VOL. 59 NO.5

NEWS LETTER University of Virginia • Institute ofGovernment JANUARY 1983

THE 1982 ELECTION FOR U.S. SENATOR IN VIRGINIA By Larry Sabato

Virginia and American politics. (Byrd and interested in the nomination; these included Mr. Sabato is assistant professor ofgovernment at the his father had continuously held the Senate former Attorney General Andrew P. Miller, University of Virginia. This News Letter is excerpted seat for nearly fifty years.) Byrd's decision to Senate Majority Leader Hunter B. Andrews, from a chapter in the forthcoming Virginiq Votes 1979­ 1982, to be published by the Institute ofGovernment in retire served to reinforce the new era of two­ and Delegate Owen Pickett of Virginia the spring of1983. Allfootnotes in that chapter have been party competition that had begun more than Beach (the state party chairman). In order to deleted here, because ofspace limitations. a decade earlier, and it set off a flurry of reduce fratricide and give the eventual activity in both parties. Democratic nominee a headstart equal to Among Republicans, First District U.S. that of the unopposed Trible, Democratic Representative Paul Trible, who had made leaders, including Governor Charles Robb, The results of the November 1982 no secret ofhis senatorial ambitions since his initiated a series of meetings and informal elections in Virginia gave both major first days in the House of Representatives, surveys that involved the potential candi­ political parties reason to rejoice. The and who had been campaigning for the dates, the key party officials, and others, all Republicans gained a U.S. Senate berth and nomination for over a year in case Byrd designed to arrive as a consensus choice for the Democrats won three U.S. House seats. retired, immediately became the GOP front­ the Democratic nomination. Eventually, the But the clearest message of the Old Domin­ runner. Despite grumblings from many in consensus formed around Pickett, and the ion's elections in 1982 was that Virginia, in the party that Trible was too young and too other potential candidates dutifully with­ its elections at the state and congressional ambitious, senior Republicans like former drew from consideration. district levels, had become one of the most Governor John N. Dalton, U.S. Representa­ As the Democratic party repeatedly has competitive two-party states in the nation­ tive Stanford E. Parris, and former Delegate proven, its coalition is tenuous and fragile. a state where close elections are now Wyatt Durrette declined to challenge Trible; In this case, Pickett in his campaign kick-off commonplace, where reversals of power are and so Trible received his party's nod by reverently invoked, without qualifiers, the frequent, and where neither party can take acclamation in a June convention. name of Harry F. Byrd, Jr. Tha~, coupled any election for granted, even those featur­ The Democratic story was more compli­ with the failure of several black-sponsored ing incumbents. At the same time, the GOP's cated. A number of major Democrats were bills in the recent legislative session, was victory in the statewide U.S. Senate contest, while narrow, suggests that this two-party competitiveness still has a Republican tinge; THE 200th ANNIVERSARY OF THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION when all campaign advantages and disad­ In 1987 Virginia and the nation will celebrate the 200th anniversary of the United vantages are relatively equal or balanced, the States Constitution; the final page of this News Letter discusses some of the special state's electorate will lean to the GOP's significance that this commemoration holds for citizens of the Commonwealth. nominee. This News Letter reviews the 1982 Governor Charles S. Robb has designated A.E. Dick Howard, Counselor to the election for U.S. senator in Virginia, Governor, as the member of the governor's staff responsible for offering encouragement examining the voting results that gave the and support to groups and institutions planning activities during this Decade of the victory to Republican candidate Paul Trible Constitution. Professor Howard, .who was the chief architect of Virginia's current and analyzing the major campaign issues constitution, has written extensively about constitutional law and history. that contributed to Trible's win. Governor Robb has also designated the Institute of Government at the University of Virginia to offer staff assistance and to be responsible for actual coordination of, and THE PARTY PRELIMINARIES assistance to, groups and institutions as they undertake plans for events marking aspects The unpredictable twists and turns that of the constitutional decade. Under the aegis ofthe Institute, an ad hoc steering committee have come to characterize Virginia politics has met several times to share information on activities being planned around the since the demise of the Byrd Organization Commonwealth. Timothy G. O'Rourke, a research associate and assistant professor at were much evident in the winter and spring the Institute, is specifically responsible for overseeing the Institute's role of information of 1982. Ironically, the son of the machine's gathering and sharing and of assistance to those wishing it. longtime boss was primarily responsible for Individuals or groups desiring further information are invited to contact either Mr. the tumult. In late ovember 1981 Harry F. Howard (address: Office of the Governor, Richmond, Virginia 23219) or Mr. O'Rourke Byrd, Jr. unexpectedly announced his (address: Institute of Government, 207 Minor Hall, University of Virginia, Charlottes­ retirement from the U.S. Senate, thereby ville, Virginia 22903). ending a remarkable era in the annals ofboth 18

