ROANOKE TIMES
Copyright (c) 1996, Roanoke Times
DATE: Sunday, January 7, 1996 TAG: 9601110037
SECTION: VIRGINIA PAGE: A-1 EDITION: METRO
DATELINE: RICHMOND
SOURCE: ROBERT LITTLE STAFF WRITER
FORCED BY VIRGIL GOODE of Rocky Mount to come up with a power-sharing plan, Democrats and Republicans in the deadlocked state Senate are now talking about how to divide up committee chairmanships.
As legislators ready for their annual lawmaking session, a novel twist to recent Virginia politics is brewing in the state Senate: The political parties are talking about sharing.
No one is sure yet how the 20 Democrats and 20 Republicans in the Senate will divvy up power. Informal negotiations between the parties might not be resolved until the General Assembly convenes Wednesday.
The chances are increasingly high, however, that Republicans will, for the first time, control some of the Senate's committees, and possibly even one of the chamber's top leadership posts.
Many Democrats don't like it, to be sure. But two factors are pressuring them to consider sharing power with their GOP counterparts:
Maverick Democratic Sen. Virgil Goode of Rocky Mount has sent letters to all Senate Democrats saying he wants to share leadership with the Republicans and won't vote for any organizational plan that doesn't. Knowing that without Goode's vote they lack a majority, other Democrats are supporting the idea, too.
The Democrats hold their tenuous majority only by virtue of Lt. Gov. Don Beyer, a Democrat who has the power to break ties in the Senate. With that post up for election in two years, some senators worry about the consequences of shrugging off Republicans now, only to see them win control in 1997.
Another factor, one less tangible but no less pervasive, hints at real change. After a bitter 1995 session and a stick-in-the-eye election, legislators appear ready to let things calm down.
"The politics are rather delicate," said Sen. Charles Colgan, a conservative-leaning Manassas Democrat who also has written colleagues that he favors sharing power. "But I think everyone wants to get on with things."
There are 11 designated committees in the Senate, and Democrats historically have led them all - giving them the power to decide which bills live and which die. Because of last fall's election and two retirements, however, only six of those chairmen will return this year.
To Republicans, that makes for some simple logic: Fill the five empty spots with GOP legislators, and everyone's content. Rarely is politics so simple, of course - and certainly not in the 1996 Senate.
The empty committees are among the most influential - Finance; Education and Health; Courts of Justice; plus Agriculture, Conservation and Natural Resources; and Rehabilitation and Social Services. If Republicans drive those committees, they control most of the Senate horsepower.
So Colgan is offering a plan that would allow senior Democrats to move into those influential chairmanships; keep Local Government, Transportation, and Commerce and Labor; then give Republicans what's left - Privileges and Elections, General Laws, and Rules.
That would give Democrats eight committees and Republicans three; other scenarios being floated would give Republicans one or two additional committees - Education and Health, and Rehabilitation and Social Services - to make the split either 7-4 or 6-5.
The politics of that are, as Colgan put it, delicate indeed. To put a Republican in charge of social services would deny a chairmanship to Yvonne Miller of Norfolk, the only black and only woman in line to head a committee. To put a Republican in charge of education would deny a chairmanship to Senate Democratic Leader Richard Saslaw of Fairfax County and also give the GOP control of a panel that handles legislation of interest to teachers, often a vital Democratic constituency.
Under all the scenarios, the GOP would have a majority on the committees it would lead; the Democrats would control theirs. A handful of other Democrats say they're willing to back Colgan on splitting chairmanships - although the precise split remains unclear.
"It might be the only reasonable solution," said Sen. Charles Waddell, D-Loudoun County.
"If that's what it takes, I would be willing to consider it," said Sen. Jack Reasor, D-Bluefield. "I don't think we're under any obligation to find something that everyone will like, but I think we have an obligation to try.''
All of which broils other Democrats intent on clinging to power until forced to give it up.
"You don't give away power; you take it," said Sen. Louise Lucas, D-Portsmouth. "And right now, we can take it."
"If they had the lieutenant governor, they wouldn't even talk to us," said Sen. Richard Holland, D-Isle of Wight County, another who thinks Democrats should keep all the power they can get.
But when things are tied 20-20, there's no room for dissent. And while Colgan, Waddell and Reasor won't necessarily vote against their party if it takes a collective position, Goode doesn't even show up for their meetings. He wants to give Republicans even more authority than Colgan - granting them a leadership position, such as president pro tempore.
Ideally, Goode and the other more-conciliatory Democrats want a plan that both parties will accept for four years - regardless of who wins the lieutenant governor's race next year.
"I'd go along with that, if it's really something fair to everyone," said Sen. John Chichester, R-Fredericksburg, the senior Senate Republican and primary negotiator with Goode.
"If we could make an arrangement and leave it that way, it would be better for everyone," Chichester said. "I'm optimistic. There are a lot of intelligent people who want to work things out.''
LENGTH: Long : 106 lines ILLUSTRATION: GRAPHIC: Charts. 1. The 1996 General Assembly. color. 2. Senateby CNBchairmanships. KEYWORDS: GENERAL ASSEMBLY