Black smoke continues to rise from the chimney at the Sistine Chapel, signalling that the cardinals have yet to agree on a new pope.

We don’t know the actual vote — the cardinals are sworn to secrecy on that — but we do know one thing. Unless there was a tie, somebody’s in the lead, and somebody’s in second. And the more balloting that goes on, somebody’s either rising or falling.

I don’t mean to equate what is supposed to be a divinely-inspired selection of the new pontiff with the messy, grubby business of electoral politics, but to the extent that people are involved, well, there are some politics involved. And, historically speaking, there are certain dynamics that take place in multi-candidate, multi-ballot elections.

So back to where we stated the obvious: Somebody finished that first ballot in the lead and somebody was in the second. At that point, there’s the expectations game. Yes, Candidate A finished first, but did they meet or exceed expectations? If they did, does that mean they’re the candidate to rally around? Or does it mean they’re weak and supporters should look elsewhere? And if you don’t particularly like Candidate A, does that mean you should rally around Candidate B to stop them, even if you really prefer Candidate C or D or E?

We need to look no further than Virginia political history for some examples.

* Perhaps the most famous nominating convention in Virginia history was the 1978 Republican gathering to pick a candidate for U.S. Senate. There were four candidate — long-time party leader Dick Obenshain, former Navy Secretary John Warner, former Gov. Linwood Holton and state Sen. Nathan Miller of Rockingham County. Obenshain led on the first ballot, and then proceeded to gain strength on subsequent ballots and eventually won – an example of first ballot strength translating into a later-ballot victory. (Tragically, of course, Obenshain was killed in a plane crash not long afterwards; he’s buried in Botetourt County, and the runner-up, Warner, was quickly named as his successor.)

* Less famous but even closer to home for us here in the Blue Ridge was the 1982 Republican convention to pick a 6th District candidate for Congress after Caldwell Butler of Roanoke announced his retirement. Ray Garland of Roanoke was the clear front-runner over a slate of lesser-known candidates, but conservatives felt Garland was too moderate. Conservatives eventually rallied around Kevin Miller of Harrisonburg, and he won a majority in later balloting — an example of a front-runner being denied the victory.

* Much the same thing happened in the 1985 Republican nomination for lieutenant governor — former attorney general and former gubernatorial candidates Marshall Coleman was the best-known of multiple candidates, but delegates considered him too moderate (and also blamed him for the party’s loss in 1981) and rallied around the lesser-known but more conservative John Chichester.

Now, those were both cases of a well-known front-runner vs. multiple lesser-known candidates. For an example of two closely-matched front-runners getting knocked out in favor of a compromise candidate, you need look no further than the 2009 Democratic nomination for governor. That was a primary, not a convention, but much the same dynamic was in play. Terry McAuliffe and Brian Moran were locked in tight combat, until voters decided enough of that, and moved en masse to dark horse Creigh Deeds at the last minute.

One big difference, though, is this: The primary required only a a plurality, the conventions a majority. But the papal vote requires a two-thirds majority, which means a determined minority could hold out and block the nomination of a majority front-runner.  History buffs will recall that the Democrats used to require a two-thirds majority to win their presidential nominations — one reason why it took the party 103 ballots in 1924 to settle on a nominee.

The rules for choosing for a pope specify that if no pope is selected after 33 ballots, then the 34th ballot is a run-off between the top two contenders. An incentive, perhaps, for front-runners to hold out?

* That brings to mind the 1992 Democratic convention to pick a 6th District candidate for Congress after Jim Olin of Roanoke announced his retirement. There were three candidates: Steve Musselwhite and John Fishwick entered with the most committed delegates; John Edwards was a distant third. The rules required that the last-place finisher drop out — meaning Musselwhite and Fishwick could effectively force Edwards out and get an instant run-off. Edwards cleverly lined up some other candidates — to try to prolong the vote. But the Musselwhite and Fishwick forces held firm, knowing that if they did, they’d get the two-vote vote they were both seeking. After five ballots, that’s how it played out — with Musselwhite defeating Fishwick by 11 votes in the final tally. (He went on to lose that fall to Republican Bob Goodlatte.)

