Governor Patrick Morrisey took to social media Friday evening.

“West Virginians are still waiting for the Legislature to deliver meaningful income tax relief to our citizens,” Morrisey posted. “Today is Day 52 of the 60-day session. Time is running out. Demand your Delegate and Senator pass income tax cuts NOW!”

A question to Morrisey on X asking whether the post should be interpreted to mean five percent is too little — or whether he would reject such a deal as part of a budget agreement — went unanswered.

.@MorriseyWV is this post to be interpreted as 5 percent is not enough and / or not a deal you’ll accept? https://t.co/22IEgR6kgD

— T.J. Meadows, Co-Host MetroNews Talkline (@TJMeadows304) March 6, 2026

My view is the governor thinks 5 percent is not meaningful.

Morrisey made the post after a few important developments that add context.

The House and Senate had just reached an agreement on the state’s next fiscal year budget. While that budget does not contemplate a 10 percent tax cut, prevailing wisdom around the Capitol suggests House leaders stand ready to allow the governor a 5 percent cut generated through reduced revenue estimates from his office. After all, the legislature may not change the governor’s revenue estimates and funding the cut via lower estimates doesn’t directly require cuts on the expense side.

Senate Finance Chair Jason Barrett has said the 5 percent is important to the Senate. There’s no reason for the Senate to pass on a relatively sure thing they’ve already ironed out with the House. As Barrett said, the latest version represents the final compromise with the House. The parties have reached agreement – it’s done.

Plus, the governor surely knows – the legislature all but wrote it in crayon – any such cut wouldn’t come before the budget is back in their hands to handle any line-item veto.

Why would he make a post knowing these things, unless unhappy with the amount?

Given that calculus, the governor’s post reads as something close to an outright rejection of the legislature’s plan and the five percent. Morrisey appears willing to forgo a deal — one where everyone could claim a win — for the opportunity to potentially bank more political capital from the failure to achieve what he considers “meaningful” tax relief. A failure he would lay at the feet of the legislature.

That strategy could backfire.

Morrisey’s post, along with the reposts that followed, drew mixed reactions. Many responses pointed to poor road conditions and suggested tax cuts should wait until infrastructure improves. Water system needs were mentioned frequently, and special education funding surfaced in the comments as well, along with a bent to focus on property taxes instead of the income tax.

Legislators are no doubt paying attention to those reactions and could use them to their advantage — especially in the House. You’ll recall that chamber originally messaged their desire for no incremental tax cut beyond the current trigger mechanism.

The legislature’s passing the budget early already weakened the governor’s line-item veto power. This self-imposed push now risks something else: Morrisey losing any tax cut altogether. Anecdotally, social media feedback suggests many voters would be comfortable with that outcome.

If House leaders — who remain firmly in the driver’s seat on this issue — respond by simply leaving the five-percent tax cut bill in a desk drawer and instead direct the surplus created by the already lowered revenue estimates toward roads, water systems, or special education, the governor loses the battle entirely.

And if Morrisey ultimately accepts the five-percent deal after this heavily-viewed public post, he risks looking politically weakened against a legislature that stood its ground. What could have been framed as a negotiated victory suddenly looks like a retreat on his part.

It almost feels as though the legislature handed the governor enough rope, confident he might use it.

Looking further ahead, there’s another complication. If voters ultimately receive better roads instead of a modest income tax cut — just as voters seemingly want — how does the governor campaign on the issue later? It becomes difficult to argue lawmakers should be replaced for refusing to cut taxes when the result is infrastructure improvements many voters were asking for in the first place.

Whether the post was carefully calculated or simply off-the-cuff, Morrisey has backed himself into a corner. How — and how successfully — he navigates out of it remains to be seen. But, the great ones always find a way. Maybe Morrisey will or maybe he won’t?

The post Social Media Post May Backfire on Morrisey appeared first on WV MetroNews.

The big story coming out of the Capitol Thursday was the budget. The Senate amended its budget after receiving the House’s version and then rolled the document back across the Capitol. The House passed the compromise measure Thursday evening.

Veteran newsman Brad McElhinny has all the details.

A few observations — and a few hopes — as we close in on the final week of the session.

The House now holds the strongest hand moving forward — essentially all of the leverage. Legislators around the Capitol were quick to point out the governor would receive the budget Friday. The implication was that legislative clerks would turn the document around quickly in order to start the five-day clock on the governor. Under the Constitution, he has only five days to review the budget and issue any line-item vetoes.

The House and Senate are largely in lockstep at this point. If the governor redlines any provisions, the Legislature will still be in session and can easily override any line-item veto it does not like. Moving the budget this early effectively strips the governor of much of his leverage — a goal the House appeared to have from the beginning.

There is additional motivation beyond the political embarrassment that comes with having vetoes overridden. The issue of the tax cut is also looming. The governor created headroom for that proposal by reducing his revenue estimates by roughly five percent as opposed to any cuts in his budget.

But as House Finance Chairman Vernon Criss has repeatedly reminded anyone who will listen, the budget is an expenditure bill. It does not produce a tax cut. That requires a separate law. The governor can set the revenue estimates as he pleases, but minus a law to lower taxes, the lower revenue estimates would end up producing a surplus.

The tax cut bill is still sitting on Chairman Criss’ desk in House Finance. And it may end up producing more than just the governor agreeing to play nice with his line-item veto pen.

TEAM West Virginia — House Bill 4001 — is, in my view, the single best proposal currently on the table to change the trajectory of West Virginia’s economy. Successful ventures don’t cut their way to prosperity; they grow their way there. The structure TEAM West Virginia would create could help do exactly that — removing much of the politics from the process and focusing solely on closing economic development deals. That should be the metric that matters and we should let experienced developers lead the way without interference.

The House gave up quite a bit in the budget negotiations with the Senate — items the governor also wanted. The Hope Scholarship is funded at five quarters using surplus dollars as opposed to general revenue and legislation that would add guardrails died. That’s a win. The House also appears willing to meet in the middle on a five-percent tax cut. That’s reasonable give-and-take and the governor can claim a clear win beyond the current trigger mechanism. He can legitimately claim to be a tax cutter in his own right.

My hope is that TEAM West Virginia becomes part of the final agreement, or already is, between the House, Senate, and the governor. Admittedly, that may not happen, but my hope reflects reality – the state needs this program.

If holding the five-percent tax cut bill in reserve helps move Governor Morrisey — some say he’s not the biggest fan — toward supporting TEAM West Virginia and a firm agreement to make it law, then so be it. A deal on the program’s merits would be preferable, but time is of the essence and how it gets done isn’t as important as ensuring it does.

Otherwise, West Virginia risks missing one of its best opportunities to grow the economy, keep our people here, and build long-term prosperity. Too big a gamble not to pull out all the stops to see the program become law.

The course of legislative events between now and Day 60 will prove the hypothesis right or wrong. Here’s hoping it’s right.

The post House Holds the Leverage as Budget Moves to Morrisey appeared first on WV MetroNews.

Meanwhile, he continues to drop hints about nationalizing elections while making the baseless charge that the only way Democrats can win is if they cheat. One of his administration’s efforts to subvert elections has reached West Virginia.

The Justice Department is suing West Virginia and at least two dozen other states to try to force them to turn over private voter data.  U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi has said the legal action is about “election integrity,” but it is really a fishing expedition to try to gin up evidence, no matter how inconsequential, that the administration can use to discredit election outcomes they don’t like.

Fortunately, West Virginia Secretary of State Kris Warner, along with top election officials in many other states, are fighting back.  Warner has told the Justice Department he will turn over the same public voter registration information available to anyone, but he will not disclose private data, including voters’ Social Security numbers, driver’s license numbers, emails, or phone numbers.

Warner will not comment on the issue now that a federal lawsuit is pending, but he did say in a release prior to the lawsuit, “West Virginians expect secure elections and the assurance that their personal information is protected. That remains my commitment, and I have no interest in turning over the entire State’s unredacted voter list for some brownie points from the federal government.”

Good for him. Know that Warner is no RINO. He is a lifelong Republican, a former chairman of the state Republican Party, a former Trump delegate to the nominating convention, and even a onetime Trump appointee as state Director for USDA Rural Development.  In a state where Trump is exceedingly popular, the easy route would be to kowtow to the heavy hand of Trump’s Justice Department, which Warner has refused to do.

The bad old days of corrupt West Virginia elections are a distant memory. The Secretary of State’s office for the last nine years under Kris Warner, and before him his brother Mac Warner, has worked with the 55 county clerks to clean up the state’s voter rolls. Over 400,000 names have been removed for a variety of reasons—they have died, moved away or were ineligible to vote.

And don’t think those 400,000 people have been voting. The cross-checking that takes place by resolute poll workers every election means it is extremely difficult for illegal votes to take place.

As a result, West Virginia continues to responsibly fulfill its constitutional obligation (Article 1, Section 4, Clause 1) of prescribing the “times, places and manner” of holding elections for federal officers. Recent history dictates that West Virginians can be confident that voting here is free and fair.

Donald Trump’s constant attempts to bend the law and democratic norms to his whims are a threat to the integrity of the republic. The only bulwark to the precipitous slide is when other individuals in power, particularly members of his own party, put their legal and constitutional responsibilities above fealty to an individual.

The post SOS Warner rebuffs Trump’s voter registration fishing expedition appeared first on WV MetroNews.

Raylee’s Law is less than a page long. It’s somewhat surprising that such a succinct bill has generated so much controversy.

House Bill 5669 — named after Raylee Browning — would prohibit a county school board from approving home instruction for a currently enrolled public-school student if there is a pending child abuse or neglect investigation involving the child’s custodial parent, guardian, or proposed instructor. But the restriction applies only when that investigation was initiated by school personnel under mandatory reporting laws.

Under the bill, the county superintendent must be notified when such a report is filed and confirm within 48 hours whether an investigation has been opened. If so, home instruction is paused during the investigation. If the complaint is not substantiated within seven calendar days — and no other eligibility issues exist — the student must be permitted to begin home instruction.

A similar bill in the Senate failed to clear committee and prompted a discharge motion from Sen. Joey Garcia on the floor Monday. That effort failed.

The proposal has become a flashpoint for a few homeschool advocates, who argue it represents government overreach and an attack on school choice.

But that claim weakens under scrutiny, particularly when considering what the bill does not do.

The legislation applies only when an investigation is triggered by school personnel under mandatory reporting requirements. Reports from any other source would not prevent a student from homeschooling.

Truancy is not a trigger in the bill.

And if parents have already notified school officials of their intent to withdraw their child for homeschooling, private, or parochial education, a subsequent report would not activate the restriction.

Additionally, the House version requires that any such report be substantiated within seven days. If it is not, the student must be allowed to begin home instruction or transfer schools.

Still, critics remain concerned.

“This bill has gross overreach on parental choice and the decisions that parents have on the direction of the education of their children,” said Roy Ramey of the West Virginia Home Educators Association during a House Education meeting Monday.

Ramey raised concerns about families seeking to escape bullying, curriculum disputes, or conflicts with school personnel. He argued the decision to homeschool is deliberate and thoughtful — not made “willy nilly.” He warned of the possibility that school personnel could file preemptive reports as a means to stop the transfer to homeschool if they suspect a family intends to withdraw a child.

Ramey noted he wasn’t casting accusations against school personnel but was instead pointing out potential downfalls of the law.

Another hypothetical raised in committee discussion: what if the reporting teacher is the one abusing the child and uses the report to prevent the student from leaving?

Sen. Amy Nichole Grady, a public-school teacher and supporter of the bill, said on Talkline Tuesday the bill would not apply if parents are removing a student due to suspected abuse by school personnel.

Mandatory reporters filing a false claim is a misdemeanor under West Virginia law

Ultimately, this debate comes down to balancing parental rights with child protection.

Homeschooling is a lawful and valuable educational option in West Virginia. Nothing in this bill eliminates that right. Instead, Raylee’s Law narrowly addresses a specific concern: preventing a parent or guardian who is under investigation for abuse from removing a child from public view during that investigation. A means to ensure any parent under legitimate suspicion may not slip into the night.

The bill is targeted, time-limited, and tied directly to existing mandatory reporting laws. It does not apply broadly but is instead surgical in application. And it includes a clear, short window for resolution.

Reasonable people can debate its merits. But it’s not a sweeping attack on homeschooling as some would have people believe. It’s a narrowly tailored child-protection measure that holds with common sense.

