Get Well+Being delivered to your inbox every Monday Morning.

The local politician on his goals, marijuana in DC, and the time Ann Coulter was mean to him. By Hallie Golden
Photograph courtesy of Majors.

If DC’s mayoral race has been a bit drab so far, don’t blame Bruce Majors. The Libertarian candidate for mayor brings humor and an enthusiasm for libertarianism—which began with his introduction to the writings of Ayn Rand when he was in ninth grade—to the race. Majors, a realtor by day, saw that steadfast devotion pay off two years ago when he garnered more than 16,000 votes in his first political campaign. (Mayor Vince Gray won with 97,978 votes.) Major’s haul was more than enough votes for the Libertarians to become an official party for the first time on a DC ballot.

Majors is running again, spreading the Libertarian philosophy along the way—“Let people do what they want, and then address a problem if there is one,” he summarizes—and touting the fact that his party is the fastest growing in DC. We chatted with him about his positions and his goals as an underdog candidate in the mayoral race.

What does your party want to achieve?

We want to replace the current paradigm with one where everyone makes choices about their own lives, their own bodies, and their own children. I’m sure occasionally there will be a case where somebody’s doing something and you will have to step in and do something about it, but don’t manage them from the very beginning.

Tell me about your stance on the marijuana referendum.

We spend too much money putting people in jail for that. I don’t smoke marijuana, but I do have a balcony, and I’ve teased my friends who do smoke that I’ll grow three plants on my balcony so they could come to DC, buy me dinner, and I’ll give them some. But I won’t sell it to them.

How would you handle development?

We’ve got a lot of people moving to DC with a lot of money who are driving up the price of housing because it’s so restrictive. One of the ways it’s restrictive is that buildings can’t be more than ten stories tall. If you could build tall buildings that created huge numbers of housing units, I think the rents wouldn’t be going up as quickly.

How would you decrease unemployment in the District?

I want to get rid of lots of regulations that keep people from getting jobs. For example, DC has regulations on hair braiding [that say] you have to go to cosmetology school and get a full-scale license. I have a feeling there’s a lot of stuff like that that nobody ever thinks about looking at because they only affect a small number of people.

How is your fundraising going?

We’ve probably raised $7,000. About half of it’s from me, and, unfortunately, that’s probably all that’s going to come from me this year.

As an underdog, how will you measure success on election day?

Our minimum level of success is getting 7,500 votes to maintain permanent ballot status. That’s really the reason we’re doing this. We definitely don’t want to have to go back to petitioning, and we do want to raise all these issues.

What do you do besides politics?

When I’m not running for office, I like to make jokes. I have some really great jokes about our campaign, but I can’t make any of them because I’m supposed to be running a serious campaign.

In 2010, you said you want to be the gay, slightly less conservative Ann Coulter. Is that still true?

That was kind of a joke. I’ve since met Ann Coulter, and she was mean to me. I showed up at her book signing wearing a “Majors for Mayor” pin. In comes Coulter. She turns to me and grabs my button. I was slightly terrified. She’s looking at me like, “What’s this?” All I could say was, “It’s a local candidate.”

Posted at 01:41 PM/ET, 09/25/2014 | Permalink | Comments ()
The former governor of Virginia and his wife were charged in January on 14 counts of taking gifts from the CEO of a nutritional supplement manufacturer. By Benjamin Freed
Bob McDonnell, as seen in Johnnie R. Williams's Ferrari. Photograph via US Department of Justice.

Former Virginia Governor Bob McDonnell and his wife, Maureen, were found guilty Thursday in federal court for illegally accepting cash, luxury goods, and vacations from the chief executive of a nutritional supplement manufacturer in exchange for promotion by the state government.

A jury in federal court for the Eastern District of Virginia found the McDonnells guilty after a five-week trial that exposed long-simmering rifts between the McDonnells and Johnnie R. Williams, the former CEO of Star Scientific, who lavished the McDonnells over several years in exchange for their promotion of Anatabloc, a tobacco-based supplement made by Williams's former company.

