House District 89 Democratic primary: Blaizen Buckshot Bloom and Kacey Carnegie face showdown
The Virginia House of Delegates District 89 race will be among the most competitive in the commonwealth as it's an open seat up for grabs. Republican incumbent Baxter Ennis, who served one term, isn't running for re-election.
Democrats Blaizen Buckshot Bloom and Karen 'Kacey' Carnegie will face off in the primary election on June 17 for a two-year term. Republicans are also holding a primary. The district covers part of Suffolk and a significant chunk of western Chesapeake.
___
Age: 21
Employment: Stagehand, Live Nation
Education: Some college or professional certification
Party affiliation: Democrat
Website: www.blaizenbuckshotbloom.com
What is your top priority if elected and how would you work across the aisle to accomplish it?
My priority is boosting economic security for working people. We'll achieve this by raising the minimum wage to $17, repealing 'right-to-work' laws, cutting small business taxes, mandating reasonable benefits from large businesses, and subsidizing small business benefits so they can compete for talent and give all workers a fair shake. We'll fund this by making large corporations pay their share.
I have a history of working across party lines to build coalitions for practical policies — I'll continue this in office. I know Republicans, even in MAGA, who believe 'making America great' means direct support for working families, and we can work together to help regular people find economic security. Working with them requires willingness to share credit for a political win, listening without scolding, and the maturity not to let strong disagreements poison your ability to agree elsewhere.
What is the best way for Virginia to respond to federal funding cuts to the state?
Our state legislatures are the frontline of defense against what is going on in Washington. When facing federal funding cuts, Virginia must prioritize protecting essential services. My focus in Richmond will be using state resources wisely — like our budget surplus and rainy day funds — to shield Virginians from cuts impacting healthcare like Medicaid, nutrition programs like Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), education, and infrastructure.
We must manage our budget responsibly to minimize service disruptions. I'll raise revenues by shifting to a progressive tax system that will alleviate tax burdens on middle and working class families while providing additional revenue to fill in federal funding gaps. Protecting Virginians is the priority. We have the means to weather this storm if we are strategic.
Should billionaires like Elon Musk and George Soros be able to contribute unlimited amounts of money to Virginia candidates? If yes, why? If no, what would you do if elected to office to enact campaign finance limits?
Absolutely not. Democracy only works when politicians feel beholden to their voters, not their donors. Big-money special interests corrupt this dynamic. Getting big money out of politics empowers regular Americans to have their voices heard.
The goal is fully funded public elections, but there are meaningful steps we can take which are more achievable in the short-term. If elected, I will introduce and cosponsor legislation to cap contributions from individuals, businesses, and PACs. I will also introduce legislation to publicly match 1:1 small dollar donations for campaigns that pledge not to take donations above a certain threshold. This would amplify the voices of normal, everyday Virginians.
___
Age: 41
Employment: Attorney, Carnegie Law Group
Education: Doctoral degree, T.C. Williams School of Law at the University of Richmond
Party affiliation: Democrat
Website: carnegiefordelegate.com/
What is your top priority if elected and how would you work across the aisle to accomplish it?
My top priority is building a family-first economy that puts working people at the center of every decision — by lowering the cost of living, increasing the minimum wage, making childcare more affordable, and creating an environment where families can truly thrive. To accomplish this, I will work across the aisle by focusing on practical, bipartisan solutions that reflect shared values — like supporting small businesses, expanding access to quality childcare, and investing in workforce development. I believe that when we focus on what unites us — strong families and economic opportunity — we can create necessary change together.
What is the best way for Virginia to respond to federal funding cuts to the state?
The Virginia House of Delegates has established the Emergency Committee on Federal Workforce and Contract Reductions in Virginia to address potential federal workforce and contract spending cuts in Virginia.
Removing Medicaid trigger laws. Virginia is among states with a 'trigger law' that could automatically terminate Medicaid expansion if federal contributions drop below 90%. Democrats are advocating for budget amendments to eliminate this provision, safeguarding healthcare coverage for over 600,000 Virginians.
Virginia's House Democrats unanimously opposed a Trump-backed budget resolution that proposed cuts to essential programs like Medicaid, food assistance, and veterans' benefits. Such cuts would harm vulnerable populations and together, we must advocate against these reductions.
