"We have lost our ambition, our imagination, and our willingness to do the things that built the Golden Gate Bridge" - Barack Obama (aka President Malaise)
Pitch in with the Prince William Young Republicans and help defeat Obama in 2012!
AG McDonnell On Transportation
By Greg L | 2 February 2007 | Virginia Senate | 15 Comments
Not to be outdone, Attorney General Bob McDonnell weighs in on the actions of the Senate Finance Committee with a well written and scathing rebuke this evening which deserves at least equal billing with Lieutenant Governor Bill Bolling’s statements. It’s a must-read for anyone who might be unsure of whether Chichester and Potts have done the right thing:
“Last night, a majority of members on the Senate Finance Committee chose to reject the best opportunity to proactively address Virginia’s traffic congestion challenges this year. The very disappointing committee action demonstrates a glaring absence of spending restraint, and a disregard for a spirit of compromise. The frustrations that millions of Virginians share over long commutes, less time spent with families and a decreased quality of life must be addressed this year. The Senate Committee action greatly obstructs progress on transportation.
The Senate Finance Committee voted against the Republican leadership compromise, a plan that included vitally important VDOT reforms and land use reforms that tie road building decisions to development decisions, all while holding the line on taxes and providing resources for private-sector initiatives. Instead, the Senate Finance Committee supported a plan that includes a massive statewide tax increase on gas, after a year of record-high gas prices, and regional sales tax increases previously rejected by the citizens. It contains none of the important reforms included in the Republican compromise plan.
Over the past few months, 7 of the 8 senior elected Republican leaders of the House and Senate put away past differences to find common ground on the issue of transportation. They crafted a comprehensive proposal offering a long-term traffic relief solution for our citizens. In addition to requiring VDOT and land use reforms, the Republican compromise plan provides $2 billion in bonds, and $500 million in new statewide transportation funding with no net tax increase. The plan makes traffic congestion relief a top priority, assisted by long overdue spending reductions at the state level, with the general funds directed to transportation amounting to only about 1.3% of the operating budget. State spending has increased at an average of 6% a year over the past decade; a whopping 3% above the growth in population and inflation combined. The argument that core functions of government will suffer because of the Republican compromise plan is absolutely wrong and irresponsible. During the most recent two-year budget cycle alone, the General Assembly increased funding for K-12 education by 19%, funding for higher education by 22%, funding for public safety by 15%, funding for mental health by 21%, and funding for the Chesapeake Bay by a record 38%. Despite misleading sound bites to the contrary, Virginians know that spending for every core function of government has increased dramatically and is now at record levels.
The compromise plan requires reductions in the rates of increase in future spending in other budget areas to focus resources on transportation. Every good state agency manager is capable of providing excellent state services with nominal budget cuts. Traffic congestion relief is the number one quality of life issue facing Virginians, especially in areas like northern Virginia and Hampton Roads. Improving transportation infrastructure and reducing traffic congestion is a priority, and therefore resources must be directed to that priority. We cannot continue down a road of constantly raising taxes and increasing spending in some areas without a corresponding commitment to cut spending elsewhere. Families and businesses don’t run that way, and neither should government. Virginia taxpayers will not stand for it; we cannot manage our way to prosperity with tax increases. Spending must be cut, priorities must be chosen, and transportation must be improved.
I strongly urge the legislators in the House and Senate to defeat the Senate committee tax plan and to instead pass the responsible leadership compromise plan with no statewide tax increases. The people of Virginia are tired of inaction. For the past 3 years, proponents of higher taxes for transportation with no reform have been rejected by the General Assembly. The citizens want elected officials to find practical solutions to our transportation challenges. House and Senate Republican elected leaders have answered this call through the creation of the compromise transportation plan, and this plan deserves broad support in the General Assembly.”
I just love it when prominent republicans battle to see who can most effectively battle against tax hikes and fiscal irresponsibility.
The opinions expressed here are solely the views of the author, and not representative of the position of any organization, political party, doughnut shop, knitting guild, or waste recycling facility, but may be correctly attributed to the Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy. If anything in the above article has offended you, please click here to receive an immediate apology.
You can follow the discussion through the Comments feed.
15 Comments
Views: 941
Loading ...
Great rebuke by our AG. He is showing real leadership.
Leadership? I love Landslide Bob, but this transportation ‘compromise’ i he is willing acknowledge parenthood is an abortion.
Ask how many congested miles go away each year for Hampton Roads for 20 years (answer - there are MORE congested miles not including all the construction delays, accidents and deaths)?