Bob McDonnell was found guilty on 11 corruption counts while Maureen McDonnell was found guilty on eight corruption counts plus one count of obstruction of justice. Both faced a total of 14 counts. The jury of seven men and five women took a little more than two days to deliberate more than a month of testimony and arguments.

The McDonnells were charged in January, just days after leaving the governor's mansion in Richmond. Many of the allegations against the couple stemmed from their former chef, who was profiled in the February issue of Washingtonian.

Among the trials revelations were images of Bob McDonnell cruising around in a Ferrari borrowed from Williams, testimony that Maureen McDonnell had an "obsession" with the businessman, and an argument by the defense that the McDonnells' marriage was too fractured for them to build a conspiracy to cover up Williams's largesse. In total, prosecutors say the McDonnells took over $200,000 in cash, clothing, jewelry, and vacations for pushing Anatabloc on everyone from state government underlings to Ann Romney, the wife of 2012 Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney.

According to the Washington Post, the McDonnells were visibly emotional after the verdict was announced. The former governor "sobbed throughout the proceeding" and stared at the floor as he exited the courtroom. The McDonnells will be sentenced January 6 and each face up to 30 years in prison.

While an appeal is already considered "inevitable," the verdict marks a low point for the McDonnells and Virginia politics at large. Once short-listed as a potential vice-presidential nominee, Bob McDonnell became the first governor of Virginia to be charged—and now convicted—of a felony.

UPDATE, 3:55 PM: "Of course we will appeal," Bob McDonnell's attorney, Hank Asbill, told reporters outside the courthouse.

McDonnell's downfall is so jarring to the Virginia political establishment, it's making his successor, Terry McAuliffe, a bit misty-eyed. "I am deeply saddened by the events of the trial that ended in today’s verdict, and the impact it has had on our Commonwealth’s reputation for honesty and clean government," McAuliffe said in a statement released by his office after the verdict. "Dorothy and I will continue to pray for the McDonnell family and for everyone who was affected by this trial."

One person for whom the McAuliffes can spare their prayers: Johnnie R. Williams, the tobacco-derivative huckster turned star witness who got immunity in exchange for his testimony.

Find Benjamin Freed on Twitter at @brfreed.

Posted at 02:34 PM/ET, 09/04/2014 | Permalink | Comments ()
Did Irvin Nathan use a staff meeting to endorse Karl Racine? By Harry Jaffe

Irvin Nathan. Photograph by Flickr user Doug Gansler.

It’s no surprise that DC Attorney General Irvin Nathan has little respect for Paul Zukerberg, one of the five candidates running for his job in the November election. Nathan, who, like previous attorney generals, was appointed to his post by the mayor, argued in court earlier this year to stop the 2014 attorney general election from going forward. Zukerberg, who had sued to force the election to go forward, beat him.

In an exchange that followed in the Huffington Post, Nathan wrote that Zukerberg’s brutal critique of past attorneys general's failings “suggests he is not worthy of the position he seeks.”

We also know Nathan is close to Karl Racine, a well-known attorney for a large law firm who’s challenging Zukerberg.

But according to three staff members in the Office of the Attorney General, Nathan has now sought to have a hand in a race he never wanted. During a staff meeting on July 9, a day before Racine formally announced he was running, witnesses say Nathan used a staff meeting to endorse Racine.

“He praised and recommended Karl Racine,” one of the three employees told Washingtonian, “and he asked us to support him.” None of the three staffers would talk on the record for fear of retribution.

If the statements are true, Nathan may have violated the District’s Hatch Act, which prohibits public officials from using their authority to influence elections while on the job.

Questioned about whether Nathan endorsed Racine, his office said in a statement Nathan noted that Racine’s “entrance into the race was a positive sign for the District and for the office’s interest in continued quality management due to Mr. Racine’s qualifications and experience managing a large law firm.”

Nathan's comments appear to have been a crucial part of the July 9 meeting and not an offhand remark during a political discussion. On June 27, Nathan sent an email to the OAG staff that he would hold two meetings on July 9 to discuss the election and its “implications for this office.” There are no audio or video recordings of the meetings.