Should billionaires like Elon Musk and George Soros be able to contribute unlimited amounts of money to Virginia candidates? If yes, why? If no, what would you do if elected to office to enact campaign finance limits?
Virginians deserve to know who is funding our elections and to have confidence that their voices are being heard. Transparency is essential to maintaining public trust in our democracy. What matters most is that candidates are accountable to the people they serve and that voters have the information they need to make informed decisions.
If elected, I would support and sponsor legislation to establish reasonable campaign finance limits in Virginia — bringing us in line with most other states. The integrity of our democracy depends on ensuring that public service remains about people, not the highest bidder.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
CBS News
14 minutes ago
- CBS News
GOP leaders cite L.A. immigration protests to push for quick passage of Trump's "big, beautiful bill"
Washington — The White House and Republican leaders in Congress are urging lawmakers to quickly get behind the centerpiece of President Trump's legislative agenda, saying the ongoing immigration protests in Los Angeles adds urgency to the push to secure additional resources for border security. House Speaker Mike Johnson said on X on Monday that the legislation, which addresses Mr. Trump's tax, energy and immigration priorities, "provides the ESSENTIAL funding needed to secure our nation[']s borders." Republicans call the legislation the "one big, beautiful bill." "The lawlessness happening in LA is ANOTHER reason why we need to pass the One Big Beautiful Bill IMMEDIATELY," Johnson said, pledging that Congress will support Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents who he said are "fighting to keep Americans safe against illegal aliens AND the radical left." White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt shared a similar message earlier Monday, saying the scenes unfolding in some areas of Los Angeles "prove that we desperately need more immigration enforcement personnel and resources." "America must reverse the invasion unleashed by Joe Biden of millions of unvetted illegal aliens into our country," Leavitt said in a post on X. "That's why President Trump's One Big, Beautiful Bill funds at least one million annual removals and hires 10,000 new ICE personnel, 5,000 new customs officers, and 3,000 new Border Patrol agents." Speaker of the House Mike Johnson holds a press conference after the House narrowly passed a bill forwarding President Trump's agenda at the U.S. Capitol on May 22, 2025, in Washington, legislation is now in the hands of the Senate after the House narrowly approved it last month following weeks of intraparty disagreement over its components. Though the bulk of the funding allocated in the legislation goes toward tax cuts, it also includes resources aimed at bolstering border security and defense. It provides $46.5 billion for the border wall, $4.1 billion to hire Border Patrol agents and other personnel and more than $2 billion for signing and retention bonuses for agents. It also imposes an additional $1,000 fee for people who are filing for asylum in the U.S. The disagreement among Republicans over the bill has largely centered on cuts meant to offset the bill's spending, including restrictions to Medicaid. In the House's razor-thin GOP majority, the disagreements threatened to tank the bill's progress at every stage. And as the bill moved to the Senate for consideration last week, Johnson warned the upper chamber against making significant changes that would throw off the delicate balance. Senate Republicans initially voiced support for separating the complicated tax components and border security provisions into two separate bills to deliver Mr. Trump a victory on immigration early on in his tenure. But House Republicans opposed the approach, expressing doubts that the president's agenda could pass through the narrow GOP majority in the lower chamber in separate parts. Senate Republicans are now seeking to amend the House-passed bill, sending it back to the House for approval with a goal of getting the legislation to the president's desk by the July 4 holiday. And with a 53-seat majority, the upper chamber can afford to lose just three Republicans. Last week, opposition from Elon Musk threatened to throw a wrench into the legislation's progress, after he stoked concerns by fiscal hawks about the bill's impact on the deficit. The episode, which began with Musk calling the bill "a disgusting abomination," erupted into a dramatic and public feud between Musk and the president last week. But the dispute did not appear to spark significant new opposition the the bill in Congress. The urgency expressed Monday surrounding securing additional border resources comes as Mr. Trump called for the National Guard to enforce order in the L.A. area amid protests over activity by ICE, prompting a clash with California Gov. Gavin Newsom. Newsom warned that the move would inflame the situation, while urging that there is no shortage of law enforcement. The governor indicated late Sunday that his office plans to sue the Trump administration over Mr. Trump's move. Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem defended the president's move on "Face the Nation with Margaret Brennan" Sunday, claiming Newsom "has proven that he makes bad decisions." "The president knows that [Newsom] makes bad decisions, and that's why the president chose the safety of this community over waiting for Gov. Newsom to get some sanity," Noem added.