Confusing possibility with probability – the idea that a teacher might use the law for a nefarious purpose compared to the odds of that happening – is not reasonable justification to kill the bill, especially with the safeguard Grady noted.

Del. Shawn Fluharty, an architect of the legislation, says the bill will receive an up or down vote in the House. Good.

Senate leadership should ensure the same if the bill passes the House.  Lawmakers on both ends of the Capitol shouldn’t hesitate to pass it and Governor Morrisey should eagerly sign it.

To share your thoughts, visit the MetroNews facebook page.

The post Raylee’s Law Protects Kids appeared first on WV MetroNews.

  But this week is the 99th anniversary of the state capital in Charleston being on fire, literally. 

 In the first week of March in 1927, the so-called “Pasteboard Capitol” fire in Charleston happened.  Once it started, within hours, the entire structure was reduced to ashes.  It was the second time in just six years that West Virginia’s seat of government was destroyed by fire.   

  The “Pasteboard Capitol” got that nickname for good reason.  After the previous West Virginia state capitol burned down in January 1921, the “Pasteboard Capitol” went up in just 42 days.  It was a 166-room, wood-frame building made primarily of wood and wallboard, hence the nickname the “Pasteboard Capitol.”

  The “Pasteboard Capitol” was right downtown, where the old Daniel Boone Hotel was later erected.  There’s an office building, the 405 Capitol Street building, on that site now.  

  As the story goes, once the lot was sold after the fire in 1927, more deals were made by state legislators in the Daniel Boone Hotel’s bar than had ever occurred at the “Pasteboard Capitol.”

  Thankfully, no was hurt or died in the fire.  Most of state’s critical records weren’t lost either, because most had already been moved to the newly completed West Wing of the current capitol or were safely stored in the nearby Capitol Annex.  

  With the “Pasteboard Capitol” destroyed by fire, the race to finish the current capitol accelerated.   

  The current West Virginia Capitol opened on June 20, 1932, our state’s 69th birthday.  The final cost was just under $10 million, an enormous sum at the time, considering it was during the absolute depth of the depression, when the Dow Jones was hitting historical lows and the unemployment rate was at 25 percent.  

  The cost to build it today would be staggering.  Adjusted for inflation,

$10 million in 1930 would be worth $195 million now.  Construction costs for a building of that scale and quality, with its 23-karat gold leaf, Imperial Danby marble, and hand-carved limestone, would easily put the final bill somewhere in the neighborhood of between $500 million and $1 billion. 

  That’s a neighborhood West Virginians don’t live in and rarely even visit. 

  And it’s a long way from the old “Pasteboard Capitol” that blazed its way into the dust, and cinders, of history, 99 years ago this week. 

The post Remembering the “Pasteboard Capitol” fire appeared first on WV MetroNews.

Iran’s Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, is dead. Good. His killing marks the end of one of the most consequential and purely evil figures in modern Middle Eastern history — a man whose regime defined itself in opposition to the United States, Israel, and the Western world.

For decades, Khamenei presided over a government openly hostile to American interests. The historical record reflects that hostility clearly.

The confrontation between Iran and the United States began almost immediately after the 1979 Iranian Revolution, when revolutionary students seized the U.S. Embassy in Tehran and held 66 Americans hostage for 444 days — a crisis that severed diplomatic relations and reshaped U.S.–Iran relations for generations.

Violence soon expanded beyond Iran’s borders. In 1983, a suicide bombing destroyed the U.S. Embassy in Beirut, killing 63 people, including 17 Americans. Six months later, a truck bomb leveled the U.S. Marine barracks in Beirut, killing 241 American service members.

Hezbollah, widely assessed by U.S. intelligence officials to have been organized, trained, and supported by Iran, was blamed for those attacks. The pattern continued through the 1980s with additional embassy bombings, kidnappings, and assassinations carried out by Iranian-backed militants across Lebanon and the region.

In later decades, the conflict shifted to proxy battlefields in Iraq and Syria. During the Iraq War, U.S. officials accused Iran of supplying explosively formed penetrators to Shiite militias — weapons linked to the deaths of hundreds of American troops.

Tensions again escalated in 2019 when a rocket attack on Iraq’s K-1 Air Base killed a U.S. civilian contractor. Washington blamed Kata’ib Hezbollah, an Iran-backed militia. Days later, militia supporters stormed the U.S. Embassy compound in Baghdad, leading to the U.S. strike that killed IRGC commander Qassem Soleimani. Iran responded directly in January 2020, launching ballistic missiles at U.S. bases in Iraq and injuring more than 100 American service members — a rare instance of overt state-to-state military confrontation.

The proxy conflict intensified again following the October 7, 2023 Hamas attacks on Israel. Iran-aligned militias carried out repeated rocket and drone strikes against U.S. forces across Iraq and Syria. The deadliest came in January 2024, when a drone attack on the U.S. outpost known as Tower 22 in Jordan killed three American service members and wounded dozens more.

Beyond the battlefield, U.S. authorities have repeatedly disrupted alleged Iranian-linked plots abroad and even on American soil, including a 2011 plot targeting the Saudi ambassador in Washington and later alleged assassination schemes against former U.S. officials.

Across four decades, the strategy attributed to Tehran remained consistent: avoid full conventional war with the United States while projecting power through proxy organizations — Hezbollah in Lebanon, militia groups in Iraq, the Houthis in Yemen, and aligned forces operating throughout the region.

That history raises an unavoidable question: how long is too long? Surely, Khamenei and his circle had it coming.

President Donald Trump is a polarizing figure. Opinions about him are firmly set. Much of the heat he receives is well earned and justifiably raised. He’s often narcissistic, crude, and short on the truth among other flaws.

But it’s worth asking whether public reaction would differ if the same action had been taken by a president viewed as more traditionally presidential. A president viewed as a good guy and not a heel. The policy itself — not merely the personality behind it — deserves examination.

What comes next matters most.

The death of a leader does not automatically bring peace. But it better ensures a non-nuclear Iran, an opportunity for the Iranian people to determine their own future, and perhaps a path toward greater regional stability.

Americans will debate the wisdom of this moment — they should. Debate is healthy in a democracy and all viewpoints deserve consideration. Someone who raises concerns over U.S. action in Iran — or outright opposes it — should not be villainized or labeled unpatriotic. Their voice is protected by the same rights protecting those of supporters and wholly required in a democracy. What good is debate if everyone always agrees?

But amid disagreement, one principle should remain constant: support for the men and women in uniform carrying out national policy, and prayers for both our troops and the leaders charged with decisions that carry enormous consequence.

Many West Virginians will need the love and support of neighbors moving forward as they deal with the knowledge that family and friends serving in the region are close to harm. May they find peace in this time and may their loved ones remain safe and protected as they serve our country.

To share your thoughts, visit the MetroNews facebook page.

The post Long History with Iran Adds Context to War Decision appeared first on WV MetroNews.

Friday commentaries lately have taken the form of a legislative download from the week. So, here goes.

Governor Patrick Morrisey teased a major economic development announcement on social media just days ago. Thursday, he delivered: a $4 billion intelligence center — what most people simply call a data center — headed to Berkeley County. It’s welcome news and a significant investment in the state. Brad McElhinny has the full story.

This one belongs to the governor. The win is clearly his — a project secured entirely during his administration, without credit carried over from prior leadership. Local economic developers and lawmakers certainly played important roles, and the governor acknowledged that appropriately. But after criticism that the administration had yet to land a marquee project, this announcement helps change that narrative.

Success, however, carries its own burden. One win creates expectations for many more. It will take more wins to silence critics, along with tax dollars actually hitting the bank.

Not long after the announcement, Delegate Daniel Linville of Cabell County was outside the Capitol running those tax numbers. Using an Excel calculator he built around last year’s passed funding formula, Linville estimated roughly $54 million annually in new tax revenue flowing to state coffers.

Berkeley County would retain 30 percent — just over $16 million. Roughly $27 million would flow to the Personal Income Tax Reduction Fund. A little more than $2.7 million each would go to the Water Development Fund and the Electric Grid Stabilization Fund. The remaining $5.4 million would be distributed statewide under existing formulas.

That means counties benefiting even without hosting the project. According to Linville’s calculations, Cabell County would see just over $300,000 annually. Mercer County nearly $194,000. McDowell County about $62,000. He ran each county.

Not a bad payday, especially when another county handled the heavy lift.

Which raises a fair question: why oppose projects like this instead of hoping one lands in your own backyard? Especially odd considering much criticism comes from those living in counties that could desperately use the revenue

Meanwhile, TEAM West Virginia, the JobsOhio-style economic development initiative long discussed at the Capitol, remains unfinished business.

The concept originated in the House. An early agreement anticipated the Senate introducing the bill and taking the lead. That never happened for reasons passing understanding.

TEAM West Virginia is about as close to a no-brainer as policy proposals get. House leadership has now taken control of the effort, fast-tracking House Bill 4001 to establish the program.

The likely reality is this: if a Senate version failed to advance earlier, support inside that chamber may still be uncertain. Advocates quietly acknowledge the uphill path ahead and some worry the Governor’s Office has not fully embraced the concept either.

It would be a mistake to conclude Thursday’s data-center announcement proves TEAM West Virginia unnecessary. The opposite is true. Programs like this exist to make successes happen faster and more often — shortening timelines and improving the state’s competitiveness for future investment.

As Delegate Matthew Rohrbach noted on Talkline, 49 other states aggressively compete for economic development opportunities. West Virginia must do the same.

Failure to pass TEAM West Virginia would represent one of the largest missed opportunities of this legislative session — perhaps several sessions. There’s still time to avoid that outcome.

The Hope Scholarship deal appears to be a good one. The issue isn’t finished — it will almost certainly return next year — but allowing time for enrollment data and calmer discussion between now and then is a sensible path forward.

The House budget pulls LEDA (Legislative Economic Development Assistance) dollars out of the governor’s span of control, instead placing those dollars within the State Treasurer’s office. No surprise after the dust up earlier this year. Legislators don’t believe the governor should have a say in scrutinizing their grant allocations, especially given the legislative approval process. Placing the dollars elsewhere is the legislature removing his opinion from the process indefinitely and a message on their refusal to surrender prerogative when it comes to the purse strings.

And finally, a lighter moment.

First Lady Denise Morrisey stopped by the AARP broadcast location Thursday just after we wrapped the show. Having never met her before, it was nice to visit. She spoke proudly about her granddaughter — as any grandparent would — and graciously endured a few stories about my kids.

Plainly, the governor married up. Many of us, including me, can say the same; the governor will forgive stating the obvious as he surely would agree.

The First Lady mentioned speculation that House Finance Chairman Vernon Criss may have been unhappy about she and the governor attending a recent House Finance committee meeting involving Hope Scholarship discussions.

Her point was straightforward: the meetings are public and held in a public building. That’s true.

The tension, real or perceived, likely comes down to tradition. Governors rarely attend legislative committee meetings unless invited — and first ladies almost never do. Mrs. Morrisey has attended several. That is certainly her prerogative.

Some lawmakers view uninvited attendance as similar to a friend dropping by without notice. Others see no issue at all.

It’s understandable that some may also feel the practice is a bit heavy handed resembling a pressure tactic.

I’m told Chairman Criss did not mind either the governor or first lady being present. That seems about right. Criss has been around a while and has a thick skin. It would take much more to concern him.

Enjoy the weekend!

The post A Data Center Deal, Moving TEAM WV, Pushing the Governor Out of LEDA & More appeared first on WV MetroNews.

Sources close to the process say a deal has been reached on the House Finance–originated bill that would place various levels of restrictions on the Hope Scholarship beginning in fiscal year 2027. Thursday’s happenings should confirm whether that understanding holds.

As the agreement currently stands, there would be no substantive changes to the Hope Scholarship for the upcoming program year. The only adjustment would be a cash-flow management change, shifting payments from two distributions per year to four quarterly installments.

NEWS from Dave Wilson: Future of bill making changes to Hope Scholarship remains uncertain

A good deal is one where every party gains something and leaves something behind. By that definition, this appears to be a good deal.

Hope Scholars and their families would not have to navigate new eligibility rules or restrictions, or lose any amount of funding already promised for the coming year from a proposed cap. Even small rule changes this close to a program year create uncertainty, and avoiding that disruption is beneficial. Quarterly payments may be less convenient for some families, but they should not create material hardship.

