Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli aborted efforts to push state lawmakers into allowing more Republican presidential candidates on the March primary election ballot, ending a doomed bid that opened the Republican to criticism from his top political opponent.SClBJust 24 hours after calling for emergency legislation opening the primary up to the rest of the field, Cuccinelli said Sunday he now feels “that changing the rules midstream is inconsistent with respecting and preserving the rule of law.” “I do not change position on issues of public policy often or lightly,” Cuccinelli said. “But when convinced that my position is wrong, I think it necessary to concede as much and adjust accordingly.” His message was passed along to supporters in an email with the subject line: “Now that everyone is upset with me. …”
Cuccinelli maintains that the state should ease its ballot restrictions. Only former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney and Rep. Ron Paul, R-Texas, met the 10,000-signature threshold required to make the ballot, sparking a lawsuit from Texas Gov. Rick Perry that has been joined by four other candidates.
Lt. Gov. Bill Bolling, who heads Romney’s Virginia campaign and is expected to face Cuccinelli in the Republican primary for governor in 2013, advised Cuccinelli “to avoid making public statements that criticize our state election laws while his office is defending the State Board of Elections in a lawsuit.”
“I am concerned that such public comments could be used against the commonwealth in our effort to defend these lawsuits, and I am confident that the attorney general would not want to do anything that could jeopardize his office’s ability to win this case,” Bolling said.
House Speaker Bill Howell, a Republican, told The Washington Examiner he didn’t have any conversations with Cuccinelli in the 24 hours between his change, but he assumed the attorney general realized “there is absolutely no support within my caucus to have a special session and I don’t think there’s a whole lot of support for passing legislation that might be retroactive.”
