Roanoke Times
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: THURSDAY, October 26, 1995 TAG: 9510260020
SECTION: EDITORIAL PAGE: A-15 EDITION: METRO
SOURCE: RAY L. GARLAND
DATELINE: LENGTH: Long
When the dust settles Nov. 7, Democrats will either retain the majority they've enjoyed all the years of this century; or, in a stunning reversal of fortune, will have lost it.
In the state Senate, a 20-20 tie is very possible. But Democrats would still organize that body on the vote of its presiding officer, Lt. Gov. Don Beyer. A tie is not possible in the 100-member House by reason of the presence of its sole independent, Del. Lacey Putney of Bedford.
In the unlikely event neither party wins more than 50 seats, Putney could decide which organizes the House. The price of his support might be to make him speaker. As the assembly's most senior member - and one of its most popular - we could do worse. Or, the outcome could be decided by someone switching parties.
Does it matter? You could find support for a negative conclusion in the fact that almost all of the state's budget for 1996-98 is spoken for - controlled by commitments previously made. For example, you won't see the assembly going back on the promise it rashly made in 1984 to have taxpayers pick up 100 percent of the cost of pensions for state workers. The issue now is finding the billions required to fund the Virginia Retirement System.
The debate in this campaign has been arid and nitpicking, because candidates of both parties may understand that - absent significant sources of new revenue, which nobody is proposing - there isn't much scope for initiative. Oh, Republicans might give local governments a few hundred million more to spend as they see fit, and Democrats might direct a similar sum to education that the GOP would like for prisons. But in the context of state and local spending exceeding $25 billion a year, such tinkering is minor.
The case for the Democrats boils down to the past. No person living remembers when Democrats didn't control the General Assembly. They have been at times arrogant, in the tradition of one-party rule, but seldom dangerous. That entitles them to a sizable share of the credit for keeping the state on a steady course.
The case for the Republicans boils down to the future as seen through the eyes of Gov. George Allen. If you believe the national Democratic Party is running on empty - fighting a rearguard action to preserve as much as possible of a discredited welfare state - you should stick with the genuine article of conservative change represented by Allen, and give no solace to Democrats anywhere.
If you like both Allen and what Republicans in Congress are doing, but are still inclined to support that local Democrat you also like, bear in mind that returning the legislature's Democratic majority will brand the governor a loser, and cause most of his ideas to be dead on arrival at the assembly's door.
Since Democrats' remaining in charge will mean more of the same, let's focus on what Allen might do with a GOP majority.
The most important issue is whether the legislature will yield control of lottery profits to counties, cities and towns, or continue to count this money in the state's general fund, where much of it will still find its way to local coffers. It's a small issue, but not insignificant. Getting some $320 million each year in new money, with no strings attached, would allow local governing bodies far more freedom to address local priorities.
Democrats say it's only a shell game, that once lottery money is taken out of the general fund, state grants to localities won't increase as much. State revenues will grow by several billion over the next two years, but that money will have many claimants. Still, giving local officials a source of new revenue to spend as they decide best is a sound principle.
Regardless of who wins, the state will face sharply increased costs for prisons - not only to pay for new construction, but to operate new facilities. There seems little doubt now that Democrats let the state fall well behind the rising curve of incarceration, and that Allen inherited the beginnings of a real crisis. While he hasn't said much about it in the campaign, the governor would like to finance much of his new construction with debt - to which Democrats are certainly no stranger. But this now provides a useful cover, in the name of pay-as-we-go, to reject proposals to reduce taxes or send lottery profits back to localities . But once these are safely out of the way, Democrats won't mind issuing some debt for prisons.
It's hard to have much faith in the governor's charter schools making a revolution in public education. But alternatives to traditional public schools have no chance with Democrats. The charter concept at least represents a small opening toward more choice and competition.
But the overriding issue is Allen's conviction that government must be leaner, and get out of the way of the private sector whenever possible. A true conservative agenda is at work in this administration, the likes of which Virginia hasn't seen in 30 years.
You can legitimately argue that government is already so conservative and business-oriented that no more is needed. But after a growth in state spending of 1,000 percent in 30 years, you can equally claim that a spirit of frugality, and a willingness to challenge the status quo, are overdue. Whether that represents sense or nonsense is the question truly independent voters must now resolve.
Ray L. Garland is a Roanoke Times columnist.
by CNB