Thus concludes your history lesson for the day. Which of these dynamics will play out in the Vatican? Or maybe some other dynamic will take hold?

We’ll know (maybe) when we see some white smoke.

Any famous conventions that our readers care to cite?

UPDATE: CNN reports white smoke, meaning a new pope has been named. So, as we learn more, it will be interesting to see which of these dynamics, if any, the voting followed.

The House of Representatives today voted to continue funding the government past March 27, a move that would avert for now a government shutdown.

Generally, Republicans voted in favor, Democrats against.

Reps. Morgan Griffith, R-Salem, and Robert Hurt, R-Chatham, both issued statements. Here they are.

First, Griffith:

“Instead of waiting until the current Continuing Resolution expires on March 27, the House is acting now to prevent a government shutdown. This continuing resolution reflects the spending levels subsequent to Sequestration, and at the same time tries to give more flexibility to defense and veterans programs regarding implementation of the Sequester.

“On page 229 of the Continuing Resolution, I noticed a provision that would extend benefits for disabled coal miners not only through the end of the fiscal year, but through the first quarter of 2014. The legislation also includes an increase in funds for research on traumatic brain injury and psychological health in order to address the serious issue of soldiers’ suicides connected with service in Afghanistan and Iraq.

“Furthermore, the Continuing Resolution includes a provision that extends the current pay freeze for Members of Congress.

“We hope the Senate will promptly take up the Continuing Resolution, joining the House in working to responsibly avoid a government shutdown.”

And now, Hurt:

“Today the House of Representatives has taken a positive step toward restoring fiscal stability in Washington. I am pleased that this measure reflects a lower level of discretionary spending — which is a step closer to ultimately balancing the federal budget. And at the same time, we have given the Administration the flexibility to ensure that we reduce spending in wasteful government bureaucracy and that we do not undermine our support for the men and women who are defending our nation. As we work through this budget process, we call on the United States Senate to join us in supporting this measure for the benefit of future generations.”

From Terry McAuliffe, Democratic candidate for governor, on the death of former Roanoke Del. Clifton “Chip” Woodrum:

“Chip was a leader and a true inspiration, and this is a painful loss for all Virginians. His sly humor was a testament to his love of his work and his community. Chip’s selfless dedication to service to the Commonwealth and the Roanoke Valley left an indelible mark that will always be remembered by those lucky enough to know him and by the countless Virginians whose lives are better today because of his work.”

Gov. Bob McDonnell has issued the following statement:

“In public service, there are a select few who make a mark on the lives of those they represent and the Commonwealth for both their personality and compassion and for their policy achievements. Chip Woodrum was one of those rare individuals. His contributions to the General Assembly for 24 years have had lasting effects on the citizens of the Commonwealth. However, as someone who served alongside Chip for several years in the House of Delegates, to me his most lasting legacy might well be the humor, dedication, fairness, intelligence and compassion he showed in the legislature year after year.

“Chip had a lighting quick wit that would diffuse tensions during heated debates, putting his fellow legislators on both sides of the aisle at ease. Meanwhile, his command of literature and keen intelligence would elucidate arguments with historical references and literary insights.

“He served his constituents in the Roanoke area well for more than two decades. He played a key role on the Freedom of Information Advisory Council, providing more transparency and accountability for our government, and perhaps most memorably Chip labored to establish the Virginia Birth-Related Neurological Injury Compensation Program to assist those families devastated by the financial and emotional impacts of giving birth to a severely disabled child.

“I extend my personal condolences to his family during this difficult time. On behalf of a grateful Commonwealth, I offer our thanks for his public service and dedication to his fellow citizens.”

Roanoke College has a new poll out with lots of questions about guns. Here’s a release from the college:

Virginians favor many regulations while they think that better enforcement of existing laws is more likely to prevent gun violence. And, they do not blame lax gun laws for mass shootings, according to The Roanoke College Poll. The Roanoke College Poll interviewed 583 Virginia residents between Jan. 14 and Jan. 22 and has a margin of error of +4.1 percent. Residents were asked a series of questions about guns, gun violence and a variety of issues before the Virginia General Assembly.

