Kaine Takes His Case to Virginia FREE

I’ve been a vocal opponent of Gov. Timothy M. Kaine’s proposal to raise $1 billion in taxes for transportation. And after hearing him address the Virginia Foundation for Research and Economic Education (VA FREE) yesterday, I still oppose his plan. But I believe in giving the devil his due. Kaine made a more lucid case for his tax plan than anything I have read in the voluminous newspaper coverage of the issue. In the interest of elevating the transportation debate to a higher level of discourse, I present his arguments here without my usual commentary.

Kaine’s transportation plan does not hinge upon taxes alone. The Governor acknowledges the need to change the way the system works. Virginia has made good headway in improving the accountability of the Virginia Department of Transportation, and the state has begun connecting transportation and land use decisions. “Five years ago VDOT could not finish a construction on time or on budget,” he said. The Commonwealth Transportation Board could not build a reliable six-year plan — its list of transportation projects bore no relationship to the actual costs of the projects or revenue available to fund them.

Today, VDOT is 1,000 employees leaner and engaging in a round of facility consolidations that will make it even more efficient. The number of projects coming in on time and on budget has reached roughly 90 percent. And the projects listed in the state’s six-year transportation plan, though sharply curtailed, are at least realistic.

As for land use, Kaine said, “We will have more discussions about that next year” — presumably in reference to legislative proposals submitted by the House of Delegates but not acted upon in the September transportation session.

Even with all those reforms, Kaine contends, the transportation system needs more funding. One of the core revenue sources, gas taxes, has been flat since 1986 but construction costs have escalated steadily. In “a growing, thriving state with population growth … the only way to solve our challenges is to find more revenues. … You cannot have an ‘A’ system on a ‘C’ revenue stream.”

The question then becomes: Where do the revenues come from? Kaine does not want transportation to “compete with” schools, health care and other General Fund priorities. Transportation needs its own dedicated revenue sources. Kaine proposes to raise about $1 billion a year through “user based” taxes — on auto insurance, car registrations and auto titling, supplement by abusive driver fines. A competing state Senate plan would rely primarily upon a wholesale gasoline tax.

In setting new tax rates, Kaine compared current Virginia tax rates to those of neighboring states. In most cases, our taxes are lower — often significantly lower. Our 17.5 cent-per-gallon gasoline tax compares to $.30 in North Carolina, $.22 in Washington, D.C., $.245 in Maryland, and $.21 in Tennessee.” Only South Carolina, at $.16, is lower. There are similar discrepencies in the auto titling tax, he argues. Bottom line: Virginia can raise the extra $1 billion a year without raising its transportation taxes any higher than its neighbors.

People who think Virginia can solve its transportation problems without more revenue, Kaine suggested, either “don’t understand economics” or are willfully obscuring reality.

Update: Read Michael Shear’s account of Kaine’s speech in the Washington Post. You’d hardly know we attended the same meeting or heard the same speech. Shear focused exclusively on the political elements of the Governor’s speech, especially the implied criticism of the House of Delegates, and totally ignored the substance of his arguments. It causes me to wonder — what else is Shear leaving out of his stories? Which is a scary thought because Shear is less captive to his partisan/ideological prejudices than many of the reporters covering state politics. What are they leaving out of their stories?

If journalists don’t report the substance of politicians’ arguments — as I have done in this post, even though I don’t agree with them — citizens have no hope of understanding the complex issues that confront them.

Note: I have corrected a couple of facts and typos brought to my attention by readers in the comments section.


Share this article



ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)



ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)


Comments

14 responses to “Kaine Takes His Case to Virginia FREE”

  1. Anonymous Avatar

    The Governor’s proposal, if approved, would prevent any real reforms from taking place. Why fix problems when there’s more money to spend?

    Can the Governor demonstrate by an audit that VDOT has sufficient cost controls in place? Can the Governor demonstrate that the CTB makes funding recommendations based on engineering and economic factors and not based on lobbyists’ sway? (If the CTB had been fixed, the special interest groups would be screaming, as they are about the Prince William County BoS.)

    Can the Governor demonstrate that newly funded projects would improve traffic congestion and not just fuel more development? What roads would be built and what changes in LOS, safety or other factors would the public see as a result of paying higher taxes?

    Bottom Line: Governor Kaine is NOT an honest man. He campaigned for office with a promise to restrict rezoning when the roads were inadequate, a promise to protect the transportation tax trust fund, and a general promise not to raise taxes. He does the opposite. That’s wrong. It’s no different than the Congressional Republicans campaigning on a small government platform and then breaking the bank on appropriations.

    Tim Kaine may get by with this because of the compliant MSM, but I don’t know how he can look himself in the mirror each morning.

