What a bunch of jerks.  We all know that curriculum combatting dating violence has an obvious social benefit.  However, speaking as a policy guy, I also think that it has economic benefits regarding worker productivity and all sorts of other ancillary economic benefits.  It is about time we did something like this.

Or should we call them the "Date Rape 14?"  Ugh.

One word: reprehensible.

Oh and yes, the move to WordPress gets a thumbs up :)

I'm curious as to how these 14 justified voting against this bill - has anyone heard?  And Landes is my Rep. - sheesh!

...if I were a woman, I'd stay far away from these guys.

What?  Is there not enough anti-gay verbage in that addition to the bill? 

Or maybe that it's chief patron, Ward, is a Democrat and these "R" guys want sole control over anything that deals in sexual matters.

Seriously, what gives with voting against education regarding violence?

Sexual Assault Response Program in Central Virginia makes visits upon request to any school. Their program is informative and non-threatening.According to the statistics reported by their educators a woman is raped every 6 minutes and most rapes go unreported. Most women know their rapists. This is a frightening statistic.

There are only a few schools in this area that do not participate. Unfortunately that's a few too many.
Although Cline is not my Delegate he needs to be "called" on this NO vote.

We will definitely use this against Carrico as we unseat him this year.

Does anyone have a better theory than this to explain what's wrong with these guys?

There are some (primarily Republican) voting blocks that band together and anyone who breaks with their ranks finds their chairmanships and even their favorable committee assignments re-allocated as a form of discipline.  Their votes are for the retention of their own power base rather than for their constituents or even their own personal beliefs and they justify it as the fact that by having the powerbase they have they feel they are able to be more influential on behalf of their constituents.... some of the worst circular logic and rationalization comes into play here and the real citizens and the public loses.

Where can I find the reasoning for the "nay" votes by the 14 delegates?  Rather than just objecting to their vote, I would like to respond to their reasoning.  Disagreement coupled with principled argumentation would probably be more forceful than simple rejection of their vote.