Today, possibly tomorrow, we'll have a ruling from a judge in Arlington regarding whether the transportation "regional authorities" are constitutional. Opponents of the authorities "argue that the Virginia Constitution bars the authority from levying taxes." Proponents retort that "[t]here are many regional authorities that issue bonds and levy taxes, including sanitation authorities, housing authorities, park authorities."What's the answer here? We'll have an answer shortly, although the ruling is likely to be appealed. Personally, I think this entire transportation deal is a monstrosity, and have been saying so for months. I think the abuser fees are a disgrace, the money in the transportation bill is completely inadequate (and not dedicated, and not sustainable) to solve our transportation needs, there's no real "smart growth" vision there, and the regional authorities tend toe balkanize the state (whether they're unconstitutional or not, which frankly I doubt they are). Besides that, it's a GREAT piece of legislation! Ha. Heckuva job, House of Delegates, heckuva job.
Anyway, we'll see what the judge rules, and where this all leads. No matter what, this NOT the way to run a state. We need a change in leadership in Richmond, and we need it ASAP. On November 6, we'll have our chance. Go Chap and Janet and Ralph and George and John and Albert and Steve and Michael and Karen and Margi and Carlos and Paul and Joseph and Eric and Marty and Jay and Troy and....well, you get the idea! :)
I totally and completely agree that the transportation bill doesn't adequately deal with our transportation funding crisis. And I also agree that rapacious abuser fees are not necessarily the appropriate funding mechanism for our roads.
However, I do believe that regional taxing authorities may be a good partial answer to the problem. I have no problem paying higher taxes in my area if I want more services in my area. I don't think that regional authorities necessarily lead to the balkanization of the state. On the contrary, I think it can lead to better cooperation on other issues. If I am willing to pay extra for the extra things I want, but not charge you extra for those things, you might be more willing to allow me latitude on those things, since you're not paying for it.
Sort of. It's another variation on the tax-someone-else theme we've been discussing recently... as long as Richmond doesn't raise our taxes they've been good legislators. Yeah, right. At least they can say they didn't do it - make someone else increase taxes if all else fails.
C'mon, how much evidence do we need that these flat-earthers will not embrace responsible government? What? They're promising to fix a few problems with the CRFs? Sorry, that won't fix the heart of the problem - which is the Republicans in Richmond. Their irresponsibility is stamped all over the transportation monstrosity. The only way we're going to get good government is to kick those bums out of office this November.
Yes, we should handle transportation funding through gas taxes, as a general rule. But I personally don't have a problem with adjusted abuser fees for truly egregious traffic offenses as an additional revenue source spread across the state. As has been mentioned elsewhere, and before, rural areas might be a lot more dangerous when it comes to some driving behaviors than NoVA and Hampton Roads.
I think it's a question of scale, not principle.
As for putting a more responsible legislature in place come November, Hell yeah.
Everyone pays for schools.
Everyone pays for Medicaid.
Everyone pays for higher education.
Northern Virginia's economic prosperity benefits THE ENTIRE Commonwealth. Why should Northern Virginia's roads be special?
Also, remember that Northern Virginia and Hampton Roads will have more representation than the rural areas for the first time in Virginia history after the 2010 Census. Change is coming.