Bacon's Rebellion

Democracy Thrives in Sunlight

Who the Real Ideologues Are

—

by

James A. Bacon
in

The Roanoke Times has joined a justifiably long list of observers appalled by the prospect of imposing punitive fines for driving offenses — fines that will (a) encourage more people to contest their tickets, (b) clog the courts, and eventually (c) start jamming local jails with working-class stiffs who, unable to pay the fines, will lose their licenses and then get arrested for driving without a license. It won’t take long before these flaws are manifest to all.

I take no issue with the Times’ criticism of the punitive fines, or even its endorsement of gasoline taxes as a preferred source of transportation revenue. But I do take issue with its kneejerk characterization of the General Assembly. Writes the Times editorialist: “Motorists can thank the General Assembly’s anti-tax ideologues in the House of Delegates who refused even to consider tax increases to pay for the state’s needed highway improvements.”

Got that? Anyone who opposes tax increases is an “ideologue.”

As opposed to pro-tax advocates who are… what, exactly?

By my recollection, the Axis of Taxes has been agitating just as long and hard for higher taxes as their anti-tax foes have been resisting them. But more successfully. Taxes are going up in Virginia this year, not down — a fact that apparently has escaped the notice of the Campbell Ave. crew. Likewise, if the anti-taxers “refused even to consider” tax increases, what can be said of the Axis of Taxes? The pro-tax crowd has just as steadfastly “refused even to consider” any transportation strategy that doesn’t entail higher taxes: strategies such as congestion pricing, an end to government mass-transit monopolies and, most important, reform of human settlement patterns to encourage fewer and shorter automobile trips.

At least the “anti-tax ideologues” passed legislation that restructures the way in which state and local governments build and maintain roads. The changes, though shamefully under-reported by the press, are comprehensive and far reaching. By contrast, the Axis of Taxes never relinquished its monomaniacal advocacy of tax-build, tax-build as the solution for all transportation ills. With the exception of Gov. Timothy M. Kaine, tax advocates never offered one solution that didn’t require mo’ money. Not one.

Yes, the punitive fines are an abomination, and I’m betting that they will be repealed eventually. But they might never have been necessary if the Axis of Taxes and its enablers in the punditry hadn’t taken such a hard line and had thought more creatively about how to improve mobility and accessibility.

Share this article

ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)

ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)

Comments

20 responses to “Who the Real Ideologues Are”

  1. Rodger Provo Avatar
    Rodger Provo

    Jim Bacon –

    I know you are a big fan of the GOP
    conservative wing that controls the
    House of Delegates in our General
    Assembly.

    But I want you to consider these
    facts relative to the so-called
    compromise growth management-transportation package approved by
    the 2007 GA session and signed by
    the governor that was cooked up in
    secret meetings in a posh hotel in
    downtown Richmond away from public
    examination:

    -the new fines written about by
    the Roanoke Times hit Virginia
    residents the hardest, lower fines
    will be levied on out of state and
    non US drivers who violate our new
    laws designed to punish bad drivers and fund our troubled
    transportation system;

    -the new transportation authorities in Hampton Roads and
    Northern Virginia have the power
    to levy new fines and taxes on
    businesses and residents in our
    two most populated regions for the same purpose;

    -and out of state motorists traveling across or visiting our
    state will continue to buy fuel
    in Virginia that has some of the
    lowest taxes
    levy on that commodity in the USA.

    It would seem to me the Virginia
    GOP and Jim Bacon are not friends
    of Virginia, but instead want to
    protect motorists and truckers from Canada, Florida and New Jersey
    and the like.

  2. Waldo Avatar
    Waldo

    To be fair, the paper didn’t say that “anyone who opposes tax increases is an ‘ideologue.’” The author wrote that “anti-tax ideologues in the House of Delegates who refused even to consider tax increases,” which describes merely one particular group of ideologues within one legislative body, not “anyone who opposes tax increases.”

    The Oxford Dictionary defines an ideologue as “an adherent of an ideology, especially one who is uncompromising and dogmatic.” That certainly seems like a description that those delegates being described would wear proudly, and rightly so.

  3. Jim Bacon Avatar
    Jim Bacon

    Waldo, The key words are “uncompromising and dogmatic.” That’s exactly my point. The description fits the Axis of Taxes even better than it fits the anti-taxers. When has anyone in the Axis of Taxes camp demonstrated themselves to be anything other than uncompromising and dogmatic?