    Do the fixes first; then come back and talk revenues.

  2. James Atticus Bowden Avatar
    James Atticus Bowden

    Money for public goods competing in government, especially in the legislative process that taxes, is the way government is supposed to work.

    It causes elected officials to set priorities, make decisions, and balance the public good against the golden goose of the capitalist economy.

    Furthermore, money thrown at problems doesn’t solve the problems.

    The plans need to show how they actually solve the problems. The Hampton Roads wish list – by their own analysis – resulted in MORE congestion in 20 years than today.

    The administration of the plans, especially when they go for unelected, unaccountable regional governments, needs to pass scrutiny.

    When government gets those things right, then make the case for a hike in gas taxes, etc.

  3. E M Risse Avatar

    “People who think Virginia can solve its transportation problems without more revenue, Kaine suggested, either “don’t understance economics” or are wilfully (sic) obscuring reality”

    A more comprehnsive way to state reality is:

    People, including governors, who think Virginia can solve its mobiltiy and access crisis without Fundamental Change in human settlement problems, regardless of how much revenue is avaliable, either “don’t understand enonomic or physics or a willfully obscuring reality for political or monitary gain.

    EMR

  4. James Atticus Bowden Avatar
    James Atticus Bowden

    EMR: I actually understood what you wrote. And, I agree.

  5. Anonymous Avatar

    “One of the core revenue sources, gas taxes, has been flat since 1996 but construction costs have escalated steadily”

    Just to keep the facts straight, the year was 1986.

    This is excellent discourse on needed changes to Virginia’s transportation program and policies. It would be great to have a bi-partisan plan (so everyone can claim credit) for implementing phased solutions.

    Is there any agreement on the fact that the cost of transportation has been artificially low? Low-cost driving and delivery of goods in the U.S. seems to be considered a right, and not a privilege. We are now being faced with the true costs – and noone wants to pay.

    Just a few more facts (with a pro-transporation focus).

    Due to a lack of state funding, 70 percent of VDOT’s construction programs must now be paid for with federal dollars. The national average is only 42 percent. Federally funded projects take longer to complete because of federal requirements.

    No funding is available to complete any of the 11 multimodal transportation networks identified in the state’s long-range transportation plan (VTRANS 2025).

    Due to a lack of new, long-term, sustainable funding, this year VDOT will be forced to take more than $250 million from its construction program to fund highway maintenance.

    Twenty-nine percent of Virginia’s roadways are rated poor or mediocre. VDOT needs more than $1 billion in additional revenue to simply meet current maintenance needs.

    During the past five years, highway construction costs have increased by more than 25 percent.

    Inadequate road conditions and congestion cost the average Virginia driver nearly $1,000 per year.

    More than 3,000 of Virginia’s bridges are structurally deficient or functionally obsolete.

    VDOT must accept more than 200 miles a year of local roads into the state highway system each year, with no additional money to maintain them.

    JAS

  6. Jim Wamsley Avatar
    Jim Wamsley

    Any plan to spend more money with out changing the current allocation formula will fail.

    The first step is recognizing your problem. The problem is not money. The problem is projects that are chosen for pork instead of progress.

    A new allocation formula is needed that makes highways compete with railroads for freight and commuters. The new formula has to solve the problem of congestion. Remember that congestion is measure in hours, not in miles, travel miles or lane miles.
    It must also solve the problem of the value of the improvement. Land and construction is more expensive in Northern Virginia and Hampton Roads and state spending can not continue to ignore this fact of life.

    When the Governor recognizes this we can move forward.

  7. Larry Gross Avatar
    Larry Gross

    I don’t agree with the claims that VDOT projects are substantially on time and on budget nor do I agree that the 6yr plans are realistic. Both ARE vastly improved .. but they are still not representative of financial realities.

    and readers here can verify for themselves .. my assertions.

    Go to the VDOT website and find your own local jurisdictions webpages for your 6 yr plan and then onto the Dashboard and take a look at the projects in your own jurisdiction.

    http://dashboard.virginiadot.org/
    http://syip.virginiadot.org/LineItems.asp?syp_scenario_id=83

    Look at the allocated funding, the projected allocations and the anticipated construction dates ..
    and see for yourself… that all is not as well as advertised.

    Good News – This stuff is actually available to the public… Bad News – most don’t even take the time to look

    And I also concur that TMT asked a lot of the right questions.

    I’ll ask two more.

    Where does Kaine and company stand on the JLARC and Auditor of Public Account VDOT Recommendations?

    Would he agree to go forward and implement some if not all of these recommendations?

