ROANOKE TIMES
Copyright (c) 1996, Roanoke Times
DATE: Thursday, April 25, 1996 TAG: 9604250022
SECTION: EDITORIAL PAGE: A-13 EDITION: METRO
COLUMN: RAY L. GARLAND
SOURCE: RAY L. GARLAND
MOST OF the business at the assembly's one-day "veto" session was cut and dried, and of no great importance. But there were some tense moments when all Democrats (joined by a few Republicans) tried to override Gov. George Allen's veto of three provisions in the 1996-98 budget.
The meatiest of these efforts focused on artful language Democrats inserted to enroll Virginia in federal Goals 2000 over the governor's strong objections. That would happen, they insisted, upon the formal request of 85 or more local school boards. As the assembly convened, this stipulation was close to being met. The locals, it seems, were hot for a few extra bucks.
Allen's veto, sustained by most House Republicans plus independent Lacey Putney of Bedford, appears to end the debate. There was talk of a lawsuit challenging the governor's right to veto mere language in the budget to which no specific state appropriation was attached. But Democratic leaders seem to have dropped that idea. It could be taken up, of course, by one or more local school boards. There are technical questions relative to the use of the veto the Virginia Supreme Court should clarify.
Goals 2000 was the perfect symbolic issue for both Democrats and Republicans. The federal money in prospect was trifling - less than $7 million. If spent in one year, it works out to about $6.50 a student. This might be set against per-pupil expenditures in Virginia now exceeding $7,000 a year.
The core of Allen's argument was that by signing up for Goals 2000, the state could become enmeshed in federal efforts to direct public schools. That combined both sense and nonsense. There's no question the teachers lobby would dearly love to see Congress take a larger role in deciding policy. The reason is simple: The fewer and more compacted the policy-makers you must influence, the easier your task.
But given the fiscal problems of the federal government, it's hard to imagine Congress giving the Department of Education a bigger stick. In fact, the federal share of public-school funding has declined steadily. In Virginia, federal funds now account for only 5.4 percent of total spending, down from 9.4 percent in 1979.
Allen is correct, however, in believing Goals 2000 provides the structure for nationalizing education policy, should that become the will of a future Congress. But there are two flies in that ointment. First, the political will to nationalize public education isn't on the horizon. Second, Virginia's refusal to embrace Goals 2000 doesn't repeal it, nor does it protect the state against future federal mandates.
Any time Congress wants to be the tail that wags the dog in public education, all it has to do is attach more strings to the aid it now provides. Unless the demands are outrageous, no governor will have the political support to refuse all federal money. And even if that political support were forthcoming, who can say a future, Clintonized Supreme Court would permit Virginia to stand aside?
But Allen was still right in taking a stand against Goals 2000. This country is too big and too diverse for a national education policy to work effectively. Goals 2000 means more busy bureaucracy spinning webs of gobbledygook.
In a more surprising move, Allen picked a fight over state support of $1.6 million a year for Virginia Cares, a nonprofit corporation based in Roanoke that operates a statewide network assisting released prisoners. This agency has been receiving state funds of increasing size for more than 15 years. The governor hung his hat on the argument there has never been any competition in awarding this grant. Assuming the Department of Corrections believes this service is worthwhile, it isn't clear what will be done to organize a bidding process before the start of the new fiscal year, or where the money would come from to fund it.
Almost as surprising was the veto of $950,000 destined for the College of Health Sciences in Roanoke, and $50,000 for Roanoke County to reimburse Rusco Windows Inc. for costs incidental to moving from one site in the county to another. Both had been pitched by House Majority Leader Richard Cranwell, D-Roanoke County, as legitimate economic-development issues.
Allen thought otherwise, saying the grants were too narrowly focused to meet state criteria. He also provided plentiful documentation showing that the Roanoke/New River Valley region had received a disproportionate share of such state grants during 1994-96.
The issue with the health college was especially troubling because Allen had supported state grants to the city of Buena Vista to assist Southern Virginia College, formerly Southern Seminary, a historic two-year private college fallen on hard times. The College of Health Sciences, faced with the loss of financial support from a local hospital, had asked for state help to make the transition to a self-sustaining operation.
In one of the most tasteless exercises ever seen on the House floor, Cranwell went through a stack of photographs of college employees and their families, asking delegates to take a good look at people they would be putting out of work if the veto stood. When asked about that, the president of the college said it had no intention of closing its doors. Cranwell's response was, "Nobody told me that."
The precedent of earmarking public funds for specific employers, however deserving, is clearly a bad one. Once the idea takes root, half the assembly's time will be spent deciding winners and losers, mainly on the basis of which legislator or party has the most clout.
Allen's argument was weakened by the fact he seemed to zero in on Roanoke money. It's impossible to avoid a conclusion he did that to get back at two of his chief tormentors in the House - Cranwell and Del. Chip Woodrum, D-Roanoke. If so, their patronizing bombast toward the governor had done much to earn it.
There might also be a lesson here for Roanoke that the everlasting rattle of the tin cup becomes tiresome, and there is no law that says Democrats will always control state government.
Ray L. Garland is a Roanoke Times columnist.
LENGTH: Long : 107 lines KEYWORDS: GENERAL ASSEMBLY 1996by CNB