Legislators concerned about rising enrollment — more so the financial obligations that follow — have raised legitimate fiscal questions. Those concerns are now formally on the record. With another full year of participation data ahead, lawmakers will have clearer enrollment projections before revisiting the issue. One consistent refrain during debate has been: wait until we have better numbers. This agreement does exactly that, preserving the ability to reconsider the program’s fiscal impact next year.

The originating bill also appears to have served another purpose: leverage in the broader budget negotiations quietly underway between House and Senate leadership. By introducing potential Hope changes, the House created political space for Senate members to prioritize protecting the scholarship program over supporting the governor’s proposed tax cut.

NEWS from Brad McElhinny: The House bakes its version of the budget bill and adds some spice

Fiscal conservatives skeptical of the governor’s budget — particularly the proposed 10 percent personal income tax reduction — secured something significant in return. Medicaid and most Hope Scholarship spending are now positioned within general revenue funding, relying on tax dollars reasonably expected to materialize rather than surplus dollars that may or may not appear. That aligns with the fiscal best practice of funding ongoing obligations with general revenue dollars. Combined with leaving some general revenue unallocated for contingency, this approach reflects a more cautious fiscal posture. Spending every dollar allocated – general or surplus – without a cushion is NOT fiscally responsible.

Fiscal policy aside, however, the manner in which the budget process is unfolding raises concerns.

During Wednesday’s budget presentation from the floor, House Finance Chairman Vernon Criss noted that while Governor Patrick Morrisey appeared in his committee – unusual for a governor – during Hope Scholarship discussions, the governor has not met directly with him or Vice Chairman Clay Riley regarding the budget itself.

It’s no secret that Criss and Morrisey have a strained relationship. Personal chemistry is not required for governing, but communication is. The absence of direct outreach to key House Finance leaders has puzzled lawmakers and reinforces concerns about the governor’s ability to build the legislative relationships necessary to advance his agenda.

As one legislator privately observed this week: “If I were governor, I’d be up here every day working with legislators to get buy-in. He doesn’t do that.”

Nothing is final until a budget bill is passed and signed.

The expectation inside the Capitol is that the Legislature will ultimately pass a budget, however, early enough in the session to allow time for overrides of any line-item vetoes the governor may issue.

It remains to be seen how the politics of the budget process will or will not affect the upcoming Republican primary campaigns… betting it will is not unsound.

The post Legislators Appear to Have a Deal on Hope Scholarship appeared first on WV MetroNews.

Did you watch 60 Minutes Sunday night?

The segment, titled “Left Behind,” profiled McDowell County and the continued struggles of its people.

McDowell Countians likely appreciate the attention. But the story has been told before — many times — and little has changed. There is little reason to believe this report alone will alter the county’s trajectory.

Residents correctly note their situation has worsened over time. Political control has shifted between parties in Washington and Charleston, yet outcomes remain largely the same. That reality points to a hard truth.

McDowell’s problems are not primarily political. They are economic, geographic, and topographic — and problems like these are rarely solved through politics alone.

Government funding matters, and public investment will always play a role. But the more difficult ingredient may be sacrifice — difficult decisions made by the community itself about what the county’s future should look like.

Consider the numbers.

McDowell County generated just under $533 million in GDP in 2023, an improvement from prior years. Yet poverty rates have reached as high as 37 percent, more than three times the national average. About 17,000 people live in the county today, down from roughly 19,000 at the last census.

Unemployment has improved — 9.6 percent as of last December, compared with more than 16 percent in July 2020, according to Federal Reserve data. Still, it’s difficult to determine how much of that decline reflects job growth versus population loss or workers leaving the labor force altogether.

The county covers approximately 535 square miles, almost entirely mountainous terrain. More than 21 percent of residents are over age 65.

Those statistics reveal deeper structural challenges:

• GDP per square mile sits just under $1 million. That sounds substantial until compared nationally, where averages range from $5–6 million, with West Virginia itself around $1.6 – 2 million.
• Population density stands near 35 people per square mile. The U.S. average is about 94, West Virginia roughly 75, and Kanawha County nearly 280. A huge delta.

These figures illustrate McDowell County’s central dilemma: building and maintaining modern infrastructure across rugged terrain, vast distances, and a limited economic base.

If McDowell County is to survive long-term, the community faces an uncomfortable question — whether its future requires consolidation into denser population centers? A question other West Virginia counties may soon face too.

Popular? Certainly not.
Necessary? Absolutely, minus a miracle.

Ten towns remain scattered across the landscape. Water systems originally built with coal-era revenues are aging, while the tax base that supported them has diminished. Constructing entirely new systems across the county may be unrealistic, while investment in a centralized hub — such as Welch — could prove more sustainable.

The same question applies to electric infrastructure. Miles of distribution lines serve a shrinking population. Would service costs fall if residents lived closer together? Yes. Would modernization become more feasible if infrastructure demands were concentrated rather than dispersed? Yes.

A larger, more centralized population could also create palatable conditions for entrepreneurship and private investment that remain challenged today.

Plainly put, the McDowell County of the past cannot simply be restored. It must be reinvented.

What that reinvention looks like should be decided by the community itself — if it is willing to have that conversation. Without it, meaningful change is unlikely.

Relocation from outlying areas toward a central community like Welch would be difficult. It would carry emotional, cultural, and generational consequences and sacrifice.

But if consolidation represents the only viable path forward, the harder question becomes unavoidable: Is a painful transition preferable to continued decline or ceasing to exist altogether?

That’s up to residents. But if they are willing to try, that collaboration, that willingness opens the door to funding conversations that could lead to meaningful change and survival.

The post 60 Minutes Prompts Larger, More Meaningful Questions appeared first on WV MetroNews.

The Education Savings Account program has successfully provided families with educational opportunities that may have otherwise been out of reach while also growing into a significant financial obligation within the state budget. The program expands this year, and all school-aged children in West Virginia are eligible for the program at an estimated cost to the state of $300 million.

That has caught the attention of legislators who are concerned that the program is on an unsustainable financial path. That’s why a bill was introduced last week in the House of Delegates Finance Committee to apply guardrails to the program and begin to rein in costs.

The bill establishes a fixed annual amount of $5,200 for individual recipients, refines allowable expenses, and defines “participating schools” as private schools or microschools located in West Virginia.

Those opposed to the possible changes quickly expressed their concerns.

“This is a way to stop innovation and individualized educational opportunities, which many Hope families are specifically looking for,” said Senator Patricia Rucker, R-Jefferson.

“These changes would drastically change the benefits of the Hope Scholarship and dramatically decrease the parents’ ability to make decisions that best fit their child’s needs.”

Gov. Morrisey questioned the conservative bona fides of House of Delegates Finance Committee Chairman Vernon Criss in a post on “X.”

Tax cuts and school choice used to be page one of the Republican platform— guess House Finance Chair Vernon Criss hasn’t gotten that far.

— Patrick Morrisey (@MorriseyWV) February 19, 2026

Special interest groups such as Americans for Prosperity WV and Cardinal Institute also weighed in portraying the proposal as an attempt to gut the Hope Scholarship program.

A texter to Talkline on Friday described how the Hope Scholarship has helped his family. His son, who was diagnosed with dyslexia, struggled in the public school system. Because of the Hope Scholarship, his son was able to attend Bishop Walsh School in Maryland and is now thriving.

While recognizing the successes of the program so far, we must also acknowledge the increasing financial obligations and engage in serious conversations about how to move forward in a financially responsible manner.

Guardrails on EAS programs are very common across the country. Among the 30 states that have some type of school voucher program, there are a variety of requirements. Some states emphasize special needs students while others prioritize students based on family income.

School choice advocates have praised West Virginia for its universal program, but philosophical principles are meeting financial realities.

Meaningful conversations about what, if any, restrictions are necessary to rein in the cost of the program. Hyperbolic speech and performative politics that appeal to the rage machine on social media do not contribute to a constructive conversation. They add confusion and frustration to the situation, distorting the discussion.

But maybe that is the point.

The post Performative politics and hyperbole overshadow Hope discussion appeared first on WV MetroNews.

That has been evident for years for anyone paying attention, but it becomes ever more apparent when Donald Trump does not get his way.  Take for example last week’s 6-3 U.S. Supreme Court decision striking down most of his tariffs.

Trump seethed and spouted personal insults at members of the court.

Trump, who knows no shame himself, said he was “absolutely ashamed of certain members of the Court, absolutely ashamed, for not having the courage to do what’s right for our country.”

As is his practice, Trump conflates what is best for the country with what is best for him personally.

He singled out Justices Amy Coney Barrett and Neil Gorsuch, who he appointed in his first term and who sided with the majority, as a “disgrace to our nation.” “They’re just being fools and lapdogs for the RINOs and the radical left Democrats—and…they are very unpatriotic and disloyal to our Constitution.”

Trump even accused the Justices of having been “swayed by foreign interests.”

Good grief.

The conservative Wall Street Journal opined that Trump “owes the Supreme Court an apology—to the individual Justices he smeared on Friday and the institution itself.”  The Justices would be wise not to hold their collective breath waiting for that.

Trump followed up his foaming rant with the imposition of a new 15 percent global tariff on all imports entering the U.S.  This new tariff is also legally dubious, but when has that ever stopped Trump?

Americans have borne the brunt of Trump’s ever-shifting trade duties, which amount to a tax on consumers. A paper published by the Federal Reserve Bank of New York earlier this month determined that “90 percent of the tariffs’ economic burden fell on U.S. firms and consumers.”

The Trump administration’s response was predictable.  White House economic advisor Kevin Hassett called for authors of the paper to be investigated and disciplined.  That’s in keeping with this administration’s practice of threatening to use the enormous power of the federal government to intimidate detractors.

Trump’s tirade against the Court included the invective that the Justices were “anti-American.”  This is yet another example of how this President of the United States fails to comprehend the very core of our country’s founding doctrine: We are a country of laws, and we are all bound by those laws and not subject to the whims of would-be oligarchs.

There is no hope Trump will acknowledge that, but it is high time members of his party take their solemn oath seriously and hold him accountable.

The post Trump hits a new low in his rant against the Supreme Court appeared first on WV MetroNews.

As much as numbers are to be loved — tools of logic that cut through emotion — the state budget is ultimately about politics. Those politics are now fully visible after House Finance released its committee substitute.

Veteran newsman Brad McElhinny has the full story.

There are several things to like about the House’s budget.

• First, it aligns with sound financial planning. Good budgeters don’t bet on the come when paying for obligations they know exist. Medicaid must be funded. Hope Scholarship commitments must be funded. Both are requirements under West Virginia law. Covering those expenses with general revenue — money reasonably certain to materialize — is more responsible than relying on surplus dollars that may or may not appear. History – surpluses ran in the past – is no guarantee of future success.
• Second, House Finance left roughly $30 million in general revenue unallocated for fiscal year 2027. The Governor’s proposal and the Senate version both spent every available dollar. The House chose a different approach: plan for uncertainty. Emergencies happen. Revenues fluctuate. Leaving a contingency provides stability when the unexpected occurs. Yes, West Virginia maintains more than $1 billion in rainy day funds. But those dollars are meant for true “break-the-glass” moments. Using them for routine pressures creates future obligations to replenish reserves and invites scrutiny from credit markets, potentially increasing borrowing costs for state projects.

None of that, however, is the real political story.

A mentor once framed opinions this way: take what I’m about to say, add a few bucks, and you might be able to buy a cup of coffee.

So be it here, too.

This budget exercise represents the House — and its leadership — pushing back on Governor Morrisey.

The evidence is ample: the House budget includes zero funding for the governor’s requested income tax cut. No ten percent. No five percent. Nothing. That’s not just fiscal prudence, it’s messaging.

Governor Morrisey faces an uncomfortable distinction, as one lawmaker put it privately: he’s the only one in the Capitol to have never cut taxes. Governors before him — primarily Jim Justice — did so heavily. Joining that club carries obvious political value.

The challenge for Morrisey is arithmetic and economic growth.

West Virginia can’t spend every penny it has without contingency — a Dave Ramsey-like emergency fund to cover routine expenses. The governor’s budget and the Senate’s budget don’t provide for such, and that’s fiscally concerning.

If economic growth were occurring, the existing trigger mechanism would automatically result in further income tax reductions. That hasn’t happened either, leading one to believe the economy isn’t growing fast enough to go beyond the originally conceived trigger structure.

