THE VIRGINIAN-PILOT
Copyright (c) 1994, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: Thursday, October 27, 1994 TAG: 9410270010
SECTION: FRONT PAGE: A20 EDITION: FINAL
TYPE: Editorial
LENGTH: Medium: 58 lines
Few voters are aware that, in addition to the Senate race slugfest and congressional races, voters in Virginia will also face three proposed constitutional amendments.
I. Civil lawsuits involving children.
The General Assembly in 1991 extended the time period in which victims of childhood sexual abuse could file civil lawsuits from age 20 until age 28. Current law already provides an exemption from the standard two-year limit on civil suits if harm occurred when an individual was a child. The two-year clock then starts at age 18.
The Virginia Supreme Court, however, ruled that while the General Assembly could extend the time limit for future cases, the time period could not be retroactively extended for past cases. The proposed constitutional amendment would overturn that decision.
It has been argued that some people only recover memories of childhood abuse once they are into adulthood. This theory, however, is hotly challenged by many members of the psychology and psychiatric professions. Retroactively altering the rules to accommodate this controversial theory strikes us as unfair. We urge a No vote.
II. Voter registration.
Two issues are involved: easing registration by no longer requiring citizens to appear in person before a registrar and canceling registration of anyone who hasn't voted in four years. Both clash with the National Voter Registration Act, the so-called ``motor voter'' bill.
Continuing current law would mean two sets of registration records, one for state elections and the other for federal elections. That would be a terribly confusing waste of manpower and taxpayers' money.
While we recommend a Yes vote, it ought to be noted that these federal mandates that force changes in state law are not good public policy. Liberals hope that putting more people on the voter rolls will help their candidates. It wouldn't be surprising, however, if it brought out more people disgusted with Washington.
III. Governor's veto power.
The last amendment would strengthen the General Assembly in relation to the governor in terms of the latter's veto power. It would (a) limit the governor to one set of amendments to any General Assembly bill; (b) permit the General Assembly to act on amendments separately or in any combination, rather than as a unit, which is now the case; and (c) allow the General Assembly to enact original bills during regular sessions after accepting or rejecting the governor's amendments. This now is done only in veto sessions.
Virginia's governor has traditionally been a very strong figure, politically. That is positive because it spotlights accountability. Weakening the governor's veto power tends to weaken that accountability as well. We recommend a No vote. by CNB