The
results are now in: Barring a miracle between now
and the end of the Veto Session, the day after
April Fools Day, those concerned with smart growth
and a sustainable future were hosed at the 2003
General Assembly.
In
our last column (See Silver
Lining, March 3, 2003), we examined why the
very best that advocates of sustainable human
settlement patterns could hope for from the 2003
General Assembly session was a set of clubs to use
at election time. Every
seat is up for election this fall, and those who
have the fortitude to face voters after the last
session will be standing for reelection.
The
question is: What chance do those who favor
responsive, efficient state and sub-state
governance, and desire human settlement patterns
that support a sustainable future have of
achieving fundamental change?
From
a logical perspective, the odds look good.
First,
we have the support of the voters on these issues,
as demonstrated in poll after poll over the past
decade.
Second,
the support is concentrated in the three largest
New Urban Regions of the Commonwealth.
These urban places are not only have the
most voters, they are the most prosperous.
Most important, the citizens of these three
regions have the greatest institutional capacity
and the best networking potential.
These
three regions are the economic engines that pay Virginia's bills. As
of July 2002, these regions had 67.3 percent of
the population. If
one-person-
one-vote is the law of the land, and it
takes a two-thirds majority to achieve fundamental
change, then supporters of this change should have
no problem, right?
I
don't think so!
There
are four obstacles confronting any effort to use
the legislators' positions on issues related to
land use and transportation in the 2003 session as
a lever to get a rational and responsible majority
in the General Assembly this Fall.
Seniority
and politics. If the smart growth interests
are successful and the voters toss out many of the
current legislators who stand in the way of
fundamental change, the result could end up being
a re-enactment of the 70s following the first
suburban awakening.
The first awakening occurred in the
then-emerging economic dynamo -- the northern part
of Virginia. In this
Subregion angry voters tossed out many of those
whose vote did not to represent their interests
every two years.
This
made good government advocates feel better, but it
resulted in the leadership of the legislature
falling into the hands of the very forces that
most opposed the perspectives of the majority of
the population living in the northern part of Virginia. The
legislature ended up in the control of delegates
and senators from large, very-low density
districts south and west of Richmond. Their
names became household words in the 80s and 90s as
Virginia
emerged as a leader in 21st century technology and
18th century governance. These legislators have
repeatedly been quoted as saying that any
growth is good and that their constituents would
love see a new Wal Mart, power plant and 15
McMansions on a cul-de-sac in their districts, no
mater where they were located.
The
primary alternative to attempting wholesale
replacement of current representatives is to get a
promise-carved-in-stone that existing office
holders will mend their ways and work for the
common long-term good as determined by the public,
as opposed to engaging in party political horse
trading and soliciting campaign contributions from
special interests. For
instance, fear of losing builder PAC money was
often cited as the reason individual legislators
gave for opposing Adequate Public Facilities
Ordinances.
The
retread/promise-in-stone strategy worked with some
supervisors in Loudoun
County
in 1999, but will it work with legislators across
the Commonwealth? As
the next election approaches, the Loudoun effort
may be unraveling due to intra-party squabbling. This intra-party dissension is rooted in
the fact that the party leadership/party faithful
do not hold the same views as the majority of the
party members, much less the majority of the
voters.
The
only cure for this problem in a democracy is
extensive citizen education.
That process takes time and professional
help that no one seems willing to support.
This leaves control to the political party
apparatus, which means the citizens lose and
business-as-usual interests and their PACs win.
The
current legislative process. No
matter how many responsible legislators are sent
to Richmond
to represent the urban majority of the
Commonwealth, the current legislative process in Virginia
is black hole that adsorbs time and resources from
those seeking fundamental change.
The only good thing about the current mock
legislature is that it lasts only a few weeks each
year. The
rest of the time the legislature, which acts as if
it is indispensable during those few weeks, goes
into hibernation.
The
current system is one established to respond to
18th century technology, economic relationships
and population distribution. There is no
thought of working to create a more
perfect union, or more responsive governance
processes at the state and sub-state levels. There
is a near perfect governance vacuum at the
Regional and Alpha Community scales.
The
only winners are those who avoid getting tossed
out of office and return for more fun times in
Richmond. The
current legislative process is a yearly
re-enactment of Lucy jerking away the football
before Charlie Brown can kick it.
The core problem is that it is the only
game in town, and no one is stepping up to make
fundamental changes in the process.
As
bad as these two structural problems are, two
others may be even harder to address.
Faux
fiscal conservatism. Faux fiscal
conservatism is a disease that has morphed Virginia's tradition of "fiscal conservatism"
into something completely different to suit the
short-term political objectives of both parties.
Fiscal
conservatism has served the citizens of the
Commonwealth well in many ways.
It has led to intelligent investment in education
and infrastructure.
Taking advantage of the institutions and
prosperity created by these investments,
opportunistic politicians have changed intelligent
fiscal constraint into something completely
different. The
new theme seems to be "government is bad but
less government is less bad."
A lower tax burden and not better services
is a sign of good government and a pledge of
"no new taxes" is the only assurance of
a representative acting in a responsible manner.