West Virginia has already reduced revenue substantially through prior tax cuts. Funding another personal income tax reduction now requires either significant spending cuts — politically difficult or beyond just cost control — or replacing lost revenue with another tax. That’s hardly a compelling way to brand oneself a tax cutter and even a tax on vape products only yields $22 million of the $250 million required.

All of this unfolds while many West Virginians still drive on substandard roads, special education funding remains strained, and child welfare reforms require additional investment. The list is long.

Frankly, while an additional income tax cut might personally benefit some more than others, many residents would likely choose smoother roads, stronger schools, or better services over the relatively modest return they would see from another reduction. Remember, it’s 5 to 10 percent of the current bracket percentage – 4.82 percent in the top bracket currently compared to 4.34 percent as proposed in the Senate committee substitute – not an overall cut on effective rates.

Enter the Hope Scholarship and the effort to place guardrails around it.

Yes, reviewing allowable expenses is worthwhile. Continuous evaluation of public programs should always occur.

But policy review may not be the only motivation.

Operating again under the coffee metaphor — and political reality — Governor Morrisey appears to have stronger allies in the Senate than in the House.

“He’s got juice in the Senate, but not in the House,” as one lawmaker told me this week.

Fiscal conservatives in the Senate understand that dynamic, which helps explain why House members may be doing the heavier lifting early.

If the final negotiated budget resembles the House version — and that seems likely — passage will still require votes from senators aligned with the governor. Those votes may not come easily.

That’s where Hope Scholarship legislation could become leverage.

Revising the program creates negotiating pressure. It offers the House a bargaining chip: support the House’s more fiscally cautious budget, and the scholarship program remains largely untouched.

NEWS from Brad McElhinny: Legislation to refine the Hope Scholarship roils the Capitol

Meanwhile, the governor retains political tools of his own. A recent press release highlighting balances in Morrisey-aligned political action committees appeared less informational and more strategic — a reminder that campaign resources can be deployed for or against legislators who stand in support or opposition, respectively.

Many senators face credible primary threats, often from challengers with personal wealth or strong fundraising networks.

Do the math, and the dynamic becomes probable: senators must weigh loyalty to the governor against downside political risk of going against his budget desires, while the House uses potential Hope Scholarship changes to secure the budget framework it prefers — one that also denies the governor a signature tax-cut victory.

Architects of the strategy probably feel more senators “in the jackpot,” as one umpire famously said, are more likely to go with a no tax cut budget to protect Hope from restrictions, than would go against that budget and risk restrictions, thus abandoning loyalty to the governor.

All of this while insiders say they can move a budget out of the legislature early enough to block any gubernatorial line-item veto while still in regular session.

Governor Morrisey weighed in late Thursday afternoon via X.

“Tax cuts and school choice used to be page one of the Republican platform— guess House Finance Chair Vernon Criss hasn’t gotten that far,” Morrisey posted.

Reactions varied.

Would this analysis buy a cup of coffee on its own, or do I still need a few dollars to go with it?

The post Hope and Budget in the Game of Politics appeared first on WV MetroNews.

Founding Father James Madison wrote that when colonists began to challenge the warrantless searches and seizures, “American Independence was then and there born.”  Madison’s passion for protecting individuals from government overreach inspired the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which protects individuals from unreasonable searches and requires probable cause for warrants to be issued. The subsequent Fifth Amendment guaranteed due process for detained individuals.

These standards are bedrock principles of American democracy that have stood since they were ratified in 1791, but they are now being tested in West Virginia and across the country with the wholesale roundups being conducted by agents with the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).

Fortunately, U.S. District Court judges here have so far held true to the Constitution, while questioning the government’s tactics.  As our Brad McElhinny reported, “Federal judges in West Virginia have questioned whether law enforcement had probable cause for the initial (traffic) stops in immigration cases that led to jail and the courtroom.”

In the case of two non-citizens stopped along I-77 last month, Judge Joseph Goodwin wrote, “notably, the record contains no information regarding the justification of the initial traffic stops conducted by the state police.”

In that case and others, the government was consistently unable to show why individuals were taken into custody.  Federal Judge Irene Berger wrote in one case, “Everyone in the United States is potentially at risk if officers are free to detain and incarcerate people without having to justify detention.”

That sentiment was echoed by federal Judge Thomas Johnston in another case. “If the government may simply seize someone without due process, there is no check on its ability to seize anyone.”  He went on to write, “The law is clear: all persons present within our country are entitled to due process.”

Yes, the individuals in these cases entered the country illegally, but that typically is a matter of civil and not criminal enforcement unless there are outstanding criminal warrants.  In the West Virginia cases that came before the courts, the individuals were cooperating with the U.S. immigration system and had hearings pending.

The hearings before the West Virginia judges have resulted in the individuals who were arrested and detained being released.

The American ideal, codified in the Bill of Rights and reinforced by over two centuries of practice, begins with a guarantee of liberty and protections for individuals—including non-citizens—from government overreach. Even someone in the country illegally enjoys the benefits of due process.  The U.S. Supreme Court recently upheld that right.

Immigration is a mess.  The law is unwieldy, and the system is overwhelmed. Polls consistently show Americans want a secure border and for criminals in this country to be expelled.  However, those goals cannot be achieved by trampling on fundamental rights.

In cases so far, U.S. District Court Judges in West Virginia have held true to Madison’s principle and stood as a bulwark against the modern-day version of “writs of assistance.”

The post WV federal judges stop ICE overreach appeared first on WV MetroNews.

The state budget is the talk of the Capitol.

Each chamber alternates taking the lead on the budget, and this is the Senate’s year. The version passed out of Senate Finance on Monday makes several high-level moves.

Governor Morrisey identified roughly $125 million in offsets in his proposed budget — enough to cover a 5 percent personal income tax reduction. He left it to the Legislature to find the remaining 5 percent. With an election approaching, many lawmakers feel that left them in a tough spot: the appeal of an additional tax cut compared to the state’s ability to afford it.

Senate Finance proposed a tax on vape products expected to raise about $22 million, leaving $103 million in additional offsets it identified to close the gap. An offset is a budget tradeoff… choosing to cut or not fund some spending, or raise other revenue, to pay for a tax cut or new spending while keeping the budget balanced.

This document (Budget Presentation FY2027 with Surplus explanation) and the Senate’s budget bill outline broadly where those maneuvers occur.

Another major change involves Medicaid. The Senate moved Medicaid funding to the front of the budget, meaning it would be funded with general revenue. The Governor’s version contemplated using surplus dollars — revenue collected above official estimates. Surpluses may or may not come to fruition based on actual collections as remitted to the state. Granted, West Virginia has ran surplus after surplus in recent years, some say because of artificially lowered revenue estimates as set by the governor.

Medicaid is best presented in the front of the budget, a good move on the Senate’s part.

The Hope Scholarship is another major edit, at least in how it is funded. Hope was moved to the back of the budget to be funded with surplus dollars. The Senate reduced the Governor’s request by $38 million based on revised utilization rates presented by State Treasurer Larry Pack. Should a staple like Hope be in the back of the budget as opposed to the front? That’s debatable depending on your financial philosophy and bents around cashflow management.

Whether funded from one bucket or another — general revenue or surplus — both programs must ultimately be paid for.

Medicaid is non-negotiable because underfunding risks losing federal match dollars. That’s a non-starter.

Hope participants likewise expect their scholarship dollars, and state code establishes eligibility requirements creating a clear obligation for the state – at least for now minus any changes. And if changes are made, they likely won’t be well received. Who wants to give up a benefit they are currently realizing? Nobody.

Here’s what really sticks out. Practically speaking, both the Senate’s version and the Governor’s version of the budget would spend nearly every dollar the state could reasonably expect to collect – general revenue or surplus. That leaves little to no cushion and limited if any contingency planning.

Anyone who manages a budget is getting nervous right about now.

Traditionally, back-of-the-budget items are treated as “nice to haves” if finances allow. Not all surplus dollars are typically allocated in advance, preserving flexibility for unforeseen needs — items like emergency support for Hancock County Schools when it could not meet payroll due to financial mismanagement. Senate Finance advanced an $8 million measure Tuesday for that purpose, funded from unallocated surplus dollars.

What happens if another school system finds itself in need in fiscal ’27 when monies aren’t there for supplemental funding bills?

Timing also matters. Passing a budget from Committee this early from the lead chamber — on day 34 — allows the House to potentially move quickly. If both chambers agree on a budget and pass it before adjournment, lawmakers retain leverage to override any line-item vetoes from the governor. That becomes much harder once the session ends.

Politically, Governor Morrisey has more allies in the Senate than in the House. House Finance Chairman Vernon Criss is known for fiscal prudence and is not considered a Morrisey ally. Some fiscally conservative senators may be quietly counting on Criss to take a harder line on spending — or on the size of any tax cut.

That turns focus to Thursday when Criss’ plans to, at a minimum, address the budget in House Finance. That should provide a clearer signal on whether a personal income tax cut has a realistic path forward and to what degree the House may take the metaphorical sledgehammer to the Senate’s budget.

West Virginia faces real needs. Roads, special education funding, and child welfare among others — none of which currently see comprehensive game-changing increases in this proposal. Lawmakers must weigh whether residents prefer improved services now – with potential personal income tax cuts later through the already-enacted trigger mechanism – over an additional 10 percent cut today.

That’s the decision – the reckoning among their own ranks – lawmakers face.

The post Breaking Down the Budget appeared first on WV MetroNews.

  That’s understandable.  

  His name is hard to forget.  His first and last name are the same.  Morgan Morgan’s name is an example of a tautonym. 

  A tautonym is a name or a proper noun where the same word is used for both parts of the name. A tautonym is most commonly used in biology, it can also refer to people or places, too.  

  Today is the anniversary in 1735 of Morgan Morgan being commissioned as a Captain of Militia for the region that would become West Virginia.  Morgan’s company evolved into the 201st Field Artillery, which is recognized as the oldest continuously active military unit in America. 

  Morgan is best known as West Virginia’s first permanent settler, but that’s only part of the story.  

  Morgan was born in Wales and had already been educated at Cambridge when he arrived in America at the age of 24 in 1712.  Within a year of living in Delaware, Morgan had a wife and the first of eight kids, a son named James, was born a year later.  Morgan set up shop as a merchant and as a tailor.    

  The West Virginia portion of Morgan’s story begins in the early 1730’s.  

  At that time, the land that would become West Virginia was a rugged, isolated frontier on the western edge of the British Colony of Virginia. 

  Most people who settled here were not English aristocrats but of German, Scotch-Irish, and Welsh descent, moving south from Pennsylvania rather than west from the Virginia coast.  

  The Colonial Government encouraged settlement in the Shenandoah Valley, including the Eastern Panhandle to create a buffer zone between the established plantations and the potential threats from French expansion and, of course, the Indians.  

  Bunker Hill in Berkeley County was one of the few spots with permanent cabins by 1735.  The claim that Morgan was the actual first white settler is debatable, but he was clearly among the first and certainly the most memorable.  

  Morgan was a magistrate.  He was also the state’s first licensed tavern keeper and a key figure in building the area’s first public road.  In 1740, he helped establish Christ Episcopal Church, we know it today as Morgan’s Chapel in Bunker Hill, the first church in what is now West Virginia.  Morgan was described as a pious man who integrating his spiritual life with his leadership roles.

  Morgan died in 1766, but his influence on West Virginia remains to this day. His sons and grandsons fought in the Revolutionary War.  His son Zackquill helped establish the city of Morgantown and had a homestead set up on what is now University Avenue in 1772.

  Morgan Morgan,  more than just an odd name, a significant figure in West Virginia history. 

The post Morgan Morgan, not just a tautonym appeared first on WV MetroNews.

Debate is enjoyable. It advances issues, brings new ideas to light, and serves as a civic good. But — there’s always a “but” — when debate shifts from those virtues to arguments rooted in anger, when it becomes more about defeating someone than seeking a good outcome, it turns from good to bad.

Visiting a church Sunday morning to attend a baptism, the pastor delivered a metaphorical frying pan to the side of the head — and it was past due. Upfront, you needn’t be religious or spiritual to see the virtue in this text.

The key verse was James 1:19: “Understand this, my beloved brothers and sisters. Let everyone be quick to hear, slow to speak, and slow to anger.” In other words, be a careful listener, a thoughtful speaker, and a patient, forgiving person.

That prompted a moment of reflection that led to an “ouch” moment.