enough to send black state Senator L. THE GENERAL ELECTION RESULTS the Roanoke Sixth, and the Piedmont Douglas Wilder into the fray. Wilder Seventh) by substantial, though not over­ declared Pickett unacceptable and threa­ After an acrimonious general election whelming, margins. Trible's Fifth District tened to run as an independent in the general campaign, Republicans elected a senator in majority of 52.9 percent was unusually low, election, thereby drawing crucial black votes November, and Trible narrowly defeated perhaps reflecting the success of an earlier away from the Democratic candidate and Davis by 724,571 votes to 690,839 votes, or a black voter registration drive there that almost certainly resulting in the election of margin of51.2 percent to 48.8 percent. Trible helped to produce a large, heavily Demo­ the Republican nominee. Mediation efforts carried fifty-eight ofninety-five counties and cratic black vote on election day. by Governor Robb failed and, in the end, nineteen of forty-one cities in fashioning his Even while losing, Davis won five of the Wilder's threat and the coincident failure of statewide victory. state's ten congressional districts: the the low-key Pickett to excite the party forced Geographically, the key to Trible's elec­ Norfolk-Virginia Beach Second, the Tide­ Pickett to withdraw in early May. Inciden­ tion was his home congressional district, the water Fourth, the Southwest Ninth, and the tally, at the time of his withdrawal, Pickett First, which includes Newport News, Hamp­ Northern Virginia Eighth and Tenth dis­ already had secured a pledged majority of ton, the Northern Neck area, and the Eastern tricts. In the Second, Eighth, and Tenth the Democratic convention delegates (the Shore counties. Normally a marginally districts, however, Davis's pluralities were mass meetings having already been held), Democratic area, the First District, with a well below expectations, p imarily due to and therefore was the neminee-presumptive. high turnout, generated a plurality of 28,375 disappointing showinKs in the suburban He is thus one of the few candidates in any votes for its favorite son. Since a strong localities of Fairfax County and the City of American state ever voluntarily to have Democratic candidate usually can count on Virginia Beach. (Davis lost the latter by a turned down a cert~in U.S. Senate nomina­ a First District plurality of at least 10,000­ shattering 10,000-vote margin, perhaps tion for a reason' other than scandal or 12,000 votes, Trible's margin in the First reflecting in part a residue of bitterness personal illness. represented a net gain for Republicans of about the Democrats' treatment of native Wilder withdrew the day after Pickett's almost 40,000 votes-more than Trible's son Owen Pickett .earlier in the year.) The withdrawal, and Democrats began a mad statewide plurality of approximately 35,000 Ninth District also proved to be a substantial scramble to find a standard-bearer. Candi­ votes. disappointment to Davis; his narrow 52 dates tested the waters, took the plunge, and Besides the First District, Trible also percent majority was surprisingly small in a then retreated to the beach with dizzying carried four normally Republican districts Democratic-leaning area with substantial speed. Party leaders overwhelmingly fa­ (the Richmond Third, the Southside Fifth, unemployment. vored Lieutenant Governor Richard J. Davis as a proven vote-getter and the 1981 ticket-leader. Yet 'Davis, fearing that a Table 1. The Urban Vote in the 1982 Virginia General Election for U.S. Senator sufficient campaign war chest could not be raised, took his name out of consideration. Percent of Percent of Votes Cast for Another potentially strong contender, state Urban Measure Total Vote Davis (D) Trible (R) Senate Majority Leader Hunter B. Andrews, 49.5 50.5 also became discouraged and renounced a Urban Corridor a 58.1 possible candidacy. Standard Metropolitan Other more willing contenders did sur­ Statistical Areas b 64.9 49.2 50.8 face, most of them with regionally concen­ Central Cities 18.0 60.4 39.6 trated followings. These included liberal Suburbs 46.9 44.9 55.1 former U.S. Representative Joseph L. Fisher 31.8 48.1 51.9 of Arlington, the Secretary of Human Rural Areas c Resources in the Robb administration's cabinet; moderate Fairfax Count Com­ SOU CE: COlllpiled from official election results provided by the State Board of monwealth's Attorney Robert Horan; and Elections. populist state Senator Virgil Goode of Rocky Mount. None of these candidates a Includes eighteen cities and eighteen counties located in a geographic area that proved entirely satisfying to party leaders, stretches from Northern Virginia through Richmond to Tidewater. who once again began pressuring Davis to accept a draft. Finally on convention eve b The nine Standard Metropolitan Statistical Areas (SMSAs) for Virginia are (June 4), Davis announced that he would Charlottesville, Danville, Lynchburg, Washington, D.C., Newport News-Hampton, accept a draft. Finally on the convention's Norfolk-Portsmouth-Virginia Beach, Petersburg-Colonial Heights-Hopewell, Rich­ opening day (June 4), Davis announced that mond, and Roanoke. The Charlottesville and Danville SMSAs were first designated after he would accept the Senate nomination, the 1980 census. The Johnson City-Kingsport-Bristol SMSA of Tennessee and Virginia which he won easily the following day on the has not been treated as metropolitan in this analysis. "Central cities" and "suburbs" are second ballot. Ironically, the Democratic included in the SMSA figures. party had emerged from all the tumult unified and with one of its strongest possible c All Virginia localities not included in either the Urban Corridor or the Metropolitan nominees-a man who could not have run in categories. normal circumstances, having been firs .. elected to statewide office less than a year earlier. 20