    IF what he wants is higher taxes and more revenue but to ignore the recommendations of his own auditors – shame on him.

  8. nova_middle_man Avatar
    nova_middle_man

    Here is my humble attempt to sum this up so both “sides” are happy

    Everyone can agree more money needs to be spent on transportation right?

    I will stop here first there is a significant contingent within the house of delegates that does not believe this

    The two major arguments against the Kaine proposal were the existance of a budget surplus and that the money would not be spent wisely.

    The budget surplus is a shorterm effect that will disappear.

    Fearing that the money will not be spent wisely is an adequate concern. The solution is a carrot and stick approach that more money will be allocated if the “allocation and funding” rules are changed.

    Now there are many smarter more wonkish people that can adjust these rules for the benefit of all. Maybe the Cost Cutting Caucus could look into further reforming VDOT.

    The year that we delayed increased the costs of funding but BOTH sides are at fault for failing to compromise. The Senate plans weren’t a compromise since there were no VDOT reforms attached.

    I am troubled by the fact that Kaine uses the argument that taxes can be raised because they are lower than other states.

    I also share concers that the Norther Virginia 2025 is more of a wish list and contains many projects that are not necessary, cost-effective or would add to traffic woes.

    Finally to close it all comes down to settlement patterns. We can widen and build more secondary roads but in the end all this does is cause additional congestion on the main arteries. This PW moratourium is intersting but I fear all it will do is increase developement in Stafford and Fauquier causing people to drive on Prince William roads anyway.

    I guess the argument is the county will not have to provide services. Prince William has moved on to phase 2 and followed the lead of Fairfax to build more business since business is much cheaper than residents while still providing a tax base.

  9. Larry Gross Avatar
    Larry Gross

    It’s the how and why and who and what behind spending money.

    WHAT are we spending it on?
    WHY?
    How will it be spent?
    Who will spend it?

    What sense does it make to raise money statewide in the first place for local and regional roads?

    Why send it to Richmond to start with?

    How does VDOT classify roads these days? They still have Primary and Secondary designated roads with separate pots of money and they do not allocate it based on congestion or VMT … but rather some process not disclosed to the general public.

    Past experience has amply demonstrated that local taxes go to Richmond.. and what is returned is an IOU not worth the paper it is written on in terms of when and where something will be constructed.

    Now if someone wants to make the case that JLARC makes – that our road classification system needs to be reformed to reflect functional use and that we prioritize according to standardized metrics like VMT and peak hour congestion and the like THEN we can talk money and how much.

    What Kaine and the pro-taxer want is the money in hand FIRST.. and then they’ll decide what, if anything, they would do in the way of real reform.

    I don’t think we need to completely re-do everything overnight especially with land-use and settlement patterns but there needs to be some level of commitment to reform – in the form of proposed legislation BEFORE many folks are going to sign a blank check for more money.

    Voters in NoVa and HR in 2002 sent this message. Apparently it was never received or it was ignored.

    Since that message was sent – voter have approved a dozen or more local referenda for roads.

    What can Kaine do to convince them to send more of that local money to Richmond instead?

    It’s going to take more than “trust me”.

  10. Matt (not the usual one) Avatar
    Matt (not the usual one)

    Heres my take on this.

    Clearly, some people are not ok with more taxes and/or with DOT taking this on, whereas others are.

    Why not do this. From all the willing (for both the above things), why doesnt the govt take taxes and restructure it as a bond (or a discounted share in the final project).

    This way, people who think taxation is ok to solve their transportation problems have a way of contributing.

    The payoff – these people get either free or highly discount access to the final road/roads built. And whenever, revenues are nuetral, they get back tax breaks in proportion to whatever number of shares/bonds they hold.

    As for the people who dont want taxation/DOT interference, let us not allow them to use the final product of the above (they havent been taxed for it anyway). Or if they finally decide to jump onto the bandwagon, their access to these roads should be priced much higher. If you dint wanna put in the molah earlier, you gotta pay for it sometime if you want the goodies. This pricing can be in the form of car taxes/tolls/car stickers whatever.

    So the second category of people always have the option of not using the roads. They will also not be taxed and I am guessing that will make them happy.

    This is by no means a final solution but just a very crude sort of outline pen to lots of refinement. The basic idea is splitting up the people (given that their seems to be equal numbers on both sides). If someone doesnt want additional tax, let us not tax him. But then he doesnt get to use the end result of the tax either. Likewise for the other side.

    That should make everyone happy.

  11. Ray Hyde Avatar

    Matt, I have suggested a similar idea.

    Put a rough outline of the states budget at the highest levels on the backof your tax form. Have people allocate their own tax dollars to the categories where they wish it to be spent.

