AFTER the chaos of last year's presidential election, all elections may seem anticlimactic by comparison. In Virginia, however, we will elect a new governor in November, which will affect how the state's treasury shapes up.
The budget problems that emerged in the Gilmore administration have become especially important as the economy has grown ever more sour. Yet both candidates have dodged the issue of taxes, both old and new. With a month to go before the governor's election, the fiscal picture needs to become clearer. Both candidates, Republican Mark Earley and Democrat Mark Warner, need to cut the silly rhetoric and openly discuss their budget plans.
When crafting their strategies, politicians usually look to the lessons of the last campaign to see what plays well and what to avoid. Gov. James S. Gilmore III won office in large part because of his campaign to end the car tax. Thus, it would seem to both sides that the tax-cutting message is an important one.
At the same time, however, Virginians were angered by the impasse between Gilmore and the General Assembly over getting rid of the car tax. The Republican-dominated Assembly believed that the car tax needed to be phased out more slowly to be able to achieve another campaign goal of improving educational quality without making a mess of Virginia's finances.
In the end, Gilmore used the impasse to impose his will, and now Democrats are making this into an issue. Their support in the polls indicates that voters also are concerned about maintaining Virginia's financial health.
The tension between these two signals - don't raise taxes versus fix the budget - has resulted in muddled campaigning. Although Earley has put forth some ideas that are of relevance to everyone, such as his transportation plan, he still trails Warner by nine points in his own campaign polls. Thus, the temptation to bring out the tax issue. Republican strategists see Warner's position on taxes as Earley's best chance ("GOP Poll has Earley Trailing Warner," The Washington Post, Sept. 28).
The problem with this strategy, though, is that the only tax increase proposed by Warner would come from a referendum by Northern Virginia residents. Polls show they overwhelmingly support the sales tax increase as long as it is earmarked for transportation.
Instead of pointing this out, or arguing that other regions of Virginia will not have taxes imposed on them, Warner has been over-complicating things by trying to spin this proposal as a non-increase. He disputed Earley's criticisms by saying that allowing a referendum on raising taxes is not the same as supporting taxes, and promised once again, "I will not raise taxes" ("Tax Argument Intensifies," The Washington Post, Sept. 27). Warner couldn't be more contradictory than this if he tried.
|
Earley, on the other hand, is very clear that he expects to cut taxes. For example, he has proposed tax credits for businesses investing in "distressed communities," among others. But his plan suffers from vagueness on the costs of these tax increases, and how he expects to combine cuts with new spending in a slow economy without putting Virginia in a deficit.
This is the main problem: The uncertain dance around the tax issue is obscuring the larger issue of how either candidate plans to avoid the budget issues created by the current state government's inability to compromise between branches. Both need to quit ignoring it.
Earley's Web site has no specific write-up on the budget under his "Earley on the issues" tab. Other than a few details about his tax cutting plans woven in with his spending initiatives, money is really not mentioned. Considering that Earley is a Republican, the stereotypical party of fiscal conservatism, such an entry would be appropriate. Indeed, many Republicans defecting to Warner have cited their unhappiness with Gilmore's fiscal record as a reason for their position. Earley needs to spend less time criticizing Warner's fiscal plans and get his own.
Warner's site is a little better, with the section "Standing up for Fiscal Conservatism." But it's still fairly unclear. Warner claims that he "is committed to maintaining Virginia's triple A bond rating" (www.markwarner2001.org). Of course, most people reading the Web site probably don't even know what that means. Warner does say he wants to restructure Virginia's tax code, but he punts the issue of how he'll do this to "a bipartisan citizen commission." Commissions have a purpose, but it's hard to believe Warner will follow their recommendations blindly.
Virginia's gubernatorial campaign sorely needs open debate on the Commonwealth's budget beyond empty soundbites on taxes. In an uncertain economy, the voters need well-thought out plans. This is not a time for fuzzy math.
(Elizabeth Managan's column appears Wednesdays in The Cavalier Daily. She can be reached at emanagan@cavalierdaily.com.)
Read More
BURSTEIN: Federal workforce cuts target Virginia — and Youngkin’s response falls short
By Carly Burstein | 3 days agoForcing employees to choose between uprooting their families or losing their livelihoods is not just callous — it is economically reckless.
HUYNH: Virginia’s proposed ‘whippets’ law is laughable
By Viet Huynh | 4 days agoAs people continue to be harmed by nitrous oxide abuse, Virginians will see this new law as the ineffective, ultimately harmful policy that it is.
EDITORIAL: We can demand more of our university presidents
By Editorial Board | 4 days agoWe hope for greater transparency because for the principles of solidarity in this statement to be enacted and effective, stakeholders must be treated as partners in resistance.
