Sunday, August 02, 2009
Deeds' dance on transportation disappoints
Dan Radmacher
Recent columns
- Kaine saw much progress in his four years
- Virginia voted for gridlock on Tuesday
- Project Vote Smart tries to educate Virginia voters
- America should listen to this Cassandra
From the RoundTable blog
Editorial writers often write about the world as we would like to see it, not as it actually is. We're not running for office or trying to form a coalition to pass a bill in the General Assembly, so we have the luxury of urging idealism over pragmatism.
I understand that, and try not to get impatient with politicians who deal with a different set of restraints -- like the need to win enough votes to get elected.
Still, I'm getting awfully frustrated with Creigh Deeds' dance on transportation. During his first gubernatorial debate against Bob McDonnell, Deeds rightly criticized the Republican's transportation plan as nothing but "robbing Peter to pay Paul."
But McDonnell also had a good point when he said of Deeds, "He's got a wish list. He doesn't have a plan."
Deeds has promised to make fixing Virginia's transportation system his No. 1 priority his first year in the governor's mansion. His plan to achieve this? Building a consensus in the General Assembly.
That worked so well for Gov. Tim Kaine, after all.
What Deeds absolutely does not want to do is put forward any kind of ideas for funding transportation. That would just be a "lightning rod" that would kill reform.
Perhaps. Maybe the quickest way to lose this election would be to tell the Virginia electorate the truth: Taxes must be raised to fund transportation. Maybe it's best for Deeds to say what it takes to get elected, including his comment in Lynchburg that he didn't foresee the need for any tax increases, then try to convince the General Assembly to do the right thing after the election.
But if Deeds can't sell the public on the need for real action on transportation prior to the election, why should anyone trust in his ability to sell senators and delegates on it after the election? Won't real funding measures remain "lightning rods" even then?
Maybe it's well placed, but Deeds' shy-on-specifics strategy demonstrates a fundamental lack of faith in Virginia's electorate. He doesn't trust the people of this state to listen to straight talk and make rational decisions.
I may be naïve, but I think that if asked to choose between the shell game presented by McDonnell and a genuine plan to provide secure and long-term funding for vital infrastructure, Virginians would do the right thing.
Certainly, drivers in Northern Virginia and Hampton Roads see the crying need for more funding every time they get on the road. Even the less populated areas of the state are seeing tangible signs of the Virginia Department of Transportation's cash crunch with the controversial closing of interstate rest areas and reduction in maintenance that leaves tall grass obstructing drivers' vision.
I know anti-tax sentiment runs deep in the commonwealth, but when you have the state Chamber of Commerce expressing support for new sources of revenue, it's clear that the sentiment is not insurmountable.
Even the U.S. Chamber of Commerce is pushing for an increase in the federal gasoline tax to help fund transportation across the nation. Businesses know that inadequate infrastructure will cripple their ability to compete.
The argument in Virginia is simple and clear: The gas tax, the main funding source for transportation, has not been increased in more than 20 years. That per-gallon tax has been eroded by inflation. The tax, set at 17.5 cents per gallon in 1987, would have to be 32.8 cents just to be worth what it was then.
Because funding has not kept pace with demand, Virginia is rapidly approaching the day when there will be enough money only to maintain -- poorly -- existing roads. There will be no money for new capacity, however congested roads become. There will certainly not be money for mass transit projects or other forward-looking projects that could help get traffic off the roads.
This funding shortfall will stifle Virginia's ability to prosper. The chamber sees it. Certainly, voters can be convinced.
Think how much more political weight Deeds would bring to the table if he ran on a specific plan that included new, sustainable sources of transportation revenue, if he spent the next three months convincing Virginians of the urgent need for real action. That would give him a genuine mandate to take to the General Assembly.
Maybe I'm being too hard on Deeds. McDonnell's plan, though long on specifics, falls well short on feasibility. It's mostly a collection of failed proposals to raid the general fund and short-change other important priorities such as education.
But that's the most we've come to expect from the type of Virginia Republican McDonnell represents. Deeds, as a legislator, has cast tough votes on this issue for years. I expected real leadership from him.
There I go, getting all idealistic again.
Radmacher is the editorial page editor of The Roanoke Times.