    Rodger, How many times do I have to express my support for gasoline taxes, and how many times do I have to criticize the abomination of a transportation-funding policy that was passed, before it sinks in that you and I agree on those particular issues?

    But tell me this, when was the last time anyone in the Axis of Taxes (other than Tim Kaine) contributed one single new idea on how to address traffic congestion other than to raise taxes and build more roads/rail? I know that *you* support urban/suburban re-development and revitalization as a way to develop more transportation-efficient human settlement patterns, but when have any of your Axis of Taxes buddies done anything more than give the issue lip service?

  4. Ray Hyde Avatar
    Ray Hyde

    I’m no so sure they will be repealed. they seem to work in NJ.

  5. Larry Gross Avatar
    Larry Gross

    yeah I wondered if JB would pick up on the Roanoke’s “take”.

    My “take” is that what they were saying is that because the anti-taxes were PERCEIVED as so dogmatic in their view of no tax increases that instead of staying true to the claimed philosophy – that they engaged in some tortured logic to take more money from people but not call it a tax increase.

    The so-called “axis of taxes”, however, have never made any secret of the fact that they DO believe that raising the gas tax IS needed – and justified because it had not been structured to index with regard to inflation AND they were willing to stand for re-election on that basis.

    So.. what the Roanoke paper was saying was that the anti-tax folks in order to APPEAR to remain “pure” in their quest to NOT take more of the people’s money via taxaction would, in effect, do the same thing, but not call it taxaction.

    My view is that … If you are FOR tax increases – then you say so and you push for them and you accept the voters decision with regard to same.

    And if you say you are opposed to tax increases – then you should not engage in efforts to impose on people additional costs that walk/talk and quack like a tax increase – but you technically call it something else.

    I think there is an important point here with respect to whether or not voters “trust” those who say one thing – and do another – and I believe that it is something that is behind NoVa trending more Blue.

  6. E M Risse Avatar
    E M Risse

    Good point Larry.

    You can fool all the people some of the time, …

    For me it is another nail in the coffin of Autonomobility unwittingly driven there by Business As Usual advocates.

    EMR

    EMR

  7. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    Ray — if I understand correctly, in NJ, a) the fines are assessed on ALL drivers, not just NJ-licensed drivers, and b) the fees in NJ are a fraction of those that will be assessed here (I think I read in the Washington Post that for the same violation, the tax is $100 in NJ but will be $900 here). I’m sorry, but a $1050 TAX – not “FINE” – for someone failing to use a signal?

  8. rodger provo Avatar
    rodger provo

    To All –

    anonymous (12:07 pm) – thanks for the clarification and helping us
    understand what a bad bill our
    GA and Governor produced in the
    2007 session.

    EMR (11:23 am) – right on!

    Larry Gross (10:37 am) – you are so right about this package’s
    intent was to raise revenue via
    fines not taxes – such large fines
    appear to be a tax to me – just
    watch the fight in the courts as
    motorists try to beat these big
    fines via the charges levied against them.

    Jim Bacon (8:39 am) – Your posting
    this morning took a swipe at the
    Roanoke Times editorial writer not
    the crowd in the GA that gave us
    this bad bill. I think you need to reconsider who is the bad guy
    in these matters.

  9. Leslie Carbone Avatar
    Leslie Carbone

    So those of us who oppose punitive taxes are responsible for punitive fines? Yeah, sure–if you assume that the greedy hand of government is entitled to grab as much of our money as it covets, by any means possible.

  10. Larry Gross Avatar
    Larry Gross

    well if the principle is government taking money from citizens – then why is it such a big deal to not have it labeled as new taxes?

    geeze.. I don’t want higher taxes either but I also think it’s a bit disengenuous to still take the money but claim that taxes were not raised.

    and really.. if you knew there WOULD BE higher taxes – would you have chosen higher gas taxes or “gotcha” type fines?

    I see it wrong on two counts. First the argument itself is a bit disengenuous and second.. I think the idea of using higher fines confirms the worst suspicions of those that think localities run radar traps to raise revenue.

    I would expect, more than anyone else – the conservative folks to clearly demonstrate .. scrupulous principles and integrity… since the lefties take hits all the time about being unprincipled and disengenuous.