The setting of an election is especially was unable at a crucial moment in the Perhaps in part because of these issue important, and state and national politics campaign to reach undecided voters as differences, Trible was able to secure the served as vital backdrops to Virginia's U.S. frequently. Moreover, most of Davis's ads, backing of important "conservative coali­ Senate race. First of all, the Democratic while giving voters "good" reasons to vote tion" independents such as former Delegate sweep of state offices in 1981 raised the against Trible, did not really give voters a W. Roy Smith, who had supported Demo­ stakes in the 1982 contest. Republicans were compelling reason to vote/or Davis. The last crat Robb in 1981. (While Davis also was anxious to prove 1981 an aberration, and to vital phase in campaign advertising must able to attract some of the important reestablish their statewide dominance. Thus, provide such positive motivation to the coalitionists, including former U.S. Repre­ despite the serious doubts that party elders electorate, and in this crucial respect the sentative Watkins Abbitt, the number was had about Paul Trible, Republicans rallied Davis commercial program fell short. far fewer than the number that had been around the young congressman since his active in Robb's camp.) Trible also received campaign organization was already in place The Trible media expenditures were the active campaign support ofconservatives and party unity would be essential to a supplemented by extensive, sophisticated in the Republican party who had never,been general election victory. The Democrats in national GOP advertising and personal enthusiastic about Marshall Coleman (such 1982, by contrast, wanted to sustain their appearances by President Reagan urging as former Governor Mills Godwin). newly generated momentum. But, flushed voters to "stay the course" and elect Despite his advantage on policy issues, with victory, Democrats proved unable to Republican congressional candidates. Na­ Trible was kept effectively on the defensive cope with success, as the party once again tional GOP pollsters reported that such for much of the general election campaign. dissolved into bickering factions and torpe­ advertising helped to increase President First, the Davis forces centered their attack doed its "consensus" candidate, Owen Reagan's popularity by several percentage on a Trible "internal campaign memoran­ Pickett, in a spring season full of recrimina­ points in the last few days ofthe campaign­ dum" that was sent to several hundred party tions. The popular if reluctant Davis, a gain that also seemed to register for many workers and contributors. This memo acceptable to all factions as a compromise of the GOP's Senate contenders across the inaccurately claimed that in a New York choice, restored party unity; but Davis was nation. In Virginia, the advertising may have meeting labor leaders, after viewing Davis drafted so late that he began the race with helped to draw GOP strays back to the fold television ads, secretly had pledged a large severe financial and organizational handi­ and to increase turnout in Republican areas sum to the Davis campaign, to be delivered caps. The financial gap was so enormous like the Sixth and Seventh congressional in the campaign's final days. No such pledge that, barring free spending from his personal districts, where pollsters earlier had detected or presentation apparently was made; in fortune, Davis never had any hopes of a tendency among some Republicans to sit fact, no Davis ads had even been produced at matching Trible's expenditures. In addition, out