Comments on: Bob McDonnell’s statement on Kaine’s transportation plan, translated into plain English.

By: Lonnie

Lonnie — Fri, 23 May 2008 13:59:22 +0000

One thing I think that's missing here is the connection between roads and growth. Suburban sprawl has placed a huge burden on local infrastructure. You now also hear these stories about some people commuting from two hours away. I think Richmond has to do more to empower localities to put the cost where it belongs, on developers, and give localities more tools to manage growth. For too long, it has essentially been developers who've planned the way that Virginia grows, and we're now paying the price. Instead, Richmond complains about transportation costs while creating a program intended to pave the rural gravel roads in Virginia. Localities that opt out of the program lose transportation dollars. Programs like this encourage suburban sprawl by creating in-roads for development in rural areas. Or, there's the notorious bill recently that sought to limit proffers from developers. Essentially Richmond wanted to remove the ability of localities to pay for new roads neccessitated by increased development. Or, there's the continued refusal to increase the number of years of back taxes once someone leaves the land use valuation program. All this amounts to subsidizing unmanaged growth and creating additional infrastructure costs down the road.

By: Waldo Jaquith

Waldo Jaquith — Wed, 14 May 2008 22:29:15 +0000

I've only once seen Bob McDonnell out in the wild, as it were. I was driving to the beach, IIRC, year before last. While I was on the new bypass around Richmond, 288, he blew by me going about 80mph in a big SUV. To my surprise, he did it again about twenty minutes later. The memory of him so blatantly violating the speed limit (one could say abusing the law) on a brand-new state highway seems especially ironic, in retrospect.

By: perlogik

perlogik — Wed, 14 May 2008 14:28:25 +0000

Tax increases as a rule:
1. almost never happen during an economic downturn
2. never happen during an election year
2008 is currently both

Federal taxes will go up (probably capital gains) in 2009
State taxes will go up in 2010.(assuming another democratic governor)
local taxes in the city will go up almost every year

By: Harry Landers

Harry Landers — Wed, 14 May 2008 12:20:29 +0000

Hmmm… I see opportunity for compromise. The auto registration fees stay flat for all vehicles, except those that are valued at $30,000 or more. For those vehicles, the registration fees are increased ten-fold. As much as I cringe at the “soak-the-rich” nature of this change, I think such a nod towards progressivism in tax policy would satisfy the Republican’s concerns as to where the weight of additional taxes ought to be borne.

By: MB

MB — Wed, 14 May 2008 04:14:29 +0000

This is what’s so amusing about that Republican Reality Distortion Field – not only are they deep within it, but they’re so far gone that they don’t even know how to make their BS complaints seem semi-believable. Republicans giving a damn about the regressive nature of something? Ha.

By: I.Publius

I.Publius — Wed, 14 May 2008 02:19:24 +0000

Is this the same Bob McDonnell who brokered the widely praised bipartisan transportation deal that Tim Kaine butchered and doomed to failure? Yeah, I thought so.

Kaine is a super nice guy, but unfortunately he’s been a horrible governor. His continual blunders — like this regressive tax hike — are going to do wonders for McDonnell’s campaign. I can’t wait to see Deeds or Moran run as far away from Kaine as they possibly can.

By: Waldo Jaquith

Waldo Jaquith — Tue, 13 May 2008 23:59:24 +0000

Good point, perlogik.

By: perlogik

perlogik — Tue, 13 May 2008 17:26:08 +0000

Even though it seems logical, an increase in the gas tax would be unwise for any politician at this time. Perhaps the Democrats can also offer to bringing back the car tax. It may be the only chance the republicans have.

By: Sam

Sam — Tue, 13 May 2008 15:27:45 +0000

“What has been absolutely ignored is last year’s historic increase in transportation funding.”

I think he meant to say “virtually ignored,” as it was unfortunately not ignored by the Supreme Court of Virginia, which found the unconstitutional elements of the transportation bill to be, er, unconstitutional.

But other than that triffling detail, it was a super great bill.

By: MB

MB — Tue, 13 May 2008 15:21:31 +0000

At which point Bob will have to remind his rabble that they do have to pay for their roads.

Will he? Pretty much ignoring reality has been a good electoral strategy, so far . . .

By: Bubby

Bubby — Tue, 13 May 2008 14:10:05 +0000

Not Bob’s problem? Before this thing is done, transportation funding legislation will be challenged by his base as some sort of abomination to the Right to Not Pay Taxes. At which point Bob will have to remind his rabble that they do have to pay for their roads. He will wear that dead chicken around his neck in 2009.

By: tomr

tomr — Tue, 13 May 2008 02:50:09 +0000

As one who has leaned Rep. since 84, I can’t believe that I missed the moment that the Reps decided to borrow the “poor and middle-class are disproportionately taxed” argument from the Dems!

With time, oil prices will take care of what new taxes will never be able to do.

By: J. Tyler Ballance

J. Tyler Ballance — Tue, 13 May 2008 02:29:53 +0000

What Bob is saying is that he supports multinational mega-corporations who will come here and take over our roads and charge us huge tolls to use them.

If this is what our Republican “leadership” has in mind, then we Republicans had better find better leaders.

A simple gas tax increase can get the job done and Virginians can retain control of our roads. Tell these puppets of the multinational corporations to leave our roads alone. Virginia will fix our roads without selling out to the multinationals as Bob McDonnell and his ticket mates apparently have already done.

By: finnegan

finnegan — Tue, 13 May 2008 02:16:12 +0000

We must raise taxes on the wealthy.

Wait. Did I say that out loud?

That one made me chuckle.