    🙂

  11. Groveton Avatar
    Groveton

    Maybe these driving penalties are just a scam to raise money without calling it raising taxes. However, there are a few real knuckleheads out there on the road. You can pretty much drive anywhere for an hour on any Virginia highway and see some idiot driving like a fool. There aren’t many of them but man they drive badly! I’d like to see some way to get these dangerous dipsticks off the road.

    Speaking of roads – they are either part of the critical infrastructure provided by the government or they aren’t. If they are – taxes need to be raised. Maybe these taxes should be usage based. That’s fine (sort of) but these are taxes. What’s not fine is “congestion pricing”. All roads cost money to build and maintain. All roads – not just the congested ones. Frankly, the congested roads are more a failure of government planning than anything else. Every time I drive around Richmond I find myself on Rt 295 – a four lane highway that is never, every congested. In fact, it’s never even busy. Then you get to two lane Rt 64 E and the jam starts. Is it the fault of the people of West Point, VA that the state wasted its money on Rt 295 instead of expanding Rt 64? Should Rt 64 be subject to “congestion pricing” while Rt 295 is “free”?

    No way.

    Either the state collects taxes and builds roads or everybody pays a usage fee. Everybody.

    You commute one hour each way to work on I-95? You pay a usage fee.

    You drive around Lee County? You pay a usage fee.

    Are usage fees really taxes? Yeah – pretty much.

    Should people pay for roads that are already built? Of course. The government could always sell the right to charge tolls on those roads to some corporation which would pay real money to do so. An asset has value long after it is built.

    Do some roads cost more than others? No doubt. Of course, it’s the cost per mile driven that really counts if you charge by the mile.

    What’s the difference between a gasoline tax and charging everybody for the miles they drive? Not much.

    Will these usage fees change “human settlement patterns”? No. People already pay more to live in the suburbs. They already pay more in time and money to commute from their large lots to their jobs. If you really want to change human settlement patterns – let the congestion continue to build. People will eventually give up and either get a job closer to home or move closer to work. Or shop nearby or tell Little Billy that he can’t play on the cross county “travel squad”.

    So, what is my clever plan?

    1. Everybody pays to use the roads. The state already inspects every car on the road each year. The inspector writes down the odometer reading. Subtract the last year’s reading from the current year’s reading and you have the miles driven.

    2. Everybody gets a bill from the state for miles driven. Bring proof that you paid you milage bill to your next inspection or your car doesn’t pass inspection.

    3. In places where it can be convincingly demonstrated that the cost / mile is high an additional surcharge in the form of a toll is charged. This is in addition to your milage charge.

    4. No jurisdiction may lower its present tax rates on anything due to the extra money being generated by the milage tax unless that jusridistion can prove that it is taxing it citizens at a sufficient rate to pay for all state supported services.

    All roads are assets that are of value either to state or to some corporation regardless of when they were built.

    All roads cost money to maintain.

    Either everybody pays to use the roads or just raise taxes.

  12. Reid Greenmun Avatar
    Reid Greenmun

    Q: When has anyone in the Axis of Taxes camp demonstrated themselves to be anything other than uncompromising and dogmatic?

    A: I do it all the time.

  13. Reid Greenmun Avatar
    Reid Greenmun

    What do we change the public transit people for using the roads or public rail?

  14. Larry Gross Avatar
    Larry Gross

    re: taxes and roads

    If you tally up every proposed road, it comes to 100 Billion – in today’s dollars.

    One penny on the gas tax generates at most 100 million dollars.

    do the math then do to things:

    1. – figure out how much money we can afford to spend every year (by raising taxes).

    2. – figure out which of the projects to build first.

    I would posit..

    1. – MOST of the ardor for new roads is in the form of additional rush hour capacity in the urban areas.

    2. – that building more rush hour capacity:

    a. will be very, very expensive
    b. will primarily be used by rush hour commuters in the urban areas
    c. as long as they are free, more people will use those roads to drive SOLO at rush hour.

    So .. you raise the gas tax for everyone and prioritize the urban rush hour roads first over rural priorities

    tell me again why the rural General Assembly members voted to let NoVa and TW/HR fund and build their own Regions roads?

    tell me again.. how you would convince the rural elected to agree to raise gas taxes on their own constituents so the money can be taken from them and diverted to relieve congestion in NoVa and TW/HR?

    NoVa now has a Transportation Authority … and with it the ability to tax NoVa folks and to spend that money on NoVa roads – and if they see fit.. add new “free” capacity for rush hour.