Gun violence—causes and prevention

Residents of the Commonwealth were asked their thoughts regarding the causes of mass shootings such as those in Newtown, Conn. and at Virginia Tech. The most common response was poor polices to deal with mental illness (56%), followed by an inability to stop those who want to kill others (38%), violence in the media, such as video games and TV and movies (28%), poor enforcement of gun laws (26%) and weak gun laws (21%).[1]

Not surprisingly, respondents were more likely to think that better enforcement of existing gun laws (53%) was more likely to reduce gun violence than tougher gun laws (38%).

A majority of those surveyed (62%) favor having armed police or security guards at schools to make them safer. At the same time, a majority (58%) opposes allowing teachers and administrators to carry firearms in schools. Most Virginians (59%) think that gun in the possession of a law-abiding citizen is more likely to be used in self-defense than in an accidental shooting (26%). Fully half (50%) of those interviewed said that stricter gun control laws would make no difference to their personal safety, while one-third (34%) said stricter laws would make them more safe, and 12 percent said they would make them less safe.

Regulating firearms

Strong majorities support requiring background checks for all firearms purchases at gun shows (86%) and universal background checks for firearms purchase, including private transactions (75%). Smaller majorities favor government registration of all firearms (61%) and requiring all gun owners to be licensed by the government (59%).

Respondents were asked if they favored banning a variety of different types of firearms. A majority (58%) favored banning “assault rifles.” Virginians are evenly split regarding banning all semi-automatic rifles (48% favor, 46% oppose), and marginally oppose banning semi-automatic handguns (42% favor, 50% oppose) and semi-automatic shotguns (41% favor, 50% oppose). Only 16 percent of those interviewed favor banning all guns. A ban on all magazines that can hold more than 10 rounds was favored by 53 percent.

By a very small margin (49%-44%), Virginians disagreed with the statement made by NRA Executive Vice-President Wayne LaPierre that “the only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun.” Read more »

Rep. Bob Goodlatte, R-Roanoke County, has weighed in on Russia’s decision to block foreign adoptions. Here’s a statement he’s released today:

Congressman Bob Goodlatte released the following statement after signing a letter to Russian President Vladimir Putin requesting that the Russian Federation allow completion of pending adoption cases involving Russian children who were matched with U.S. families prior to the enactment of a Russian law banning U.S. adoptions. He also signed a letter to President Obama requesting that he make this issue a priority in our bilateral relationship with Russia.

“I am deeply disturbed by President Putin’s law banning U.S. adoptions,” said Congressman Goodlatte. “Over the past two decades American families have welcomed more than 60,000 Russian children into their homes. By enacting this measure, the Russian government would choose to deprive these children of the promise of new lives, vast opportunities, and futures with loving families.”

Goodlatte continued, “This ban impacts families across the nation, including the Sixth District. I have heard from the Wallen family in Shenandoah County and the Clay family in Bedford County who were both in the midst of adopting children from Russia only to learn that this ban placed the future of their adoptions in jeopardy. For families who have gone through this painstaking adoption process, this is devastating news. For the youngsters who saw the promise of a family and a better future, this law is a devastating blow. I urge President Putin to look beyond politics to the children this ban affects and immediately allow adoptions already in process to proceed.”

President Putin signed the adoption ban into law on December 28, 2012. Current estimates from the U.S. Department of State and U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services indicate that there were several hundred active adoption cases involving Russian children matched with U.S. families prior to the recently enacted Russian ban.

The U.S. House of Representatives will once again hold a reading of the U.S. Constitution. It will be Tuesday, and Rep. Bob Goodlatte, R-Roanoke County and chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, will lead the proceedings.