Yahoo
17 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Iowa Landowners Fight Seizure of Private Property for a Pipeline
A privately owned company is proposing a pipeline across five states. While some of the state governments appear to be on board, the project is facing backlash from a large and formidable population: property owners. The pipeline, known as Summit Carbon Solutions, would span 2,500 miles and transport carbon dioxide (CO2) captured at 57 ethanol plants in Iowa, Minnesota, Nebraska, and the Dakotas to a permanent underground storage site in North Dakota. Construction of the $9 billion pipeline is expected to begin this year, with operations kicking off in 2026. In June 2024, the project received regulatory approval from the Iowa Utilities Commission, despite landowner protests. Julie Glade and her husband, Paul, are Iowans who oppose the project because of its use of eminent domain. Their property aligns with the proposed route, and in 2022 the couple was visited by a land agent. "The guy who came to our door wanted us to sit down and sign it without reading it," Glade tells Reason. "They swooped in and tried to contact as many people as possible right away before the people knew what the consequences were. It's very unethical." Several other landowners in the state share the Glades' worries. During a hearing conducted by the Iowa Utility Commission, landowner Joan Gaul testified against the pipeline, which she said would cross a large portion of her farmland. Gaul said Summit Carbon Solutions mailed two easements, which would give the pipeline a legal right to her land, to her without notice. "This letter came telling us about taking our land using eminent domain. It was a difficult pill to swallow," she said. Gaul said she didn't accept the easements and has indicated that she will continue to fight the project. The Glades visit the Iowa Capitol nearly every week to voice their opposition to the pipeline. They are joined by what the couple calls a diverse coalition united by their concern for the basic constitutional right to land ownership. "We have MAGA Republicans and we have lefties. We put our differences aside and we work together," she says. The Glades' efforts could soon pay off. In May the state Senate passed House File 639, which would prevent CO2 pipelines from using eminent domain unless the company proves the pipeline meets the definition of public use. The bill would also prevent CO2 pipelines from operating longer than 25 years. The bill is awaiting the signature of Republican Gov. Kim Reynolds, who is reportedly weighing opinions from pipeline supporters and detractors. If passed, the bill would represent a significant win for the rights of Iowa property owners. It would also be the latest setback for the Summit Carbon Solutions project. After the company launched a blitz of eminent domain lawsuits in South Dakota, Republican Gov. Larry Rhoden signed a bill into law in March preventing carbon dioxide pipelines from receiving eminent domain permission in the state. The post Iowa Landowners Fight Seizure of Private Property for a Pipeline appeared first on
Yahoo
17 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Kash Patel Sends Ominous Threat in Response to L.A. Protests
The FBI says it will act on its own to squash the Los Angeles anti-ICE protests. FBI Director Kash Patel issued an ominous threat to the city and its residents late Sunday night, claiming that his agency would intervene in the multiday anti-Trump display without explicit direction. 'Just so we are clear, this FBI needs no one's permission to enforce the constitution,' Patel posted on X. 'My responsibility is to the American people, not political punch lines. LA is under siege by marauding criminals, and we will restore law and order. I'm not asking you, I'm telling you.' In a move that Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem should agree with, California announced it would sue the federal government Monday, arguing that the Trump administration's order to send hundreds of National Guard troops toward Los Angeles, without coordination with the state's governor, was an unconstitutional breach of power. Hours earlier, FBI Public Affairs Assistant Director Ben Williamson shared that Patel had gotten off a call with 'senior leadership' addressing what they referred to as 'riots' in L.A., specifying that Patel and FBI Deputy Director Dan Bongino had 'offered all necessary resources from FBI HQ' to address the situation. Williamson said the pair 'reiterated the position that any perpetrator who attacks or interferes with law enforcement will be aggressively pursued and brought to justice.' Bongino made it plain that one of the agency's primary targets would be individuals suspected of assaulting officers, writing on X that he and Patel had notified all FBI teams to pursue suspected individuals 'long after order is firmly established.' 'We will not forget. Even after you try to,' Bongino posted. But Republicans have so far not been very successful at pinpointing wrongdoing in Los Angeles. Instead, some viral videos circulating in conservative circles of protest-related violence in the city are actually not from the weekend at all, but were instead taken in 2020 during the Black Lives Matter protests.