The District's Hatch Act, rewritten last year as part of a broader ethics measure, hasn't been tested. But it bars a public official from using his “official authority or influence for the purpose of interfering with or affecting the result of an election.”

Nathan’s aides said it was “perfectly appropriate” for him to make his comments about Racine. They added that it would be inaccurate to say Nathan “has endorsed any candidate or encouraged staff members to support any particular candidate.”

However, one aide admitted that staffers might have drawn the wrong inference from Nathan’s glowing comments about Racine. Nathan was not available to comment.

Read More

Posted at 03:13 PM/ET, 08/28/2014 | Permalink | Comments ()
At September’s candidate forums, expect Muriel Bowser to prod David Catania’s famous temper as he attacks her positions—if she risks any. For now, DC’s mayoral hopefuls require translation. By Harry Jaffe
Photograph of Bowser by Liz Lynch.

What Muriel Bowser says:

“I don’t run away from people asking questions.”

What she means: Watch me run away from questions to deprive my opponent of the microphone.

“I appreciated a very genuine handshake that [Vince Gray] offered to me this morning.”

What she means: The mayor and I revile each other.

“If you’re not married at 42, people think there’s something wrong with you. I date all the time. I am private, that’s for sure.”

What she means: No, I am not gay.

“I don’t think everything has to change in the government”

What she means: Hey, black voters who turned out my political mentor: I’m no Adrian Fenty.

“You’re not mayor until you are mayor.”

What she means: Quit worrying about my not seeming “mayoral.”

What David Catania says:

“It’s past time for the candidates of this race to engage in a public discussion about the future or our city.”

What he means: Help! Until Bowser agrees to debate, I got no game.

“A label alone never puts food on the table . . . never educates children, and it doesn’t provide health care.”

What he means: Because I’m running against a Democrat in one of the nation’s bluest cities, my only prayer is to convince DC voters to abandon their party.

“People understand that even if they don’t necessarily agree with me all the time . . . I roll up my sleeves and I’m serious about getting solutions.”

What he means: My hard work makes up for my embarrassing lack of civility.

“Let me be clear—I will not be seeking reelection as a member of the council. I am running for mayor of the District of Columbia.”

What he means: After 17 years, I couldn’t stand another term on the DC Council.

“The [Democratic] primary was about who shouldn’t be mayor, not who should be.”

What he means: I really wanted to run against Vince Gray.

What Carol Schwartz says “I just want you to take me a little bit more seriously.”

What Carol Schwartz means . . . Before I disappear again to Rehoboth.

This article appears in the September 2014 issue of Washingtonian.

Posted at 03:20 PM/ET, 08/26/2014 | Permalink | Comments ()
Representative Andy Harris says he’s worried about teenagers’ health. He’s also gunning for a House leadership job. By Benjamin Freed
Harris. Photograph via Facebook.

DC Council member and mayoral candidate David Catania marched into the Capitol Hill office of Representative Andy Harris Friday morning, demanding to know why the Maryland Republican is so keen on derailing DC’s marijuana decriminalization law. It’s possible it was more campaign stunt than policy plea: With the House out of session, Harris was back home on the Eastern Shore, with only  a skeleton crew left to handle Catania. 

But after Catania’s visit, Harris’s staff issued an email statement in response to the Catania’s visit.

“When David Catania announced his candidacy for DC mayor, he said, ‘We need to talk about how our kids are ready to succeed.’,” Harris’s statement reads. “Really? Was he serious? Passing marijuana decriminalization bills for teenagers is not the way to lower DC’s shamefully high rate of drug abuse among teenagers.”

But Harris’s office didn’t stop there. A couple hours after Catania’s visit, Harris’s press secretary, Erin Montgomery, e-mailed reporters again, claiming that decriminalization won’t unclog the judicial system, as some advocates say. Harris’s office checked to see how many people DC currently has locked up for marijuana-related offenses.

“As of yesterday, there were 0.5 percent of persons (less than 1 percent) at DC [Department of Corrections] incarcerated on marijuana-related offenses, none of which were purely possession-related offenses,” Montgomery wrote. “The offenses for which they were incarcerated were possession with intent to distribute or distribution.”

