Roanoke Times
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: THURSDAY, April 13, 1995 TAG: 9504130035
SECTION: EDITORIAL PAGE: A-13 EDITION: METRO
SOURCE: RAY L. GARLAND
DATELINE: LENGTH: Long
That about describes the relationship between Gov. George Allen and the Democratic majority in the General Assembly.
Stymied at the assembly's regular session in efforts to reduce state spending in order to cut the income tax and the local tax on business and professional receipts, the governor came up with the idea of amending the budget to return all lottery profits to 138 counties, cities and towns.
Contrary to what was said here several weeks ago, Allen did not intend to earmark these funds for education. He merely suggested they could be used to increase local spending on public schools, or anything else local governing bodies felt appropriate, including tax relief.
While the initial grant of $15 million in lottery profits for the fiscal year beginning July 1 wouldn't mean much in the context of local spending now exceeding $9 billion, the full impact of diverting all lottery profits to localities by the year 2000 would be highly significant. If the state didn't reduce existing grants-in-aid to localities, it would mean $722 million in new money over the next five years and more than $300 million every year after that.
"For those who share my goal of eliminating wasteful government spending and empowering citizens and local communities," Allen told legislators, "these amendments provide a second chance to reach beyond the mediocre status quo and enact positive change." Refusing to accept a status quo they had a large hand in creating as "mediocre," the Democratic majority (joined by a few Republicans) rejected the lottery-profits gambit.
Instead of using budget cuts Allen identified to fund the first year of the lottery giveback, Democrats accommodated his request for $11 million to expand the juvenile detention center at Bon Air. That was their nod to "pay as you go." But they also approved Allen's request for $72 million in debt to build a new maximum-security prison in Wise County.
While a number of the governor's suggested policy amendments to bills passed during the regular session were defeated, no bill other than the budget was enacted notwithstanding changes proposed by the governor. Where his amendments were rejected, Allen must now decide whether to accept the action of the assembly or kill the bill by refusing to sign it.
Except for the lottery proposal, most of the matters in dispute could be filed under the heading of "tempest in a teapot." There was, for instance, the momentous issue of selling the yacht Chesapeake that was donated to the state years ago. Allen had jumped on this with both feet as an example of a governmental style he didn't feel appropriate. The Democrats initially refused to part with the boat, transferring it instead to the Accomack-Northampton Planning Commission, but they reversed course.
And not to be outdone in the symbolism department, they added a mandate of their own, directing the state police to dispose of the famous helicopter that so often ferried former Gov. Douglas Wilder to a rendezvous in Charlottesville.
In the kind of lengthy debate the assembly often brings to a small subject, all manner of arguments were advanced pro and con on the sale of the helicopter, which is expected to realize all of $400,000 for the general fund. Apparently, the superintendent of state police had told the House Appropriations Committee the chopper was nearing the time it would require a $1 million refit to continue in service, and his agency could get along without it.
But the Allen administration suddenly discovered lots of reasons why the helicopter was needed, and the superintendent of police obligingly wrote the assembly a letter giving reasons why it shouldn't be sold. By a vote of 88 to 11, however, the House decided the helicopter should go. After making such a fuss over the yacht, one has to ask why Allen didn't take a pass when Democrats chose to up the ante by throwing the governor's whirlybird into the pot.
Perhaps the most important bill on which the Democratic majority and the governor deadlocked was the one conforming state voter registration to the new federal "motor-voter" law. Tracking federal mandates, the bill required registration at offices of the Division of Motor Vehicles, various welfare offices, the Virginia Employment Commission and recruiting offices of the armed forces. It also provided for registration by mail and prohibited the automatic purge (after notice) of those not voting over a period of four years.
Allen, who has instructed the state attorney general to join other states in opposing this in the federal courts, wanted to amend the bill to make it effective only if re-enacted by the 1996 assembly. Democrats rejected this on a virtual party-line vote, but couldn't muster the two-thirds required to enact the bill as originally presented to the governor. Allen will now kill the bill by refusing to sign it.
Unless the states are granted prompt relief by the federal courts, it's hard to know what will happen. My guess is the judges will come down at least on the side of allowing Congress to set rules of voter registration for federal elections. If Virginia refuses to conform, that would mean one set of books for federal elections containing all those who registered by mail, etc., and another for state and local elections. Clearly, that would be unworkable. But Allen was right in wanting to await the decision of the courts.
While the governor looks battered now, he still has good talking points to take into the fall elections for all assembly seats. He has defined the contest as a choice between those who would cut state spending in order to cut taxes and those who wouldn't.
While I wouldn't be as sanguine about the result of such a referendum as he seems to be, the people will have a real choice between competing philosophies of government. If ever the state needed an election to clear the air, it's now.
Ray L. Garland is a Roanoke Times & World-News columnist.
by CNB