the Senate race, and a tendency among the time of the alleged presentation. The Davis's age (sixty-one years, compared with some conservative independents to favor inability ofthe Trible campaign to document Trible's thirty-five years) and comparative Davis. Trible's war chest also permitted a far the charges, and its refusal to retract them, lack of ambition and drive for the Senate more extensive "get-out-the-vote" phone kept the issue alive for weeks, depriving post ensured that the Democrat could not bank effort than the Democrats could Trible of momentum at a crucial time. make up on the stump what he lacked in afford. Republicans traditionally have out­ money. performed the Democrats in this crucial Secondly, Davis focused on Trible's The national political setting also was electoral task, though Robb's well-heeled participation in U.S. House votes during crucial. Midterm gains for the Democrats campaign came close to matching the GOP 1982. Trible, who had promised not to let his were to be expected by historical standards; effort. campaigning interfere with his duties as a but the national Republican party, far better congressman, compiled only a 75 percent financed and organized than the Democrats, The Trible campaign used its advertising voting record in 1982, the lowest in the would try to minimize those gains. Virginia, to highlight the Republican's conservatism Virginia delegation for at least a decade. with its history of support for the GOP in and the Democratic nominee's alleged (Trible's overall voting record for his six general and President Reagan in particular, liberalism. One ofthe GOP candidate's clear years as· a House member was over 90 was a natural target for the GOP's money advantages in a campaign that was dominat­ percent, however.) Whatever the actual and campaign technology. ed by negativism on both sides was his importance of the missed votes, the charges In the end, Trible's financial and techno­ adherence to conservative positions on clearly had' some effect politically and kept logical advantage was perhaps the most certain policy issues, such as military and Trible off balance. crucial factor in his narrow victory. The defense spending, capital punishment, the Finally, the Davis camp skillfully stressed Republican candidate outspent his Demo­ third year of the Reagan tax cut, and the the stylistic contrasts, as they perceived cratic opponent by close to a 2-to-l margin Reagan administration generally. While them, between the older, white-haired Davis, (about $2.02 million for Trible to $1.18 Davis was able to narrow the differences on whose manner was relaxed and straightfor­ million for Davis). In the vitally important these and other issues, Trible's position was ward (if uninformed on key issues) and the final ten days of the campaign, the Trible closer to the Virginia mainstream, at least as young, intense, and ambitious Trible whose camp was able to invest close to $500,000 in measured by public opinion polling. Virgin­ public utterances and gestures often ap­ television and radio advertising alone-a ians, for example, consistently have given peared artificial and rehearsed. Davis's Virginia campaign record for that time higher popularity ratings to President assets, and Trible's faults, were enthusiasti­ period. The Davis organization, by contrast, Reagan than has the country as a whole, and cally advertised on television and on the spent little more than half that amount for they overwhelmingly favor capital punish­ stump by the Democratic candidate's fore­ media advertising in the final days and thus ment. most supporter, Governor Charles Robb, 21