But the DC Council took up marijuana decriminalization last year because of a massive racial disparity in arrests and prosecutions, not incarcerations, a fact that makes a one-day head-count of the city jail a flimsy statistic at best. 

Nearly 75 percent of people convicted of a single count of marijuana possession in DC last year were given probation instead of jail time, according to the DC Sentencing and Criminal Code Revision Commission. But those verdicts still leave dark marks on citizen’s records that can lead to lifelong difficulties in education, housing, and employment prospects. And, with blacks being arrested for possession as much as eight times as often as whites despite no racial difference in the rate of marijuana use, the socioeconomic rationale for decriminalization is even clearer.

In a phone interview about Harris’s statement, Montgomery retreated to her boss’s accustomed medical argument about pot and kids instead. “As a physician, father, and lawmaker he’s going to protect children,” Montgomery says. She says Harris has not discussed the decriminalization measure with any DC law enforcement officials.

In his statement, Harris also called Catania’s visit a “campaign prop,” but according to Catania’s chief of staff, Brendan Williams-Kief, Catania is not the only one strutting for the cameras here. Harris, says Williams-Kief, is trying to whip up his own campaign to take over the Republican Study Committee, an influential group of socially conservative lawmakers in need of a new chairman with its previous leader, Representative Steve Scalise, becoming House majority whip.

“If there’s any kind of stunt going on, it’s Representative Harris jumping on a red-meat issue as he’s seeking a leadership post,” Williams-Kief says. 

Messing with DC seems to be a prerequisite for the study committee chair. One of his rivals for the post is Representative Louie Gohmert, a mouthy Texan who in 2011 introduced a bill that would have permitted members of Congress to carry concealed handguns around town.

If so, Harris has his leadership campaign off to a good start: In trying to gut the decriminalization law, he’s earned the enmity of WAMU host Kojo Nnamdi, who singled out Harris in a preview of today’s installment of The Politics Hour.

“We welcome Representative Andy Harris, not to the show, but to the ranks of bottom-feeding, low-life, dictatorial, bullying, outside interlopers,” Nnamdi said.

Lump that in with Council member David Grosso calling him an “idiot” earlier this week, and Harris might have Gohmert beat.

Posted at 03:58 PM/ET, 06/27/2014 | Permalink | Comments ()
A Maryland representative says he plans to block the District's plans. By Benjamin Freed
Photograph via Shutterstock.

This was expected: A member of Congress is going to try to derail the District’s marijuana decriminalization law by introducing an amendment blocking its implementation.

Representative Andy Harris, a Maryland Republican, says he’ll attach his amendment to the Financial Services and General Government Appropriations bill, an annual piece of legislation which authorizes funding for, among other things, the District’s budget, Roll Call reports.

Mayor Vince Gray signed the decriminalization legislation into law in March, but because Congress gets 60 working days to review laws that affect the District’s judicial system, it will not take effect until mid-July. Harris’s amendment would not techincally overturn it, but it would prohibit the District from using either federal funds or its own local revenue to decriminalize marijuana. (The District’s budget, while approved by the DC Council, is still subject to federal review.)

“I had hoped that D.C. was in good company with the 17 states that had decriminalized marijuana before the city did,” DC Delegate Eleanor Holmes Norton says in a press release. Among those 17 states is Harris’s. Governor Martin O’Malley signed a law in April that removes criminal penalties for possession of ten grams or less of cannabis.

The District’s decriminalization law replaces criminal penalties for possesson of less than one ounce with fines of $25. It was passed, in part, to alleviate a grave disparity in the marijuana arrest rates between black residents and white residents. Black residents are eight times as likely as white residents to be arrested for marijuana, even though the rate of use is even between the groups, according to an ACLU study published last year.

Harris’s office did not return requests for comment. But while he says he doesn’t like his home state’s newly relaxed stance on small-time pot possession, he seems eager to futz with the District’s.

“The Constitution treats the District of Columbia and Maryland differently,” he tells Roll Call.