Campaign
after campaign on these themes have convinced
voters that they are overpaying for the services,
and the way to solve it was to elect those who
pledged to pass no new taxes. Citizens fell for
this ploy and are paying for their mistake with
reduced services and growing governance
inefficiency. The
real goal should be to efficiently provide
services and create an effective governance
structure.
The
"no new tax/smaller government is good
government" phobia infects all government
services and deprives every citizen of the
services they should be able to expect --
education, health care, resource conservation,
etc. The
disease negatively impacts human settlement
patterns in many ways.
For example, failing to fundamentally
change the state and sub-state funding structure
encourages municipalities to chase non-residential
tax base to pay for "sub-state" (aka
municipal) services for residents.
This creates a wild imbalance in land use
control process and exacerbates the problems
associated with dysfunctional human settlement
patterns. "Tax
reform" is the current buzzword.
Failure of the state government to address
even the most blatant abuses of the current system
gives citizens little hope that there will be a
serious effort to make fundamental changes.
Providing
for the safety and prosperity of its citizens is a
government responsibility.
As Aristotle noted, the primary path to
safety and happiness of citizens is creating and
maintaining quality human settlement patterns.
This process costs money, and in a
democracy, the role of government is to fairly and
equitably allocate these costs.
Under
our federal Constitution, it is the Commonwealth's
responsibility to enable and support prosperous
and stable communities within sustainable New
Urban Regions. The
2003 legislative session proves again that those
in office have no idea what this means or how to
achieve these objectives.
The
obsession with private interests and neglect of
public responsibilities. Perhaps
because the citizens elected representatives who
are unwilling to address the larger issues, the
legislature and the executive branch have become
obsessed with issues of private rights and actions
(e.g., seat belts and parental notice) without
concern for private individual's collective
responsibilities. The
obverse is that the Commonwealth governance
structure has become incapable of focusing on the
collective, commutative impacts of government
action and inaction that impact the health, safety
and welfare of all its citizens.
Traffic
fatalities, traffic congestion, air quality, water
supply, economic prosperity, social stability and
environmental sustainability -- all items directly
related to human settlement patterns as well
as many others such as education, health and
safety that are indirectly related -- are
ignored in favor of sometimes trivial and
uniformly less important issues.
The Lt. Governor recently distributed an
e-mail to supporters lauding his efforts in
facilitating distribution of deer meat to poor
residents of the Commonwealth as an important
legislative initiative.
This
last point is perhaps the most
troubling. Most
agree that our individual prosperity and family
welfare is directly tied to our region's economy,
and the region's economy is directly dependent on
our competitive role in the global economy.
In this context, state government is taking
profoundly counterproductive actions and
crisis-sustaining inactions.
The focus on "individual rights"
and especially on "property rights" with
no mention of the collective private
responsibilities violates a basic economic
reality. Robert
Samuelson termed it "The Fallacy of
Composition": What is good for one is not necessarily good
for all.
The
stock market demonstrates the wisdom of this
observation every day.
There is, however, no more dramatic
demonstration of Samuelson's truth than in the
pattern and density of land use.
One
curb cut on an arterial road is a convenience to the
user and an occasional inconvenience or safety
concern to the users of the arterial.
Thirty curb cuts is strip development that
reduces the arterial road to a collector road and
may require a bypass.
One
urban house on a 10-acre lot in a small valley of
farms is by-in-large tranquility with an occasional
conflict. One
hundred urban houses on 10-acre lots in the valley
puts an end to agricultural activity.
Reviewing
and approving a series of "projects" that
may all meet the general criteria of the municipal
plan often results in a cumulative mess that
requires expensive public intervention after the
fact. This is
demonstrated in every urban area in the
Commonwealth.
If
the proverbial Man from Mars were to drop in on
Virginia and listen to the Richmond rhetoric, he
would not believe that according to the Year 2000
Census, fewer than than one percent of Virginians
live in families that are classified as
"farm" (e.g. non-urban).
Nearly 79 percent of Virginians live in the
eight metropolitan regions, and the other 20 percent
are urban residents who live in urban dwellings
scattered across the countryside.
The
inter-planetary visitor would think most Virginian's
were yeoman farmers living in a bucolic 1840
landscape. Those
who did not farm were engaged in small family
businesses -- most of them rolling cigarettes,
making shoulder holsters and other gear to conceal
weapons or running mortuaries.
It would also appear that these genteel souls
are being protected by the legislature from a demon
force called "sub-state (aka, municipal)
government" that is seeking to steal their
privacy, property and innocence.
The
common theme of discussions and decisions about
governance in the Commonwealth is competitive,
partisan, party politics-driven squabbling.
In
grade school world history classes, I was fascinated
by the suggestion that Nero fiddled while
Rome
burned. In our
town, when something was on fire, everyone helped
put out the fire. Then
it occurred to me that Nero was not really playing
the fiddle, he was just fiddling around.
Democracy has come to this: In Virginia it is
not the emperor who is fiddling; it is the whole
governance system that is fiddling around while the
Commonwealth grows ever more dysfunctional.
Those
who like to play the political game and want to beat
legislators over the head for their poor performance
in Richmond
during the 2003 legislative session have an
insurmountable obstacle course unless they start
with Civics 001.
--
March 17, 2003
|