who realized that a Davis victory would suggests one major reason for the poor Davis the Democrat. Virginians with a high school boost his national stock. showing: he received just 53 percent of the education or less were inclined to cast their If Davis had the better of Trible for much Catholic vote. This percentage was remark­ votes for Davis; the more highly educated of the fall, Trible did well when it mattered ably low, given the fact that Catholics in voted for Trible, except that those with the most-in the closing days of the campaign. other states were supporting Democratic highest levels of education (at least some In an age of looser party identification and candidates in 1982 by a margin more than 10 graduate or professional school training) growing numbers of independent voters, percent higher than Davis's margin. Davis were Davis voters by 56 to 44 percent. events in the final days are becoming himself was an active Catholic, unlike the increasingly important. In Trible's case, not protestant Trible; Davis apparently would CONCLUSION only his large advertising and organizational have been the first Catholic ever elected U.S. expenditures but also a number of last­ senator from Virginia-a fact not lost to Paul Trible, then, won election to the U.S. minute events worked in his favor. In the many Catholics in an overwhelmingly Senate in 1982 with a voting constituency final week of the campaigl1, the National Protestant state. that was heavily Republican, independent, Rifle Association used radio and direct mail Further insight into the Senate contest can white, and conservative and wa di \Jro r­ to its membership to attack Davis as being be gained from some other demographic tionately male, white-collar and profession­ pro-gun control. Davis was, in fact, on breakdowns provided by the NBC/ AP exit al, high-income, non-union, Protestant, and record as opposing gun control. Some poll. The "gender gap" was a factor in the well educated. The Trible co~stituency was a individuals, acting independently of the Virginia race: men favored Trible by 52 to 48 classically Republican coalition. And even Trible campaign, spread a false rumor that percent, while women preferred Davis by a though it is loosely aligned, this GOP black state Senator L. Douglas Wilder of larger 54 to 46 percent. (Across the country, coalition-with the exception of 1981-has Richmond would be Governor Robb's too, women voted disproportionately De­ held together to produce a series ofRepubli­ choice to replace Davis as lieutenant mocratic.) Davis won 82 percent of the can victories in Virginia, some narrow and governor should Davis win the Senate race. relatively scarce liberals and 55 percent of others expansive, for more than a decade. And perhaps most importantly of all, anti­ the moderates, but Trible scored heavily Yet viewed in another perspective, the abortion handbills and pamphlets, labelling among the more plentiful conservatives, elections of 1982 merely underline the Trible "pro-life" and Davis sympathetic to winning 73 percent oftheir votes. While both growing two-party competitiveness that has abortionists, were distributed at Catholic candidates ran very strongly among their come to characterize statewide political (and some Protestant fundamentalist) party adherents-Trible winning 92 percent contests in the Old Dominion. The narrow churches throughout the state, especially in of the Republican vote and Davis 94 percent Republican statewide victory in the U.S. Northern Virginia .and Tidewater, on the of the Democratic vote-the crucial swing Senate race was balanced by the major Sunday prior to election day. (Significantly, independent bloc chose Trible by a decisive Democratic gain of three U.S. House seats neither Trible nor Davis supported a 61 to 39 percent margin. Blue-collar workers and the preservation ofthe large Democratic constitutional amendment to ban abor­ and union members favored Davis in majority in the Virginia House of Delegates. tions.) overwhelming numbers; non-union, white­ So if 1982 provided an important boost for There is some electoral evidence that the collar, and professional workers backed Republicans reeling from their 1981 elector­ abortion issue had political consequences. Trible by more narrow proportions. Those al disaster, it proved as well to be a year of Davis ran considerably worse than expected with annual incomes under $25,000 were in considerable consolation for the Democrats. in both Tidewater and Northern Virginia, Davis's camp; higher-income individuals The vigorous two-party competition on the two areas in the state with the greatest favored Trible. Perhaps because of appre­ display once again in Virginia was yet concentrations of Roman Catholics. An hension about possible changes in social another welcome sign of the health and NBC News/ Associated Press exit poll of security, the normally Republican-leaning vitality of the state's modern political sys­ 2,252 Virginia voters as they left the polls retired population voted 56 to 44 percent for tem.