But Harris may be living in a pipe dream. Even if his amendment clears the Appropriations Committee and the House at large, it would still need to clear the Democratic-controlled Senate and be signed by President Obama to take nullify DC’s decriminalization effort.

Posted at 06:02 PM/ET, 06/24/2014 | Permalink | Comments ()
With the arrival of Julián Castro to head up HUD, he and his twin, Joaquín, a congressman, will be in the capital at the same time. Here's how to tell them apart. By Rebecca Nelson
Julián and Joaquín Castro. Photograph by Kevin Dietsch/Upi/Landov.

Julián Castro

  • Older by one minute. First to run for office, winning a San Antonio city-council seat in 2001, with the activist Castro matriarch, Rosie, as his campaign manager.
  • Accepted to Yale Law, but because Joaquín didn't get in, both brothers—Stanford grads—decided on Harvard.
  • Julián "has always been the more quiet, more serious," Rosie told Vogue last year. "Joaquín likes meeting people and trying something new."
  • Third-term mayor of San Antonio, HIs foreign-sounding name and stirring keynote at the 2012 Democratic National Convention have invited comparisons as "the Hispanic Obama."

Joaquín Castro

  • Elected to the Texas legislature in 2002; after ten years, won a US House seat.
  • Education is key for both. Joaquín focuses on getting poor students through college, Julián on funding full-day pre-K in San Antonio.
  • Since Joaquín's 2013 marriage to Anna Flores, who works for a San Antonio tech firm, Julián's wedding ring [he's married to Erica, a schoolteacher] is no longer the giveaway.
  • Says Joaquín: "When I was in San Antonio, probably ten times a day they called me mayor, so I'm hoping he gets some of that in Washington."

This article appears in the July 2014 issue of Washingtonian.

Posted at 10:45 AM/ET, 06/24/2014 | Permalink | Comments ()
They’re really tired of all the criticism of Washington’s NFL team. By Benjamin Freed
Virginia State Senator Chip Petersen, a big fan of the local NFL team. Photograph by Flickr user VCU CNS.

Several Virginia state legislators are taking a bold stand against what they see as a federal incursion against one of their state’s best-known companies. Meet the Redskins Pride Caucus, a club of delegates and state senators united in defense of Washington’s NFL team, which was stripped last week of its federal trademark protections because its name is, in the words of the US Patent and Trademark Office, “disparaging to Native Americans.”

Well, State Senator Chap Petersen and Delegates Jackson Miller and David Ramadan have had enough of what they call “inappropriate involvement” by the federal government in the ongoing conversation about the Washington team’s name. In a press release, they also say their new caucus is dedicated to “providing a voice” for fans and season-ticket holders; supporting the franchise as a business, which is headquartered in Ashburn; and supporting “commercial freedom” and intellectual property rights.

But the top priority appears to be defending a team name that, as its many critics point out, is defined by most dictionaries as a racial slur against Native Americans. Petersen, a Fairfax Democrat, is especially sensitive.

“As with so many recent opinions in the twilight of the Obama era, this one reeked of political correctness, i.e. the Orwellian principal that all viewpoints matter but some matter more than others,” he wrote on his blog following last week’s trademark ruling, which the team is appealing. “Ironically, the most disparaging sports names—‘Yankees,’ ‘Fighting Irish,’ ‘Canucks’—continue on undisturbed. Because insulting a group without a historic grievance is considered no insult at all.”

For the record: Merriam-Webster defines “yankee” as a native of New England or northern United States and “canuck” as a person born and raised in Canada; neither is defined as offensive. The origins of “fighting Irish” are apocryphal, ranging from a large number of Irish-American student-athletes at the University of Notre Dame to the appropriation of widespread anti-Catholic sentiment at the end of the 19th century. The Washington NFL team’s name comes from an attempt by original owner George Preston Marshall’s attempt to “honor” coach William Henry Dietz, whose claims of Native American ancestry remain disputed.

Petersen, Miller, and Ramadan are also cheesed by a May 22 letter from 50 Democratic US senators to NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell, urging him to persuade Washington owner Dan Snyder to change his team’s name. The team responded with a “#RedskinsPride” Twitter campaign, which backfired miserably.