Here’s a release from his office with details:

On Tuesday, January 15, 2013 the U.S. Constitution will be read aloud from the floor of the House of Representatives. Congressman Goodlatte will lead the reading of the Constitution beginning at 10:00 a.m. The reading is open to all Members who are interested in participating and is expected to take between one and two hours. Congressman Goodlatte released the following statement about tomorrow’s reading:

“One of the resounding themes I have heard from my constituents is that Congress should adhere to the Constitution and the finite list of powers it grants to the federal government. Our constitutional principles remain timeless and it is fitting that we start the 113th Congress by reading the Constitution aloud on the floor of the House of Representatives. The Constitution is the written consent the American people gave to their government to protect individual liberty and maintain limited government. This reading of the Constitution demonstrates that House Republicans are committed to our Constitution and the enduring principles for which it stands.”

Tomorrow’s reading is only the second time the U.S. Constitution has been read aloud in the House of Representatives. It was first read at the beginning of the 112th Congress when Republicans regained the majority.

To view this event, tune into C-SPAN at 10:00 a.m. on Tuesday, January 15 or watch online at http://houselive.gov/ or http://www.c-span.org/Live-Video/C-SPAN/.

U.S. Sen. Mark Warner, D-Va., is joining other Virginia Democrats — and a few Republicans –  in voicing disappointment with this morning’s vote by a House of Delegates subcommittee to defeat a proposed constitutional amendment establishing an automatic process to restore the voting rights of non-violent felons. Warner streamlined the executive branch process of restoring voting rights while serving as governor from 2002 to 2006, and current Gov. Bob McDonnell has further fast-tracked the process.

“It is very disappointing that this bipartisan legislation has been blocked at the starting point of a two-year process that would allow Virginia voters to weigh in on a commonsense step already in place in virtually every other state,” Warner said in a news release.  “Restoring voting privileges to people who have completed their sentences, paid their fines, made restitution and lived as law-abiding citizens is the right thing to do, and that’s why I made it a high priority when I served as Governor. I encourage the Virginia Senate to move forward on its own versions of this legislation so that the House of Delegates will have another opportunity this year to consider this bipartisan approach to restoration of rights.”

A little awhile ago, we posted a release from Rep. Bob Goodlatte, R-Roanoke County, about his bill on video privacy being signed into law.

I went searching the Internet to find some national news coverage about the bill. Couldn’t find any, but did find this CNET story from November 2012, with the attention-getting headline: “Meet Rep. Bob Goodlatte, Hollywood’s new copyright ally.”

It has some good background on Goodlatte’s work dealing with copyright issues.

A bill that Rep. Bob Goodlatte, R-Roanoke County, sponsored dealing with video privacy has been signed into law. Here’s a statement from the congressman’s office:

Congressman Bob Goodlatte, Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, released the following statement after H.R. 6671 was signed into law. H.R. 6671, legislation introduced by Congressman Goodlatte, amends the Video Privacy Protection Act of 1988 (VPPA) to allow videotape service providers to facilitate sharing on social media networks of the video content watched or recommended by users.

“Federal laws need to catch up with the technology of today,” said Congressman Goodlatte. “Over the past two decades, video distribution and the way consumers view video content has changed dramatically. Social media users, especially young people, do not understand why they cannot share information about their favorite movies or TV shows in the same way that they can music or books. My legislation preserves careful protections for consumers’ privacy while modernizing the law to empower consumers to do more with their video consumption preferences, including sharing favorite TV shows or recently watched movies via social media networks in a simple way.”

H.R. 6671 requires that the consent to share video consumption preferences be distinct and separate from any other form setting forth other legal and financial obligations. Companies must provide consumers with the “clear and conspicuous” option to withdraw their consent to share at any time. A consumer’s consent to share expires after 24 months, unless the consumer chooses to opt-in again.

“Protecting private information is critically important in today’s online world,” Goodlatte continued. “This new law is truly pro-consumer and places the decision of whether or not to share video rentals with one’s friends squarely in the hands of the consumer.”

H.R. 6671 was passed by the House of Representatives on December 18, 2012 and agreed to by unanimous consent in the U.S. Senate on December 21, 2012.