Persons or institutions may be placed on the mailing list to receive copies ofthe News Letter by sending a written request to News Letter, 207 Minor Hall, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, Virginia 22903. The complete mailing address should be printed or typed, and the Zip Code should be included. 19

THE SUBURBAN VOTE plurality. In addition, Trible won rural Davis's O'wn 95.5 percent a year earlier. Virginia narrowly, by 51.9 percent to 48.1 While Trible had had some success in The most important demographic feature percent for Davis, thereby adding another attracting black votes in his earlier U.S. of the vote in the 1982 Senate election was 17,000 votes (net) to the GOP's column. The House races in the First District, his 5.7 the return of the suburbs to the Republican central cities, though, held firm for Davis. percent statewide black proportion was little party. In the 1981 gubernatorial contest The Democrat's 60.4 percent of the central­ better than Marshall Coleman's unusually Democrat Charles Robb and Republican city vote was reduced somewhat from low 3.6 percent in 1981. Trible received the Marshall Coleman had almost equal support Robb's 1981 margin of 64.5 percent (thanks same percentage as Republican gubernato­ from suburban localities; and Democrat in good part to Trible's Newport News­ rial candidate Mills Godwin in 1973, and less Richard Davis, in his successful bid for Hampton pluralities); however, Davis's than the 7.1 percent won by John W. Warner lieutenant governor, had secured 52.3 central-city net plurality of 53,000 votes was in his successful 1978 senatorial bid. percent of the suburban vote (the largest still above average for a Democrat. The Not only did blacks vote overwhelmingly majority of any Democrat running statewide suburbs cast 46.9 percent of the total 1982 for Davis, but also their turnout was at a since 1973). The 1981 suburban margins for statewide vote, an all-time record; and when record high level for recent off-year elec­ Democrats had broken a twelve-year pattern that is compared with the central cities' total tions. The sample of predominantly black in which the suburbs had fueled every statewide vote of only 18.0 percent, it is clear precincts indicates that approximately 68.9 statewide GOP victory by giving sizeable that Trible had the more substantial demo­ percent of registered Virginia blacks partici­ majoriti s to Republican candidates, en­ graphic base. pated in the 1982 midterm contests, up from abling them to overcome Democratic plural­ 67.5 percent in 1981 and far above the 56.4 ities in the central cities and rural areas. percent level of the last off-year senatorial In 1982 the suburbs reverted to form and THE BLACK VOTE election in 1978. Black turnout exceeded awarded Trible 55.1 percent of the vote, a white turnout for the second consecutive showing comparable to the GOP's past Much of Davis's central-city majority was year, and by a slightly larger margin in 1982 winners and almost five percentage points provided by blacks. As Table 2 shows, a than in 1981. Black opposition to Reagan­ higher than Marshall Coleman's 1981 sampling offorty-three predominantly black omics and an extensive registration drive in suburban proportion (see Table 1). Trible's precincts indicated that Davis received Southside Virginia sponsored by the state suburban majority was about 68,000 votes, about 94.3 percent of the total black vote, NAACP and the "Virginia Action" coalition fully double that of his statewide winning not far from Robb's 96.4 percent showing or were two possible explanations for the large turnout. Whatever the cause, Davis received more than a quarter of his total vote from blacks; Trible, by contrast, carried about 56 percent of the white vote to fashion his slim Table 2. Voting in Selected Predominantly Black Precincts in Virginia Cities, 1982 statewide victory. General Election for U.S. Senator Total Percent Turnout VOTER TURNOUT City Number of Votes of Registered Percent ofVotes Cast for Precincts Cast Voters Davis (D) Trible (R) The turnout of voters was larger than usual, not only in the black community but Black Precincts: also across the state. About 63.4 percent of Charlottesville 1 616 60.1 84.4 15.6 the registered voters and 34.7 ofthe potential Virginia Beach 1 . 647 61.2 82.7 17.3 electorate (those aged eighteen and over) cast a ballot in the 1982 senatorial contest. Hampton 2 2,479 68.1 83.0 17.0 While turnout was down slightly from the Newport News 8 6,329 74.5 6.2 93.8 1981 level, it was marginally higher than the Norfolk 10 11.058 71.8 94.7 5.3 participation rates in the last two off-year Portsmouth 2 3,025 78.9 97.6 2.4 U.S. Senate elections (in 1970 and 1978). Richmond 15 13,628 64.0 95.9 4.1 Virginia was following the national trend in Emporia 1 278 70.2 92.9 7.1 1982; in the U.S. as a whole, voter turnout Petersburg 3 2,939 67.8 97.3 2.7 was up from 37.9 percent in 1978 to about 41 percent of the potential electorate in 1982. Totals 43 40,999 68.9 94.3 5.7

DISSECTING THE TRIBLE VICTORY

SOURCE: Compiled from official election results provided by the State Board of Elections are complex creatures, and any Elections. fair analysis of an election-particularly a close one such as the 1982 Senate contest­ NOTE: Identification of the specific precincts used in this analysis is provided in the must allow for the wide variety of factors forthcoming Virginia Votes 1979-1982, to be published in the spring of 1983 by the that shaped the outcome of 1.4 million Institute of Government. individual voting decisions. 22