How many jobs will $209 m out of HR each year kill (every $150m in taxes = 5000 jobs killed)?
What part of ‘NO’ did the voters fail to communicate in NO to unelected, unaccountable Regional Government (1998, 2002 and some against Kilgore in 2005)?
What a terrible plan - any Republican supporting it should be ashamed.
The AG in showing his leadership is my candidate for Governor next go around.
CONVA
I have significant concerns about this compromise as well, but am exploring the idea that this is about the best compromise that can be hoped for with the current makeup of the Senate. If we manage to remove folks like Potts and Chichester, we can come back to this and repair what we both recognize as some of the disturbing flaws. If we do not reach some sort of compromise, and repeat last year’s results we might not have much of an opportunity to do that.
In that regard, warts and all, the compromise is at least worth exploring. For Chichester to ruin that compromise in favor of an even worse solution is a huge problem for the Republicans. Perhaps fighting to the bitter end for a good plan is the right thing to do. I’m not sure. I’m not going to dismiss the reality that any opportunity for compromise this session is going to be hard, but an important victory however.
What’s the art of the possible here? Whatever it looks like, Chichester just made it a heck of a lot harder to find, and we really need to ensure that a good challenger for his seat gets a lot of support, regardless of how the transportation legislation sorts out. The path to a transportation solution clearly runs through his defeat in a primary challenge.
I would have much rather seen a challenge to the plan from the folks actually promoting fiscal responsibility, though. Then it would be easier to pick a side.
James, you are on the money on your assessment of the plan. While it probably is the only chance at compromise, McDonnell has jumped in with both feet with tax raisers. The plan is certainly not conservative as he purports.
Greg, I hope you are right that we can change the makeup of the Senate and reverse the problems next year (hopefully Bob FitzSimmonds can take the first step by knocking off Colgan in PW!). Unfortunately, the hardest thing in government to do is undo a tax increase or elminate a program.
Bolling has the best perspective on this. We need to permantely direct a significant amount of existing ongoing revenues to transportation. With the massive growth in state government, we don’t have a revenue problem. We have a spending problem.
While the compromise plan IS a tax increase it is the best that can be done with the current makeup of the Senate. The Attorney General showed real leadership in getting Norment and Stolle in the same room as the House leadership. Bolling could not do it because he does not have the friendships with the members of the Senate and House that McDonnell does. For 09 McDonnell wins the convention with 52 percent of the vote. With Edwards as President in 08 and with a Democrat Congress then 1993 repeats itself and the voters in Va. elect a GOP Gov with a GOP legislature. You heard it here first.
I fully realize there are some Republicans like James Atticus Bowen, who truly believe this compromise is a “terrible plan” I could not respectfully disagree more with these folks. This plan actually achieved results. Yes, there is plenty in the plan that I do not like myself as well, but part of the compromise principle is accepting things we do not like in favor a a plan that would have been acceptable to both houses in the General Assembly and the Governor but essentially killed by a handful without the opportunity for a full vote.
If we fail to reach ANY agreement on transportation the Republican party will loose the majority in the GA and we will be GUARANTEED a tax hike across the board most likely beginning with adding a gas sales tax and increasing general sales tax and possibly even more income taxes. All this with a surplus.
I think this compromise plan with some increased fees and limited use of the general fund for transportation is a heck of a lot better than across the board tax increases and total use of the general fund to increase the coffers of state government and continue fattening of the state agencies with what it seems like unlimited funding at their request.
This is exactly what will happen if we cannot achieve some type of compromise on transportation. The Dems know it and that is why they were fighting it so hard. I hope our AG McDonnell, Lt. Governor Bolling along Speak Howell keeps fighting for some type of agreement that a majority of both moderates and conservatives in party can agree on. The future of our majority status in the General Assembly is at stake.
Bolling supports the compromise plan. Seems like GOP Jeff and others may be a little confused. Roanoke Times from yesterday notes:
“If Bolling, who praised the compromise when it was disclosed last month…”
Looks like some folks are spreading bad information about the LG. He fully supports the compromise plan.
Trey, I think the Roanoke Times overstated the LG’s position. I found Bolling’s statement when the original compromise was announced on his website and it was hardly endorsing the proposal. You may be the one with bad information.
“. . . Today, leaders in the Senate and House of Delegates announced agreement on a proposal to move these discussions forward. I commend them for the hard work they have put forth and the progress they have made.”