Day in and day out on Talkline and social media, debate over one question or another unfolds. Opinions — grounded in fact, at least conceptually — are readily offered. But too often, those responses come with the aim of proving someone wrong, of winning the argument. Too often they come without fully contemplating another’s words, and that can lead to anger.

It may be disguised in professional language and a thin attempt at civility, but it’s still anger. And even if others don’t see it, it’s there.

For avoidance of doubt, I’m talking squarely about me. My failure. My pride. My inability to be better.

Yes, it’s human instinct, but that shouldn’t be an excuse when better is possible.

Listening Sunday, internal monologue wrestled with that reality. Wouldn’t it be better if civil discourse remained civil, not a contest of right versus wrong? What if listening came first, with compassion for differing viewpoints? That might strengthen relationships and raise the level of care we show one another.

A bit of shame settled in at this point. A necessary reckoning that helps push past ego toward something better.

This struggle is likely not unique to my experience. Imagine what could be accomplished if the teachings of James guided our political discourse. The potential for betterment could be limitless.

So, as the issues of the day are discussed, feel free to hold this standard close. Offer reminders to listen first, speak carefully, and avoid anger — wrongfully aimed passion — when advocating any position. Call me out!

Winning a point isn’t worth losing sight of our shared humanity or the care we should have for one another.

If this is a familiar struggle, consider joining in the effort to do better. There’s room for everyone, and progress comes faster together.

Advocate strongly. Be steadfast in your beliefs. Defend them fiercely. Conviction is valuable. But carry the lessons of James along the way.

Be well.

The post Wakeup Call: Civic Discourse Shouldn’t be Fueled in Anger appeared first on WV MetroNews.

Let’s go rapid-fire on Capitol happenings from this week…

My Talkline tenure is only a little more than a year old, but politics has long been a pastime. From early fascination with West Virginia politics to a prior professional life tracking more than a dozen statehouses across the country — plus D.C. — a surprising, even startling, thing or two has come along the way.

Experience established, rarely has there been a more direct or caustic attack on the business community at the state level – at least from a chamber floor – than what House Majority Leader Pat McGeehan delivered this week.

“Perhaps they (the West Virginia Chamber and other business associations) oppose it (E-Verify) because a lot of the associations you just named love to make money at the expense of our people through illegal labor,” McGeehan said.

That’s a broad brush applied without evidence. Any business evaluating West Virginia could hardly be blamed for pausing after rhetoric like that. Politically speaking, Democrat challenger Quincy Wilson may have just received the best soundbite imaginable for a general election matchup.

Governor Morrisey continues pressing for a 10 percent personal income tax reduction this session. Whether it happens seems a matter of perspective.

Senate Majority Whip Ben Queen noted on Talkline that the Senate is working to find a path to 10 percent. House Speaker Roger Hanshaw, also on Talkline and in a press conference, pointed out the House was only presented a five-percent plan from the executive — suggesting the governor must first put a detailed 10-percent proposal on the table.

Prediction: 10 percent likely clears the Senate but runs into resistance in the House. Politically, that could leave the House absorbing criticism in an election cycle, though the chamber has increasingly styled itself these days as the home of fiscal caution under the dome. There’s value in that role. There’s also some political upside in opposing the governor here if properly messaged.

Several seasoned Capitol observers believe, however, the cut ultimately reaches the finish line. In an election year, few want to campaign against a tax reduction. Time will test that assumption.

On the school aid formula and special education funding, both chambers are exploring options, but the session clock is ticking and consensus remains elusive.

One lawmaker says it requires a special session. Another says a special session won’t work because of budget implications. The issue is multifaceted, and complexity slows movement.

Someone will need to quarterback the effort to move it. Senate Education Chair Amy Nichole Grady said on Talkline that she’s ready for that job and has asked the governor to make it so.

Realistically, increased special education funding — even if it falls short of the full need — may be the most achievable outcome this session. At best, it buys time and will help somewhat in filling what many see as the largest gap.

Kudos to Secretary of State Kris Warner on his decision to not release West Virginia voter information to the Department of Justice (DOJ) as requested and re-requested. West Virginia law is clear on the matter and Warner chose the rule of law over political pressure to acquiesce – no doubt extraordinary pressure at that.

Beyond Warner’s good example is the poor example DOJ chose to place front and center. If any agency should value the rule of law above all else, it most certainly should be the Department of Justice. Yet the department not once, but twice asked Warner to violate the law. Why? Surely, they can read and understand West Virginia law as clearly as Warner did. That question deserves an answer and action to ensure such an ask – an illegal one – doesn’t happen again.

The post Halfway Home at the Legislature appeared first on WV MetroNews.

Republicans were once known as a party supportive of business, especially small businesses. Judging from those pushing new mandates on private employers to use the E-Verify system, the evidence — at least as it pertains to some in the House — points in a different direction.

House Bill 4198, sponsored by Del. Elias Coop-Gonzalez, places several new requirements on private businesses.

First, it requires every covered employer to enroll in E-Verify and maintain an active employer account. Participation isn’t optional. If you are an employer under this article, you must be in the system.

Next, when someone is hired, the employer may put that person to work, but only provisionally. The new hire works conditionally while their eligibility is checked. The employer must still complete the verification even if the employee leaves or is terminated within the first three business days. A short stint on the job does not remove the obligation.

If E-Verify cannot confirm that a worker is authorized to work in the United States, the employer may not hire, continue to employ, or rehire that individual. Continued employment would violate the rule.

Finally, the bill imposes a record-keeping duty. Verification records must be kept for the duration of employment or at least three years — whichever is longer. The intent is to ensure a paper trail for audits or compliance reviews.

Taken together, the provision makes E-Verify a routine and documented part of hiring: enroll, verify every hire, act on the results, and retain the records.

Federal law already requires employers to complete I-9 forms and, in some cases, to use E-Verify. Noncompliance carries penalties, including fines. There is already a mechanism to ensure illegals can’t work here.

HB 4198 would have layered on additional state penalties that run into the thousands, although many of those were stripped out after delegates learned leveraging fines for enforcement was not in the state’s purview legally.

On third reading with right to amend Tuesday, the bill as amended was passed after lengthy debate.

If lawmakers wanted to signal that the state is unfriendly to business, this approach risks doing just that. Should companies employ individuals who are not legally authorized to work? Of course not. But the federal government already has a compliance framework in place that businesses are following.

In remarks to Del. David McCormick, House Majority Leader Pat McGeehan suggested the West Virginia Chamber of Commerce and other business associations like it oppose the mandate because they benefit from employing illegal labor.

“Perhaps they oppose it because a lot of the associations you just named love to make money at the expense of our people through illegal labor,” McGeehan said.

McCormick rejected that claim outright — and rightly so, it was a cheap shot.

Businesses in this state meet market needs here, pay taxes here, and employ West Virginians — many of them constituents of the very lawmakers advancing these proposals. Casting broad accusations at the business community serves little purpose.

Members of the West Virginia Chamber of Commerce and the entire business community would be justified in asking for an apology for having their standards unjustly questioned so publicly. McGeehan, who will face former WVU football great Quincy Wilson in November, knows better. Perhaps Wilson is more pro-business? Voters can make that decision.

More broadly, the state inserting itself deeper into this process looks less like sound policy and more like political messaging on a controversial national issue. Many of the delegates supporting this bill have never made a payroll or run a business. That lack of experience can show when mandates are crafted without regard to operational realities or an understanding of the rigors of business.

Government already shifted its burden of eligibility verification onto businesses through the I-9 federal system. Fine. But why add another layer in West Virginia?

The post E-Verify Bill is Blatantly Anti-Business appeared first on WV MetroNews.

The instinct to protect status or advance and grow has even forced lawmakers to take sides in the past and left alumni with bitter feelings toward the other institution.

For instance, when Marshall College was seeking legislative approval to become Marshall University, there was pushback from WVU leadership at the time, trying to protect the school’s status as the only university in the state. According to a 2011 article in the WV Gazette Mail, Alan Gould, then the executive director for the John Deaver Drinko Academy for American Political Institutions and Civic Culture, recalled former WVU President Elvis Stahr saying that “Marshall should be a first-rate college rather than a fourth-rate university.”

Ouch.

That is just one example of the rivalry, sometimes real and sometimes imagined, that persisted for the better part of six decades. To get the two universities to agree on anything nearly took an act of the legislature.

However, times have changed, and so has the state of West Virginia, as well as the attitudes of leadership at both universities. Instead of working against each other, WVU, Marshall, and other state institutions are realizing the benefit of cooperation.

Last week at the Capitol, Marshall and WVU displayed the best of their institutions for lawmakers and highlighted the “Universities United” initiative that has helped secure over $51 million for state economic and workforce development projects since 2023.  A total of 124 awards have directly led to the creation of or sustained 270 jobs in West Virginia.

Michael T. Benson, WVU President, and Brad Smith, Marshall President, were even in the same room together for budget hearings before the House Finance Committee last week, presenting a united front to lawmakers.

West Virginia is a small, unique state and does not have room for higher education institutions to butt heads in bitter turf wars. West Virginia is better off when institutions complement each other and provide students with the necessary tools to be successful, and be successful here in West Virginia.

Both schools have rolled out programs to offer tuition assistance for undergraduate programs, removing a barrier for West Virginia students to attend college.

“We’ve grown enrollment 22.5 percent since 2022, and this year we grew 7.5 percent. The nation grew by one percent in terms of enrollment. The other thing we do when we get them here is we make sure we’re teaching them 21st-century skills. So they have in-demand jobs,” Smith said on Metronews Talkline.

Universities United brings together the state’s two largest institutions and puts the best interests of the state ahead of the self-preservation attitude that dominated the complicated relationship over the last 60 years.

And it didn’t even require an act of the legislature.

The post WVU & Marshall have moved beyond complicated relationship appeared first on WV MetroNews.

Dave Allen asked me to hang out for a bit last Friday on MetroNews Midday. Radio with Mr. Allen is always fun, so the invitation was my pleasure.

Coincidentally, that same time slot aligned with floor remarks in the Senate from Ohio County’s Laura Wakim Chapman. She shared her thoughts on Senate Joint Resolution 19 — a proposal that would require a governor to be born in West Virginia as a condition of eligibility.

Keep in mind, Senator Rupie Phillips, the sponsor of the resolution — now co-sponsored by Greenbrier County Senator Vince Deeds — said a day earlier on Talkline that he intends to modify it. His preferred change would drop the birth requirement and instead increase the current five-year residency requirement to 30 years.

Chapman either wasn’t aware of Phillips’ updated position or chose to focus on the original language. She made clear she’s not a fan of the idea, defending Governor Patrick Morrisey’s record while expressing disappointment in the resolution.

Phillips later rose to clarify his intent to amend the proposal.

Good idea or bad, the resolution has people talking.

Phillips later remarked on Midday that if his aim were to target Morrisey specifically, he would have pursued a recall mechanism rather than a residency change.

That raised a broader question: would today’s strained relationship — the lack of trust and lack of smooth coordination between the executive and legislative branches — exist if Morrisey had won a majority in the Republican gubernatorial primary? Probably not.

More Republicans voted for someone other than Morrisey than did Republicans who voted for him — 150,741 votes for other candidates compared to 75,148 for Morrisey. With no runoff, a 33 percent plurality secured the nomination.

Yes, Morrisey went on to win the general election with nearly 62 percent of the vote. But that doesn’t necessarily mean Republicans who opposed him in the primary embraced him later as much as they opposed the Democratic alternative. Factionalism was almost inevitable, and here we are.

Add to that the decision to close Republican primaries to independents — a move that can make plurality wins more likely — and the state’s preemptive ban on ranked-choice voting.

Meanwhile, Governor Morrisey has not hesitated to weigh in on primary contests rather than staying neutral to unify the party afterward. That’s within his rights, but it isn’t without political consequences.

Then there’s the frustration among some lawmakers over what they see as sleight-of-hand budgeting — asking for a 10 percent personal income tax cut while budgeting for only five, despite an existing trigger system already in law. Candidly, when Mr. Wilson and I spoke to Grover Norquist, the takeaway was: stay the course. It seemed more like Norquist was supportive of the current trigger mechanism than altering it.

Viewed in totality, it’s not surprising some legislators are receptive to Phillips’ resolution. They’re fed up.

But the deeper issue isn’t today’s tensions, it’s the longer-term questions SJR19 has surfaced.