    Add up all the dollars allocated on the forms for each category and direct the legislators not to vay from any category more than 15%.

    That way we will know unequivocally who wants money spent on what, and we can stop posturing. Those agencies that wind up short can go out and advertize to the electorate, instead of having the process controlled by special interest. Special interests can fund their own advertizing or that of the agencies they support, but the goal will be to seing the opinion of the entire populace, not just the legislators.

  12. Larry Gross Avatar
    Larry Gross

    Ray – since you are in favor of having the public decide the transportation issue – what do you think of this?
    “POLL finds that American Public strongly prefers TOLLS over TAXES:

    The AAA in a survey find that the American public strongly favor tolls over fuel taxes by 52% to 21%. This isn’t news to anyone except perhaps the AAA lobbyists who take a consistently hostile stance toward tolls. Many previous public opinion surveys have found the same public preference for tolls over fuel taxes, but it is news that AAA itself finds this.

    According to a press release today the survey called “Pockets of Pain” involved interviewing 2,394 respondents and has a margin of error +/-2%.

    The press release refers to a “sea change” occurring in the public’s attitude toward traffic congestion and the need to increase funding for transportation. 70% of the public agrees more money is needed and that we are not keeping pace with the demands on the system.

    64% of the public think the traffic they experience has become more congested in the past three years.

    The press release says:”When respondents were asked to choose from a number of funding options, the public did not favor using general purpose revenues. “In fact, the most frequent choice – 52% – was some form of toll option to help raise money to fund our transportation system.

    Only 21 percent of respondents favored increasing the gas tax.”

    http://tollroadsnews.info/artman/publish/article_1638.shtml
    http://www.aaamidatlantic.com/safety/release_content.asp?id=3244

    How about we add that option also to the tax form?

    I wonder if Mr. Kaine and his fellow pro-taxers are paying attention to this POLL?

    Note that this is the Mid-Atlantic AAA also

  13. According to alot of the logic I see here only sick people should pay for health insurance.
    What in the world is wrong with adding more lanes when a road is congested?
    How does ignoring it make it go away?
    VDOT has been under fire and making changes and shrinking since George Allen was Governor.
    Very competent and capable bridge and road builders have been leaving the state for years now. They are gone.
    The few that are left will never be able to undertake the projects that will be required when all of this nonsense is over and we decide to get back to work. All of this psycho analysis and paralysis has real and lasting results. VDOT has an amazing record both environmentally and in construction, but to listen to you guys there has been nothing done correctly. But if you look hard to see what the alternatives being pushed forward are, there is nothing there. Just criticism. If you have concrete proposals, not just airy ideas, lets hear them. Just saying land use issues are the problem is not a viable solution. What is your solution? Be specific. Multi story, multi residential, complexes with buses and/or rail only? You can’t drive a car because we will not allow a road to be widened to accomodate your car? OK, will you guarantee us that you will be the first person to move into this Nirvanna or is this just for the other people to live in? Be honest about it. What are the solutions, in english, plain and simple. Saying you can’t pave over everything is very disingenious, because no one is suggesting that. If there are a certain number of people in an area, there will be a certain quantity of needs to be addressed including schools, garbage collection, public transit and roads. If the area around it has grown then it would be a safe bet to plan that the outlying areas are also going to grow and a good plan for transit and roads would be in order. I see lots of complaints about sending money to Richmond but Northern Virginia in their infinite wisdom chose to ignore all of their own plans drawn up as far back as the 1960’s for outer beltways and other roads and have sent state wide transportation dollars back to Richmond since “they didn’t need it” and fortunately for the Richmond area they have been able to keep their roads out ahead of the development.
    You can’t blame them for spending the money that Northern Virginia refused to spend. Again, I see lots of talk here, Please get specific. If you have real answers I would like see them.
    Remember, you would need to live wherever this is. Just dreaming up where everybody else should live doesn’t cut it. Good Luck. I really hope there are some good solutions. Until then I don’t think we need to be trashing the system that brought us here in the first place. We are actually a pretty lucky people that have been handed a really nice life by our hard working predecessors and we owe the same to our own children.
    Thanks.

  14. Larry Gross Avatar
    Larry Gross

    I don’t think you’ve been paying attention .. right?

    Both JLARC and the Va Auditor of Public Accounts have laid out in chapter and verse not only what is wrong but how to fix it. Specific Recommendations like you advocate.

    So a homework lesson:

    Go read these reports and then come back and tell us what VDOT has done in response to these recommendations?

    if you need URLs.. give me a shout. If you don’t know who JLARC and APC are then.. you REALLY need some homework.

Leave a Reply