“I am very pleased that the proposal put forth by Republicans in the Senate and House of Delegates rejects the massive statewide tax increases that had been proposed by Governor Kaine. Now, the legislative process will begin, during which this proposal will be analyzed and debated. I look forward to a continuing dialogue with the members of the General Assembly about this important issue.”
If Bob McDonnell were a real conservative, then he would stop dickering around with fee-increases. If transportation is really the number one problem in the commonwealth, why do he and his brethren keep spending more money on everything else. When I heard the LG speak last year, he made this exact point: if we have real problem we need to prioritize it, just like families do at home.
Puh-lease–
Bolling has been falling over his Lean Cuisines trying to get on the compromise bandwagon. It’s hilarious to see the Bolling people on these blogs try to walk this rightrope.
Here’s the M.O.- Bolling tells newspapers he supports the proposal (see Roanoke Times above) to try to look like one of the rational ones working for a solution. Then, the Bolling people try to trash AG McDonnell for supporting the same plan. When Bolling’s quotes supporting the plan are posted on the same blogs, the Bolling people say the newspapers got it wrong.
Bolling’s trying to have his cake and eat it too on the tax plan. Too bad he got to the party a little too late.
The difference in core beliefs is pretty evident between our AG and LG’s approach to this.
The AG is willing to give on tax increases, and the LG is not…
Now which position shows more ‘Leadership’? Breaking with Conservative values and working with squishy Pubs raising taxes during a time of surplus or holding the line and using the surplus to address the ‘crisis’?
Did I hear someone predict Edwards (i.e. BreckGirl) would be President?
10th District Republican: Your post is classic. It is the basis of the Transportation Tax Panic of 07.
Let’s compromise our principles of lower taxes, limited government and effectiveness and efficiency in those services government legitimately provides to get a deal to keep our majority in the GA.
What utter rot. Very Whig-worthy rhetoric.
Consider Hampton Roads…
You want a compromise deal that does NOT reduce congestion. (Have we lost anyone yet….the plan does NOT reduce miles of congestion in HR) It is the same projects from 02 - the one Virginia Voters spanked 2:1 in HR.
Here is an example for all the folks in NoVa. Imagine a plan to decrease traffic across the Potomac (we’ll call it the 3rd Crossing). The design is to build a super highway bleeding off traffic in PG County, MD a few miles north of the Wilson Bridge. Then swing around in a big loop, cross the Potomac with a tunnel and bridge and about 10 miles into VA RE-CONNECT WITH THE BELTWAY! Did you reduce traffic on the Wilson Bridge? Maybe. Did you lower congestion dumping all the traffic back on the Beltway? Duh, no. This is precisely the major part of the ‘Plan’ for Hampton Roads.
It takes $209m in new taxes out of HR. 10th District Rep maybe unfamiliar with economics - but Pres. Kennedy, Reagan and Bush 43 were not. Taxes kill jobs. A compromise that only raises taxes $209 m a year in HR is a compromise or a killing of our principles.
The unelected, unaccountable Regional Government was rejected by HR voters 2 times - 3 if you count all the votes Jerry Kilgore lost. A compromise that tells the voters to go to Hell so we can create another whole new level of government and bureacracy is an appalling abandonment of the principles of the Party.
But, hey, gee, if it will keep the Republican majority in the GA, then salute and execute.
This thinking is precisely why Republicans will lose the majority in the GA. Which is why Republicans lost the majority in the Congress. Power over principle or power as the only principle means you lose the principled base of the Party. Unless, of course, you think the GOP voters are the same peasants who vote for the Dems as they are told to do so.
A lousy plan born of fear is for weaklings and future Whigs.
Great points, and they are well thought out but isn’t a small increase in user fees without a general tax increase worth saving our Republican General Assembly from total across the board tax increases and even more bloated state government when the Dems take it back?
I certainly cannot speak for the Hampton Roads area but the people up in Northern Virginia demand results in the transportation area from the General Assembly and I am afraid this compromise which will probably end up failing has cost us dearly up here.
Spank that Donkey,
I hate to tell you but I do believe the Lt. Governor backed the “compromise” as well. I think he jumped on a little late but he apparently supported it.
To tell you the truth, I think Bolling only jumped on because he saw most of the conservatives in the GA headed that way as well. This does not show too much leadership in my opinion.
As for using the suplus to address the crisis, this is a good short term solution but what happens when this eventually drys up. The compromise was good because it took some from the surplus but did not rely entirely on the extra money because it will not always be there, especially if our economy goes sour.