For example: should West Virginia adopt primary runoffs to avoid plurality nominees? Are party primaries even necessary if conventions could select nominees? Wouldn’t that be a more equitable use of tax dollars, especially since independent voters are banned from the primary?

One social media follower raised an intriguing idea that rises to the top: the jungle primary.

A jungle primary, formally a nonpartisan blanket primary, places every candidate — Republican, Democrat, Independent — on the same ballot. Voters choose among all candidates at once.

If someone wins more than 50 percent, the race is over. If not, the top two finishers advance to a runoff, even if they’re from the same party.

The goal is to let voters, not parties, narrow the field and to push candidates to appeal to a broad electorate from day one.

Instead of the traditional primary-then-general sequence, a jungle primary starts with one large contest and only holds a second round if needed. More efficient and a more equitable use of tax dollars.

And don’t tell me this kind of election is unfair to Republicans – Louisiana used it since 1975 and it was used when Republicans began to take back the state in the early 90’s including winning the governor’s mansion various times in the last 45 years. It’s sad they are scrapping it now, but that’s more about control than anything else… same thinking that banned a rank choice system here.

West Virginia may be far from adopting such a system. But in a state with one dominant party and growing internal factions producing plurality primary winners, it may be time to at least examine alternatives including a simple runoff in party primaries.

Even if Phillips’ resolution dies in a Senate committee — some say the House would eagerly move it if given the chance — it has already sparked meaningful discussion. And there’s nothing wrong with that.

The post Rupie’s Resolution Sparks Deeper Question appeared first on WV MetroNews.

Friday commentaries — even when posted on Thursday night for the early crowd — sometimes offer a chance to opine on multiple issues at a time. That’s especially true during the legislative session. A fan of presenting things in threes, here you go…

Senate Bill 680

Much discussion has centered on whether the state can afford another five-percent personal income tax cut. Governor Morrisey has publicly pushed for a 10-percent cut while only budgeting for five.

Senators Rose, Chapman and Rucker want to go further, faster. Senate Bill 680 would fully eliminate the personal income tax and the corporate net income tax.

This is where principle meets fiscal reality. Philosophically, taxing labor strikes as punitive — a taking right off the top that may disincentivize work. But in fiscal 2025, the personal income tax generated roughly $2.13 billion for West Virginia. That out of a little more than $5 billion in general revenue.

Businesses appear to pay a lot in taxes on paper, but in practice those taxes become costs passed on to consumers. A tax on business is a tax on the consumer. Every business model ultimately looks at post-tax return in making capital deployment decisions. The corporate net income tax brought in about $376 million in fiscal 2025.

The issue with SB 680 is that it repeals taxes without replacing the revenue. Perhaps unpopular to say, but some level of taxation is necessary. The most likely alternatives would be consumption or luxury taxes. Both more easily controlled by taxpayers and both more broadly assessed.

Pulling $2.5 billion in revenue without a well-articulated, systematic plan to cut $2.5 billion in services — or replace it — is financially imprudent. It’s just more of the latest strain of populist politics built on bold promises and thin plans, all setting up the familiar campaign refrain: “I tried, they stopped me… send me back and we’ll try again.”

If a comprehensive plan emerges to fully eliminate these taxes responsibly, count me among those ready for the debate.

TEAM WV / JobsOhio Model

Marshall University visited the Capitol this week. Brad Smith, as always, made time for a Talkline interview. His leadership at Intuit is well documented. Less known outside business circles is his work with Eric Ries and The Lean Startup — a framework that reshaped Intuit and many other companies. It’s worth the read and provides insight into his business journey.

Smith’s record — he likes to call himself Brad from Kenova – commands respect. When asked about a JobsOhio-style model for West Virginia, his enthusiasm was clear. He’s supportive and working with Charleston to bring it to fruition.

So here’s the question: when you have a former Fortune 300 CEO, a board member at Amazon and JPMorgan, and a fully vested West Virginian pointing you in the right direction… why aren’t we heeding advice more closely?

At Day 23 of the session (as of this writing), why hasn’t a bill advanced? Why isn’t the governor championing it without reservation?

Yes, Speaker Hanshaw and others are engaged. But this feels like a no-brainer: an experienced voice offering insight into what corporate America looks for, and the legislature seems too casual about seizing the opportunity. All legislators should be all in on the initiative, but apparently they are not given the lack of urgency.

SJR 19 — Governor “Born in West Virginia” Amendment

Senator Rupie Phillips wants voters to weigh in on whether gubernatorial candidates should be native-born West Virginians. He told Talkline he plans to modify the current birth proposal to instead expand the residency requirement from five years to 30.

Some question whether he’s serious. He is, and he’s not alone. Supporters argue Governor Morrisey doesn’t fully grasp the lived experience of West Virginians. They see his tenure as politically strategic rather than rooted in long-term state commitment. One lawmaker told me: He’s (Morrisey) not about what he can do for West Virginia, he’s about what West Virginia can do for him.

Voters can judge that characterization for themselves – it is after all best reckoned as an individual decision. If Phillips has his way, West Virginians will get that chance on an upcoming ballot.

Whether one views the resolution as serious or symbolic, it’s fair to say the governor may have invited scrutiny. Morrisey and the legislature never got off on the right foot last year. The problem persists. This year, taking sides in legislative primaries and PAC messaging about using dollars against legislators who stand in the way of advancing the Morrisey agenda isn’t exactly Dale Carnegie-style politics.

Morrisey’s wikipedia page notes he moved to Jefferson County in 2006, some 20 years ago.

It’s unclear whether the resolution will move in committee. The strongest case for advancing it is simple: let the people decide, rather than politicians who may have a stake in the outcome one way or another. What legislator wants to stifle the voice of the people which is politically the voice of God?

And politically speaking, Phillips may be taking one for the team. He supports the idea fully but isn’t on the 2026 ballot. Others who might agree with him don’t have that luxury, instead facing a ’26 primary. They owe him one.

First Lady Denise Morrisey, born in Nebraska, addressed the resolution Thursday on Facebook saying she was personally offended by it. Morrisey noted her upbringing in a military family moving time and again framing the policy as military unfriendly and a discouragement to military members who may wish to run for office in West Virginia one day.

Fair points but Phillips’ restructuring of the resolution from a birth to residency requirement somewhat diminishes the weight of those counterpoints placing the focus on how long someone should live here before they become eligible to hold the governorship. The resolution would not alter criteria for any other elected positions including House or Senate or elected positions within the Board of Public Works.

“If I ever wanted to run for Governor – which I do not – are you suggesting that I have to go back to Nebraska,” she asked rhetorically in a social media post.

Mrs. Morrisey no doubt knows she would have to reside there for at least five years under Nebraska law to be eligible to sit in the governor’s chair. Whether five years is too short or too long for that state is best answered by Nebraskans, just as this question – no matter the reason it has emerged – would be best answered by West Virginians via the polls.

Thanks for the indulgence of a longer piece today. As Lincoln supposedly said, “I could write shorter sermons, but when I get started, I’m too lazy to stop.”

Enjoy the weekend.

The post No Income Tax at All, Listening to a Pro, and the Hurdle to be Governor appeared first on WV MetroNews.

  As many as 80% of Americans plan to tune in for at least part of the game, up five percent from last year.

  Both WVU and Marshall have been represented relatively well in Super Bowl history, but don’t have an active player involved this season.  That gives me a chance to pull out a few fun facts and a minor controversy related to local college players and the big game.   

  Among former Mountaineer and Thundering Herd players, Marshall’s Troy Brown leads the way with the most total Super Bowl rings and appearances. Brown was a member of the Pats’ first three Super Bowl-winning teams (XXXVI, XXXVIII and XXXIX) and played in six Super Bowls. 

  And much like in his final season at Marshall, Brown was an NFL version of a Swiss army knife, playing wide receiver, but also seeing action at times on defense and special teams.  

  Brown was clutch at crunch time.  He was instrumental in two Super Bowl game-winning drives by the Patriots,  First, in Super Bowl XXXVI, a crucial final minute 23-yard catch against the Rams, to help upset the so-called “Greatest Show on Turf” and again in Super Bowl XXXVIII, with three grabs on the final drive to defeat the Carolina Panthers.  Brown still holds the NFL record for the most career punt returns in the Super Bowl with eight.

  In the 59 previous Super Bowls, there have been 550 total kickoffs. But Martinsburg’s Fulton Walker was the first ever to return one for a touchdown.  Walker’s 98-yard kickoff return for a score was just part of the story that day against Washington in Super Bowl XVII.  Walker had four kickoff returns for 190 yards, for an average of 47.5 yard per return, both are still Super Bowl records.   

  When a kickoff is returned for a touchdown in the NFL, the odds of winning that game are more than seventy percent.  Ironically however, in the Super Bowl, seven of the ten kickoff return scores have come from the losing team, including Walker’s Dolphins in 1983.

  Wheeling’s Chuck Howley remains a singular figure in NFL history, as the only player to be named Super Bowl MVP from a losing team.  The former Mountaineer was also the first defensive player and the first non-quarterback ever to win the award for his effort in Super Bowl V. 

  The game between the Colts and Cowboys is often known as the”Blunder Bowl” or the “Blooper Bowl” due to its eleven combined turnovers, but Howley performance stands out, as he intercepted two passes and forced a fumble in the Cowboys’ 16–13 loss to the Baltimore Colts. 

  At first, Howley didn’t believe he had won the MVP and that it “meant nothing” to him because Dallas had lost.  He reportedly only accepted the award because it came with a car.  Howley’s his son Scott later remembered thinking the family story would be getting a flashy Dodge Charger, but ended up with a wood-paneled station wagon instead. 

  Finally, a case can be made that perhaps a second Mountaineer deserved a Super Bowl MVP. 

  Jeff Hostetler was the quarterback for the New York Giants in Super Bowl XXV’s 20-19 win over the Bills.   Giants running back Ottis Anderson got the MVP, after rushing for 102 rushing yards and touchdown — an outstanding game to be sure.  

  But here’s the case for the Hoss.  Hostetler completed 20 of 32 passes for 222 yards, a touchdown with no interceptions. When Hostetler is sacked in the end zone for safety in the first half by Buffalo’s Bruce Smith, he managed to hold onto the ball with one hand, preventing a certain touchdown for the Bills.  Hoss managed a Giants offense that had the ball for a Super Bowl record 40 minutes and 33 seconds, keeping the Bills’ high-powered “K-Gun” offense off the field.   

  By the way, through the first 59 Super Bowls, 34 MVP awards have gone to quarterbacks, including in 7 of the last 9 years.  Since Anderson’s MVP for the Giants in 1991, only two other running backs have won the award in last 30 years.

  Just some food for thought, when you are kicking back and watching the big game this weekend.

The post West Virginia definitely has some strong Super Bowl stories appeared first on WV MetroNews.

My writing often reflects my influences — Jefferson, Adams, Madison, and the occasional turn from the Federalist Papers among others. History, and those who lived it, can be a roadmap for moving forward. It offers progress without relearning the hard lessons others have already paid for — a chance to learn from missteps instead of repeating them.

But today’s piece draws on a more modern renaissance man — a purveyor of opinion and a staple of popular culture: Dwayne “The Rock” Johnson.

One of his catchphrases is simple and declarative: “Know your role…”

What’s Mr. Johnson saying? Bluntly, he’s telling people to understand their place as it is appropriate.

Lawmakers would do well to internalize that advice when crafting new laws or repealing old ones.

Senate Bill 694 is as straightforward as its title: removing the county residency requirement for a county superintendent of schools.

NEWS from Brad McElhinny: Legislation would lift state requirement for superintendents to live in county or county over

If you’re surprised — or disappointed — to learn such a requirement exists, you’re likely not alone.

Do parents care more about where a superintendent lives, or whether that superintendent is qualified and has a record of achievement? The answer is obvious.

Residency mandates are relics of a protectionist era, designed to keep “outsiders” out — even if that outsider is simply from a nearby county or another part of the state. That mindset belongs to a bygone time.

Imagine if the private sector worked this way. Today’s most successful companies recruit globally, drawing talent from wherever it exists. Remote work and telecommuting are not novelties; they are standard practice.

My first career in business delivered days collaborating with teammates across the continental U.S. and sometimes Europe. That reach brought the best minds to the table and produced results that would have been impossible under a “live where you work” rule. Imagine telling a stockholder: we really like this person, and they do a great job, but they have to live in the city or county to work here. Laughable in the modern world. A good way to go bankrupt.