But besides a bunch of local politicians giving themselves another platform to gripe about perceived federal overreach, the new caucus also gives the Washington team to trot out its recently hired lobbyists. According to the Associated Press, representatives from McGuireWoods passed through the Virginia State Capitol with bags of burgundy-and-gold team swag for interested lawmakers.

Posted at 05:31 PM/ET, 06/23/2014 | Permalink | Comments ()
More than two months after losing the Democratic nomination, Gray is still frosty about his party's choice. By Benjamin Freed
Photograph of Gray by Flickr user chesbayprogram. Photograph of Bowser by Flickr user crystalndavis.

Since winning the Democratic mayoral nomination on April 1, Muriel Bowser has held many events featuring her fellow party members, including primary opponents like Jack Evans, Tommy Wells, and Vincent Orange. She’s even won the support of Marion Barry, who earlier this month pledged his support to help Bowser “kick David Catania’s ass,” as the mayor-for-life said at a fundraiser.

But there’s one prominent local Democrat Bowser still hasn’t convinced: current Mayor Vince Gray, who in an interview Thursday morning on NewsChannel 8 again declined to endorse her.

“I haven’t come out with any public statements as of yet,” Gray said when host Bruce DePuyt asked if the mayor is ready to line up behind Bowser.

Gray and Bowser shared an uncomfortable hug at a “unity breakfast” three days after the primary, and while Gray said he has met with Bowser several times since then, Gray’s statements today suggest she hasn’t made much of an impression since beating him on April 1 by 10 percentage points.

“I really want to hear what her vision is on the future of our city,” Gray said today. Apparently, 15 months of campaigning and debating by Bowser still leaves details to be desired.

Gray also called recent mayoral entrant Carol Schwartz a “credible candidate.” He didn’t endorse either Schwartz or Catania, both former Republicans, but fully embracing Bowser sounds a long way off, too.

“If I was Gray, I’d never endorse Bowser,” says Chuck Thies, a Democratic consultant who served as Gray’s motor-mouthed campaign manager. “How can any legitimate politician endorse an empty suit?”

Gray suggested in his TV segment that he might get off the fence eventually. “Ms. Bowser and I have met on more than one occasion,” he said. “There’s no doubt we’ll talk about this.”

Posted at 12:28 PM/ET, 06/19/2014 | Permalink | Comments ()
Looking for the perfect echo chamber in which to settle down? Try this questionnaire that matches partisanship with neighborhoods. By Benjamin Freed
Photograph by Flickr user ep_jhu.

A Pew Research Center survey released this month says that as the United States becomes increasingly partisan, more people try to live with areas with politically like-minded residents. Liberals prefer more urbanized, pedestrian-friendly areas, while conservatives show preferences for suburban and rural expanses.

While it’s easy enough to pick out red states and blue states, it can get a bit trickier at the neighborhood level. Not anymore. Research firm Clarity Campaigns has created a questionnaire determining where a person should live based on their politics, down to the Zip code.

The tool, based on voter file information, asks users seven basic questions about their political natures, including party identification, positions on gun control and abortion, and religious attendance. Although Clarity Campaigns is a Democratic firm, the results—at least for the Washington area—are startingly accurate. For instance, if someone looking to live in the District selects the obviously liberal responses—more gun control, higher taxes—to all seven questions, the questionnaire returns Zip code 20009, which includes communitarian enclaves like Mt. Pleasant.

Say you attend church often and favor restrictions on abortion and you get sent to 20057, the Zip for Georgetown University—think rectories housing Catholics priests.

A pocket of Alexandria is the most liberal-friendly zone in Virginia, while in Maryland, that distinction goes to Zip code 20912, also known as the People’s Republic of Takoma Park. Turn the dials all the way to the right in Maryland, and you land on a sleepy town in the state’s far western panhandle called Accident.

Try it out below and see if you need to put your house on the market to satisfy your politics.

Posted at 02:41 PM/ET, 06/17/2014 | Permalink | Comments ()