already export enough work for lower wages. Why do we want to keep it here if it lowers wages and puts fair businesses under. Politicians that can’t keep their word need to hear about it and then get their asses bounced out of their positions. We need to stop tolerating this type of behavior.
March 31st, 2008 at 9:08 am
Yes Jacob.
March 31st, 2008 at 10:17 am
hey 10 toes,
are or are you not allegedly a red-blood Republican, as opposed to some mambe-pohambe Democrat? If so, why are you helping the socialists in Democrat’s clothing get elected?
March 31st, 2008 at 10:40 am
jacob,
Does the word integrity come to mind? I think 10 proof just needs the limelight. It’s a “self” thing.
March 31st, 2008 at 11:13 am
Act,
You mean like self-important, self-righteous, self-aggrandizing and self-centered?
March 31st, 2008 at 12:43 pm
Finally heard back from Miller, his response was basically we are busy working on the budget.
Where Nero had a fiddle, this BOS has a budget…
April 1st, 2008 at 11:25 am
…and somebody at Too Conservative has posted a link to a new anti BVBL site.
April 1st, 2008 at 2:34 pm
jacob,
‘zackly! Think he’s pouting?
April 1st, 2008 at 3:57 pm
Act,
10cm pout, naaagh. That would require that he actually care what we think. He don’t, this is all good fun for him. A healthy perspective.
April 2nd, 2008 at 11:19 am
Supervisor McGimsey:
I am still waiting !
April 2nd, 2008 at 11:34 am
G,
After last nights vote on the budget, she maybe hiding under a rock…
April 2nd, 2008 at 3:30 pm
Nope not under a rock. I was told she was at the Chamber Breakfast this morning and looking in good form. I don’t think she or Miller are one bit worried about their broken campaign promise. Why she should they be when they have the GREAT DEAN SETTLE to protect them?
I have a feeling this is just the beginning. We will see more double speak from these two. Unless you are a cute, fury little animal, or a tree, Andrea will tell you to go suck lemons.
Pucker up!
April 2nd, 2008 at 4:54 pm
What’s also funny is that York pushed his campaign propoganda to elect these turkeys so that the board could get things done. Has anyone noticed all of a sudden which side of the fence he is sitting on? Convenient? Or does he know that he can play both sides and show that his will be more than just one vote short? I wonder. I just don’t trust his politics anymore. Not for 2 terms now.