At a time when West Virginia is striving to improve its education system, when strong leadership is needed, new ideas and when the best candidate might live in Charleston but work in Beckley or Wheeling — dare live across the state line but wish to work in West Virginia – why limit the pool? What’s the downside to giving county boards more options? There isn’t one.

This should be an easy bill to move through the legislature and it should be amended pulling all residency restrictions off.

More than that, it should prompt a broader question in the legislative process: Is this policy goal truly within the legislature’s role in promoting the general welfare? And if so, is a new law required, or is removing an old one the better reform?

That question alone would improve much of policymaking. Limited government cannot be achieved by piling on more rules and regulations. Sometimes the most conservative reform is restraint or even pulling back – yes, giving up power.

In this case, that means leaving decisions like hiring a superintendent to local boards, unencumbered by a mandate on where that person must live.

The post Know Your Role appeared first on WV MetroNews.

A Pew Research Poll two months before the 2024 election found that six in ten voters said immigration was a very important issue to them.  That was a winning issue for Trump who promised tightened border security and mass deportation.

That support carried over into the early months of Trump’s second term as border crossings fell to record lows.  It represented a fulfillment of one aspect of his campaign promises on immigration.

However, the mass deportations have been a different story.

The shooting deaths of Alex Pretti and Renee Good by ICE agents in Minneapolis have sent shock waves throughout the nation.  It is one thing to stop people from illegally crossing the border, but it is quite another when armed agents of the government shoot American citizens at point-blank range.

Trump administration representatives made matters worse by lying about the circumstances of the shootings and blaming the victims. Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem initially suggested the shooting of Pretti was justified, claiming he attacked officers and “wished to inflict harm.”

Reasonable citizens watched the videos and concluded for themselves that neither Pretti nor Good looked like “domestic terrorists.” Noem has backed away from her earlier statements and Trump, realizing he’s losing support, has put border czar Tom Homan in charge of the Minneapolis operations in hopes of lowering the temperature.

The specter of heavily armed and masked agents rounding up individuals and shoving them into vehicles is unnerving. It looks profoundly un-American. Ironically, the actions of an overzealous police state are exactly what the far right always warns about. Even the National Rifle Association pushed back on administration statements questioning Pretti’s right to carry a gun.

The polls now reflect a significant shift in America’s views of Trump on immigration and border security.  For example:

A Reuters Poll after the shootings found that just 39 percent approve of the job Trump is doing on immigration, while 53 percent disapprove.  Fifty-eight percent say ICE agents have gone “too far” in their crackdown.

A YouGov Poll found that 55 percent of Americans have very little confidence in ICE.  Independents, who helped elect Trump made the biggest swing.  Sixty-seven percent say they have little confidence in ICE, up from 49 percent a month ago.

Even a poll by Fox News determined that most voters questioned ICE tactics.  Fifty-nine percent characterized ICE as “too aggressive,” an increase of ten percentage points from last July.  Only 29 percent said ICE “almost always” carries out Trump’s pledge to remove illegals with criminal records.

Mass deportations cast a wide net.  Few would argue with rounding up hardened criminals who are in the country illegally and shipping them out.  However, research shows serious offenders make up only a fraction of the detainees, which is counter to the Trump administration’s claims that the mass deportations are focusing on the worst of the worst.

Syracuse University professor Austin Kocher tracks ICE data, and his findings were reported in a Wall Street Journal editorial.  “Between September 21, 2025, and Jan. 7, 2026, single-day ICE detentions increased 11,296. But only 902 of those were convicted criminals, 2,273 had pending criminal charges, and 8,121 were other immigrant violators.”

Trump understood during the campaign that border security and illegal immigration were an issue that resonated with most Americans, and he has followed through on his promises.  However, the ugly and violent practice of mass deportation has been a tragic failure that has turned most Americans against Trump on the issue.

The post Trump loses support on immigration appeared first on WV MetroNews.

West Virginia Gov. Patrick Morrisey wasted no time wading into a Northern Panhandle state Senate contest — even before the filing period officially closed.

Around 9:30 p.m. Friday, Morrisey posted on X:

“The race between conservative State Senator Laura Chapman and radical lefty Shawn Fluharty will be one of the defining races in the WV state senate this year. We don’t need a Bernie bro in the WV Senate — such a clear difference between these two candidates. Common sense conservatism versus lefty extremism. This race is one of the top contests of the 2026 cycle. Get ready!!”

Here’s the problem: Chapman is NOT unchallenged in the Republican primary. Maybe it slipped the Governor’s memory (sarcasm emphasized).

COMMENTARY from Hoppy Kercheval: 2026 Republican Primary Election may lead to Senate shake-up

Joe Eddy, an engineer and former head of Eagle Manufacturing, is running against incumbent Laura Wakim Chapman in Senate District 1. By framing the contest as Chapman vs. Fluharty, Morrisey effectively pretends the GOP primary doesn’t exist. A fantasy unaligned with reality.

And, that’s not a small oversight. It’s a signal. One that clearly acknowledges the divide in the state Republican party and picks one side over the other by the state’s chief executive.

By ignoring Eddy’s challenge, Morrisey is telegraphing to Republicans that he’s backing the current Senate establishment — often described as the “populist” wing — over the challengers, who tend to be more traditional, business-focused conservatives.

Longtime Republican operative Greg Thomas offered this take when asked to comment on the Governor’s X post:

“Joe Eddy is in a strong position to win the Senate District 1 Republican primary, and he is clearly the best conservative candidate to keep the seat GOP in the general,” Thomas said. “As the former head of a West Virginia-based manufacturing company with over 400 employees, Joe Eddy is a proven job creator. Joe Eddy has served as an advisor to President Donald Trump on manufacturing issues, and he is a strong conservative who will run a Republican-funded, aggressive campaign in both the primary and general elections.”

Eddy — and others like him, many recruited by Sen. Tom Takubo — are likely viewed by Morrisey as potential obstacles to his agenda… an agenda the governor needs to produce fruit for re-election.  It’s not because they’re liberals – they are not – but because they place a higher premium on economic issues than on the social battles further to the extreme.

Asked for comment on his post, a Morrisey spokesperson responded:

“Governor Morrisey has worked closely with State Senator Laura Chapman on a variety of health care, economic development and emergency management issues and believes her hard work for her constituents and her conservative record merits reelection, especially over one of the most far-left members of the House of Delegates. Chapman is the frontrunner to win that race, in part because she supports the Governor’s intense focus on economic development and making West Virginia more affordable.”

Thomas said on Talkline last week that populist Republicans have run out of runway on social issues.

“We took care of the social issues. We outlawed abortion in WV with exceptions; we banned transgendered surgeries… we did all of the things you would want to do. Now we have this new group that comes in and it’s like they’re… like they’re jealous they didn’t get to vote on this stuff. So, they come up with these new fringe things and the next thing you know we’re talking about anti-vax.”

Which gets to the real point: Morrisey’s move looks less like a drive-by shot at Fluharty and more like an attempt to make a midterm primary about his own self-preservation — a tactic premised on the belief that the general election won’t be competitive in a deeply red state. A reality that means he needs his brand of Republican in office and not that of another who could weaken him leading up to 2028.

That may or may not be a good move in the long run, but it is a definitive move.

Once a governor jumps into primaries early — instead of staying neutral until nominees are chosen — he invites scrutiny otherwise unmerited or unlikely to emerge.

If Eddy wins the primary, and by what margin, Morrisey risks alienating Republicans in the Panhandle who supported Eddy. And for what? Only to completely ensure they will not vote for him (Morrisey) in a gubernatorial primary?

‘Sorry, Joe, I’m with you now instead of Chapman…’ doesn’t seem to cut it. Could anyone blame Eddy for saying, ‘Thanks, but no thanks Governor?’

So, if it wasn’t clear which faction Governor Morrisey favors, it is now. Time will prove his post – his revelation – a good move or not.

The post Morrisey Dives into Senate Race, Reveals Faction Preference appeared first on WV MetroNews.

Some issues make news because they stir emotion or seem far outside the mainstream. Commentators – I’m a talk show host, not a reporter – sometimes get criticized for even talking about them. The argument goes like this: you know it’s not going anywhere, so why give it airtime or whatever real estate one has to give?

That’s a fair criticism, but I personally don’t accept it.

When a bill is introduced, regardless of its odds of passage, it offers a window into how a lawmaker thinks and what they consider important. No single proposal should define a legislator, but voters deserve to know how legislative time is being spent and what personal priorities are being established. That larger picture can’t be understood if these efforts go undiscussed and that larger picture should frame decisions at the polls.

With that in mind, consider two recent proposals.

The Aitken Bible
Senate Bill 388 would require every public school in the state to make a copy of the Aitken Bible available in all fourth, eighth and 10th-grade social studies classrooms, including public charter schools.

A bit of history matters here.

The Aitken Bible is recognized as the first complete English-language Bible printed in the United States. It was produced in 1782 in Philadelphia by Robert Aitken during the closing years of the American Revolution.

Before independence, most Bibles in the colonies were imported from Britain. Wartime disruptions made those imports scarce, prompting Aitken to print a full King James Bible domestically. His work caught the attention of the Congress of the Confederation, which formally approved the project and recommended it to the public — an unusual endorsement, even for that era.

Although roughly 10,000 copies were printed, the venture was not financially successful. Once British trade resumed, cheaper imported Bibles returned to the market, and today only a few dozen original copies are known to survive.

That history is worth teaching. But teaching it does not require mandating a specific modern reprint in every classroom.

Two senators, one Democrat and one Republican, both Catholic, tried to amend the bill to also allow use of the American Catholic Bible. That effort failed.

That’s where this moves from history lesson to policy problem.

The Aitken Bible is a King James Bible. Why single out one translation when you really don’t need it physically present to discuss historical context? Why not also allow the New International Version, the Contemporary English Version, the Catholic Bible, or texts from other faith traditions in schools as well?

Limiting the requirement to one specific version abandons the government neutrality on religion that protects both the majority and the minority. Today that might not feel consequential. In a less uniformly Christian future, it might.

Put me down as supportive of placing Bibles in school libraries — all versions, alongside texts from other religions. Need help paying for the Bibles? Call me. But mandating one version for classroom availability – unintentional as it may be – crosses from education into preference. How would the Danbury Baptists feel about that?

A better approach would be to revise the bill to allow any and all religious texts, provided no public money is used to purchase them. Or simply leave the decision to schools and teachers. Neutrality is the better path.

Candidly, the entire debate seems a bit like legalism to me –- the ongoing battle of Appalachian tradition versus the Gospel — what is foundational, clearly revealed and true in Scripture.

The bill passed the Senate and moves to the House. Veteran newsman Brad McElhinny filed a full report.

Editor’s note: I tend to read / study the Amplified Bible and the New Living Translation with help from a few commentaries. My Bible app has more than 3,700 versions in nearly 2,400 languages. I’d suggest asking a pastor for help in picking the best version for you.

Partisan Mandates in Municipal Elections
House Bill 4080 would require all municipal elections to be conducted on a partisan basis. Many West Virginia cities currently choose not to do that.

This effort cuts against the long-standing conservative principle of local control and would further sideline independent voters.

The West Virginia Republican Party chose to close its primary to independents. Agree or disagree, that was the party’s decision to make. But a state mandate forcing cities to run partisan elections – codified – is different. It sends a message to voters who reject party labels that their independence doesn’t count and that punishment will follow if not abandoned.

For a growing share of West Virginians, that’s more than frustrating. It feels dismissive.

Most voters don’t choose their city council member based on party affiliation. They care about garbage pickup, functioning sewer systems and safe streets. Turning every local race into a partisan contest risks importing national political fights into issues that are, at their core, practical and local.

Pushing partisanship into every corner of civic life looks less like reform and more like an attempt to force voters into one camp or another – a camp they don’t want to be in. It diminishes unaffiliated voters and undermines the idea that communities should decide how to run their own elections.

This bill was pulled from committee agenda and remains at markup stage in House Judiciary; a sign the legislative process is doing its job. But voters should still ask their representatives what they think of it.

Ultimately, you – the individual voter – are the arbiter of what matters and what doesn’t. Best of luck as you decide.

The post Bibles and Partisan Mandates appeared first on WV MetroNews.

The outcomes could have a significant impact on the makeup of the legislature’s upper body and pose a threat to the leadership of current Senate President Randy Smith. Several of the most conservative members of the Senate will find themselves in hotly contested races.