THE CO"NSTITUTION AND THE COMMONWEALTH: COMMEMORATING THE 200th ANNIVERSARY OF THE U.S. CONSTITUTION IN VIRGINIA By A.E. Dick Howard

In 1987 the nation will celebrate the 200th even thought of, Virginia served as a it was Virginia's attachment of a proposed anniversary of the drafting of the United laboratory for spawning and shaping the bill of rights to its ratification of the new States Constitution, which took place at the ideas of constitutional government. Virgin­ Constitution that led, with the convening of Philadelphia Convention in 1787. The ians took a leading role in the actual making the First Congress, to the adoption of the bicentennial of the Constitution provides a of the Constitution. Finally, in the ensuing federal Bill of Rights. special opportunity for Alnericans-and two hundred years, Virginia has proved to be In the ensuing two hundred years, Virginia Virginians in particular-to study and to a testing ground for constitutional precepts. repeatedly has been the scene of struggles think about the fundamental principles of As early as the seventeenth century, over the shape and meaning ofconstitutional our political system and to look ahead to the American constitutionalism was stirring in imperatives. It is perhaps ironic that a challenges facing American democracy as we such Virginia developments as the drafting Virginian, James Madison, refused William enter the third century of constitutional of Virginia's 1606 charter, with its proclama­ Marbury a commission that gave another order. tion that the colonists should enjoy the Virginian, John Marshall, the opportunity "privileges, franchises, and immunities" of to declare the power of judicial review in The 200th anniversary of the Constitution Englishmen. In 1619, the New World's first Marbury v. Madison. Later generations calls for a commemoration not only of the representative assembly met at Jamestown. have seen clashes arising from Virginia in grand convention at Philadelphia; it also In the eighteenth century, as the colonists such areas as school desegregation, voting requires recognition of events leading up to broke with the mother country, Virginia was rights, and freedom of the press. that convention and of subsequent at the fore. The same convention at Wil­ Whether the events have been sources of developments-such as the adoption of the liamsburg that, in fvlay 1776, called upon pride, such as the Statute for Religious Bill of Rights-that collectively comprise Virginia's delegates in Congress to introduce Freedom, or less praiseworthy, such as the what we call the founding period. Thus, the a resolution for independence created a era of "massive resistance," Virginia seems bicentennial of the Constitution is rightly committee to draft a constitution for destined to have been a forum for the regarded as a celebration of the events Virginia. Virginia's Declaration of Rights working out of constitutional norms. From leading from Revolution to the establish­ proved the model for bills of rights in the the beginning, constitutional development in ment ofthe constitutional order and beyond; other states and ultimately for a federal bill Virginia has taken the form of a dialectical indeed, some have called the 1980s the of rights and, an ocean away, even influ­ dialogue between competing ideas-states' "Decade of the Constitution" and, in a sense, enced the drafting ofthe French Declaration rights and nationalism, liberty and equality, the commemoration of two centuries of of Rights. judicial activism and restraint, and other constitutional government is already under­ In the years between 1776 and 1787, dualities. way. Virginia milestones along the road of George Mason, in his 1776 declaration of As the American people seek to under­ constitutionalism included, on the domestic rights for Virginia, called upon Virginians to stand their constitutional heritage, Virginia scene, such events as the adoption of undertake a "frequent recurrence to funda­ has a special opportunity to contribute to the Thomas Jefferson's Statute for Religious mental principles." As we mark two hundred process of reflection and discussion. More Freedom and, looking to the states general­ years since the making of the United States than any other state, Virginia can claim to be ly, the call for the meeting of commissioners Constitution, Virginians should carry a the fulcrum in which the principles of at Annapolis, which led in turn to the special responsibility for reflecting on what America's constitutional heritage was Philadelphia convention. Once the federal our constitutional system has become and shaped. Long before the Constitution was Constitution had been laid before the states, what we want it to be.

UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

NEWS LETTER

(ISSN094!~217!) r.:,:l '$4: Executive Editor / James A. (Dolph) Norton Managing Editor / Sandra H. Wiley m:bts~:r:;~~ir~n:c=;~~:~~~~~e~: ia 22903. Theviews andopinionsexpresse