For example, in District 1 in the northern panhandle, Joe Eddy, an engineer and former head of Eagle Manufacturing, is signed up to run against incumbent Laura Wakim Chapman.  Another far right incumbent, Senator Mike Azinger of District 3, is being challenged by current House of Delegates member Bob Fehrenbacher.

District 2 is an open seat with the retirement of Senator Charlie Clements. Attorney Bob Dobkin has been recruited for that race and he will face off against military veteran and conservative Toby Heaney.  Hard right incumbent Senator Jay Taylor in District 14 is getting a challenge from Marc Harman, a veteran politician and a more moderate Republican.

Senator Tom Takubo (R, Kanawha), a more moderate member of the Senate, has taken a lead role in encouraging some of the challengers.  He wants to see the body focus more on kitchen table issues.  However, he said he would not comment on specific races until after the filing period, which closes Saturday.

Senate President Smith also chose not to comment, saying his focus now is on the legislative session.

Meanwhile, GOP consultant Greg Thomas has played an active role in candidate recruitment.  “Over a decade ago, we ran a dozen campaigns against big-government, big spending anti-business liberal Democrats who took all of their money from Democrats and trial lawyers,” he said. “This year we are running about a dozen campaigns against big government, big spending anti-business liberal Republicans who are funded by Democrat trial lawyers.”

Hyperbole aside, the core of the effort is about rallying support for a slate of candidates to redirect the Senate. See the list below.*

The surge of Republican candidates comes at a time when the 32 Republicans in the Senate are divided among two to three factions.  Senator Eric Tarr (R, Putnam), a staunch conservative who is up for re-election this year, is critical of the recruitment efforts.

Tarr told me the Senate populists “lack a coherent agenda and are heavily influenced by the trial lawyers,” while Takubo is the leader of a “liberal-leaning contingent.” He said Takubo “recruited like-minded candidates—many from the healthcare sector and with ties to his employer—in an apparent continued bid to secure the Senate presidency.”

Takubo maintains his efforts are more altruistic. He has emerged as an unelected leader of like-minded lawmakers more interested in policy than politics.  The outcome of the Republican Senate primaries may well position him to be the next Senate president, but he insists that is not his main purpose as he attempts to redirect the Senate to a more cohesive body that focuses more on issues while minimizing personality conflicts.

The dramatic expansion of the West Virginia Republican Party that fueled super majorities in both the Senate and House meant different factions and leadership challenges were inevitable.  The outcome of these challenged Republican Primary races will be a key factor in determining the near-term power distribution and direction of the Republican Party.

*District 1 (Hancock, Brooke, Ohio, Marshall):  Joe Eddy, engineer and former head of Eagle Manufacturing.

District 2 (Marshall, Wetzel, Tyler, Doddridge, Marion, Monongalia): Bob Dobkin, attorney with Spilman, Thomas and Battle.

District 3 (Pleasants, Ritchie, Wood, Wirt): Bob Fehrenbacher, engineer and current member of the House of Delegates.

District 5 (Cabell, Wayne):  Chris Miller, president of Dutch Miller Automotive and 2024 gubernatorial candidate.

District 6 (Wayne, Mingo, McDowell, Mercer): Joe Disibbio, president and CEO of the Chamber of Commerce of the Two Virginias.

District 8 (Kanawha, Putnam, Jackson, Wirt, Roane, Clay): Dr. Stephen Eshenhauer, ER physician at Jackson General Hospital and Health officer for the Kanawha Charleston Health Department.

District 9 (Fayette, Raleigh, Wyoming): Dr. Michael Antolini, family doctor and small business owner.

District 14 (Taylor, Preston, Tucker, Grant, Hardy, Mineral): Marc Harman, businessperson and former long-time local politician in Grant County.

District 15 (Hampshire, Morgan, Berkeley): Ken Reed, small business owner, former county commissioner and House of Delegates member.

District 17 (Kanawha): Michael Jarrouj, restaurant owner and operator.

The post 2026 Republican Primary Election may lead to Senate shake-up appeared first on WV MetroNews.

Is social media the new Big Tobacco? That’s the argument now being tested in a Los Angeles courtroom, where the first of several lawsuits against major social media companies got underway this week.

At the heart of the cases is a familiar accusation: did companies intentionally design their platforms to hook children? Maybe they did. Maybe they didn’t. That’s what courts will decide.

Facebook, Instagram, YouTube, TikTok, and Snapchat are among the defendants in current and pending litigation. According to one report, the lawsuits involve thousands of individual plaintiffs, hundreds of school districts, and dozens of state attorneys general, with more cases expected this year.

The stats are a bit disturbing.

• Average daily use per Gallup: Teens (ages 13 to 17) spend about 4.8 hours per day on social media on average, with over half (51%) reporting at least 4 hours per day. Girls tend to spend more time than boys (about 5.3 hrs vs. 4.4 hrs).
• Pew Research: Nearly half of teens say they are online “almost constantly.”
• National Library of Medicine: Up to 95% of teens (ages 13 to 17) report using at least one social media platform, and more than a third use them almost constantly.

Is social media bad for kids? Probably. And, as with most things, the answer likely depends on how much exposure they have and at what age.

According to a study from the organization Common Sense, children are being introduced to screens earlier than ever. Four in ten have a tablet by the age of two, and nearly one in four owns a personal cellphone by eight. While total screen time has held steady at roughly two and a half hours a day, how kids spend that time has changed dramatically. Gaming alone has jumped 65 percent in just four years. Traditional television viewing is fading, replaced by short-form video on platforms like TikTok and YouTube Shorts. The result is a far more fragmented and immersive media landscape.

Missing from much of the public dialogue is an uncomfortable question: where does parental responsibility fit into this conversation?

If social media has harmed children, don’t parents who allowed — or failed to limit — their kids’ time on these platforms bear some share of the responsibility? What about the decision to buy those connected devices at such a young age? Failing to set screen-time limits? Handing a smartphone to a child and hoping for the best?

Simply blaming Big Tech feels a little too easy.

And where does this road lead? If these lawsuits succeed, what stops the next wave — against AI developers like ChatGPT, or whatever technology comes next? Will fear of litigation fundamentally reshape the internet and its evolution? At some point, companies will ask: why innovate if success only guarantees a lawsuit that drains resources and discourages progress?

None of this is to deny that social media is different. Algorithms are more powerful. Content is more targeted. Platforms are engineered to keep users scrolling. But distraction itself is not new.

Television, video games, and other digital diversions have been around for decades. Parents have long known that allowing children to zone out for hours — whether in front of a screen or otherwise — isn’t a net positive.

If we fail to assign responsibility where it belongs, we’ll never see meaningful change. The buck ultimately stops with parents. They can cut internet access. Take away devices. Replace endless scrolling with a ball and bat, a book, or a puzzle.

That doesn’t mean Big Tech is blameless. If companies knowingly caused harm — and litigants can prove that – Tech should face serious consequences.

But treating social media companies as the sole villain is incomplete. It sidesteps a deeper and more troubling trend in American life: a lack of sustained investment in our children. Investment that takes time, attention, and effort — often at the expense of pursuits adults deem more urgent or convenient.

A serious solution requires more than lawsuits. It requires a measured, deliberate effort to protect kids from harm and to recommit to the hard, unglamorous work of raising them to become healthy, productive citizens.

The post Social Media on Trial appeared first on WV MetroNews.

Something does not add up in Hancock County with regards the school system’s bleak financial picture. There are still questions swirling about how the county school district ended up in such a perilous financial situation that there was legitimate concern the county may not make the January payroll. Those questions lead to even more questions about who knew what and when they knew it.

On January 16th, the West Virginia Board of Education voted unanimously to seize control of Hancock County Schools and fire the superintendent and assistant superintendent. State School Board President Paul Hardesty did not mince words, chastising county officials for having 140 employees in excess of the school aid formula. Hardesty called it “inexcusable.”

There has not been a reduction in force in Hancock County in 10 years.

As it turns out, that was only part of the financial troubles facing the county. Hancock County’s troubles include a $5 million cash shortfall, a $2 million high school overspend, and a $1 million turf project with dollars from the county board’s general fund.

State Superintendent Michelle Blatt stated during an appearance on Metronews Talkline that required information was not being submitted to the state’s West Virginia Education Information System. Former Superintendent Dan Enich claimed the system had not been fully utilized in 15 years.

The Hancock County School Board fired Chief Financial Officer Joseph Campinelli in November. The state school board assumed control of the district in January, terminating the contracts of Superintendent Dan Enich and Assistant Superintendent Dave Smith.

The state appointed Walter Saunders as the new superintendent. While Saunders must now forge a new path forward for the cash-strapped school system, questions regarding how it arrived at this juncture and why so many apparent red flags were missed still need to be answered.

Hancock County Schools had been categorized as “needs assistance” by the state for three years before the revelation that the school system was broke. According to Uriah Cummings, with the WV Department of Education, Hancock County received regular correspondence through email to provide detailed budget data, but those emails were ignored.

But if the state Department of Education was at least aware of possible financial troubles, how did it miss that Hancock County was not complying with WVEIS requirements? If, as Enich claimed in a public meeting back in December, the system has not been utilized to its fullest potential in over 15 years, did no one else see the obvious red flag?

How were current construction projects allowed to run over-budget, and new projects approved with a looming financial disaster on the horizon?

It would be easy to place blame for the failure of Hancock County Schools on a single person or board. However, there seems to be much more to the story than just gross negligence by one party. There was a breakdown in the checks and balances within the county school administration, the county board of education, and the state department of education to ensure that taxpayer dollars were being spent responsibly.

The more we learn about how Hancock County Schools ended up in such dire straits, the more culpability there is to spread around.

The post Story of Hancock County Schools doesn’t add up appeared first on WV MetroNews.

Ice and snow frustrate us. Storms cause problems. They send people scrambling to grocery stores, make travel dangerous, and force changes to plans. In short, winter weather messes with our lives. No denying that fact.

But sometimes, it comes with an unexpected upside.

West Virginia is an energy state. In recent months, three new natural gas power plants have been announced. Those investments promise more reliable and affordable electricity, on top of what the state already produces from its existing generation fleet.

And here’s the key point: small as we are, West Virginia often produces more electricity than it needs. Sometimes even in high-demand situations.

When temperatures drop, demand for electricity rises. And that increase can actually benefit West Virginians.

Consider this: as of 3 p.m. Sunday afternoon, West Virginia was exporting nearly 2,700 megawatts of electricity to other load-serving entities — utilities and generation providers — within PJM. Put simply, the state’s power plants (mostly regulated) had enough power to meet in-state demand and could sell the excess into the regional market.

Click to View: PJM State Import / Export Map

Those exports generate revenue – profits that largely and ultimately flow back to West Virginia ratepayers, helping offset costs when utilities need to buy power from the grid.

Yes, it can get complicated and markets aren’t absent nuance. But this is one of the reasons West Virginia participates in a regional market like PJM, rather than operating a stand-alone system like Texas does with ERCOT. The next time someone suggests to you we should be like Texas, smile and walk away. That would be a huge mistake.

Participation in a wholesale market gives the state flexibility – the ability to both buy and sell electricity. And as more power plants come online here, PJM participation provides a ready pathway for megawatts made in West Virginia to reach broader markets. Minus a market, we can’t get our product to the point of sale.

Looking ahead, electricity demand is only going to grow – driven by artificial intelligence, data centers, and other energy-intensive uses we may not yet fully understand or even have imagined.

Expanding the state’s supply of both merchant and regulated generation allows West Virginia to do what it has long done best: extract resources responsibly, create megawatts, and sell power all in a transparent market with clear market rules and guidelines.

That means jobs. A broader tax base. And more opportunity than we have today.

So while the ice, snow, and cold may be disrupting your day, they also offer a reminder of the opportunity West Virginia holds as an energy exporter — an opportunity worth understanding and one we should continue to pursue. It’s our best opportunity moving forward. One we should be proud of.

Stay safe out there!

Editor’s Note: For the latest PJM Generation fuel mix statistics, click here

As of 6 p.m. Sunday, January 25:

• Natural gas fueled 39 percent of generation
• Nuclear fueled 26 percent of generation
• Coal fueled 21 percent of generation
• Renewables fueled 7 percent of generation
• Oil and other resources fueled 7 percent of generation

The post Storm Also a Reminder of Opportunity appeared first on WV MetroNews.