    The very first item that NoVa will decide is in they want HOT lanes (congestion pricing).

    If NoVa folks rise up in opposition to HOT lanes and demand – instead higher regional taxes for more regional rush hour roads – the rest of rural Virginia will be quite happy that they are no longer part of that process.

    A prediction: There are perhaps a dozen more urban areas in Virginia and each one of them will ask next years GA to give them the same deal that the GA gave to NoVa and TW/HR – and I predict further than Roanoke and Fredericksburg will be two of them.

    The days of all drivers paying higher gas taxes to build roads for those those want to drive solo at rush hour every day are .. if not gone…on their way.

    From now on – NoVa will decide if they want all taxpayers in NoVa to pay for additional rush hour capacity for daily SOLO commuters.

    and if cars get “cleaner” so that the EPA drops out of the equation – that might happen… but not next year. 🙂

  15. Groveton Avatar
    Groveton

    “tell me again.. how you would convince the rural elected to agree to raise gas taxes on their own constituents so the money can be taken from them and diverted to relieve congestion in NoVa and TW/HR?”.

    Good question.

    I keep asking it in reverse.

    How do the rural legislators get the suburbs to keep generating a huge tax surplus that is spent financially underpinning the rural areas’ education, court, police, etc. systems?

    I guess it’s because the population and legislature of Virginia is stll controlled by rural interests (for now).

    In addition, the voters in most suburban areas are transient residents who weren’t born in those areas and consider themselves only temporary residents. This results in a general apathy that allows the local politicians to “sell out” their constitutients in order to curry favor with the state’s major political parties.

    So, Larry, I ask you:

    1. Do you believe that (in total) the suburban areas generate a tax surplus that is spent by the non-suburban areas (which generate – in total – a tax deficit)?

    2. If rural taxpayers paying for suburban roads is unfair then isn’t it equally unfair for those same rural taxpayers to want susbsidies from the sururbs for everything other than transportation? Is this really a question of fairness or a question of preserving an unfair status quo.

    3. If the state continues to take ever more money from the high economic growth suburbs and gives the money to low/no growth non-suburban areas – what will happen? Won’t people who are paying high taxes and the businesses that employ them simply move out of Virginia? Please remember that both Northern Virginia and the Tidewater region are within “spitting distance” of other states – Maryland and North Carolina. I can see Montgomery County, MD from both my neighborhood and my office. If the state keeps taking more and more money from me and my neighbors – what will I do? Let me answer that for you. I’ll move my home and my office to Maryland. Over time, my well paid employees will also relocate to suburban Maryland. Then who will the state of Virginia steal from?

    4. The next census will be 2010. The next Virginia redistricting will be in 2012. The population keeps shifting from rural areas to suburban areas. What will happen when the suburban areas who have been constanly generating a tax surplus end up with a majority of the state legislature?

    BTW – Your prediction about roanoke, Fredericksburg, etc. is probably right. In my terms this would be called rejecting the state’s devotion of the Dillon Rule and implementing a form of Home Rule. Thank goodness. The state legislature has proven its incompetence for decades. It’s time to try something new.

  16. Larry Gross Avatar
    Larry Gross

    Groveton – They ARE interesting questions and I’ll give them a shot.. and if I miss some.. hold me to the ones missed.

    With regard to tax equity – across the board verses categorial allocation per formula/need.

    It appears that the state attempts to provide minimum standards for education and public safety by essentially taking from the rich and giving to the poor. Stipulated.

    I support the basic concept in moderation but I suspect that the allocation formula are out of date and need to be revisted – and perhaps that will happen as the urban elected begin to outnumber the rural elected.

    Transportation vs Education.

    If the problem was that NoVa roads were maxed with 3-person autos 24/7 then we’d have a very serious issue.. but much (not all) of the problem is simply many ordinary folks who prefer to drive SUVs SOLO everyday at rush hour – a convenience.

    Would you essentially take away a minimal education from a kid in a poor part of Va. for NoVa transportation, if the result of doing so ultimately would be to have the same NoVa folks (now with transportation equity) paying other additional state taxes to provide 30K worth of annual benefits to each kid who grew up to become an unemployable adult?

    I agree about the changing demographics and perhaps that might result in revisting the allocation formula.

    Higher taxes driving people out of Va? Correct me if I’m wrong, but I think Va is one of the lowest tax states already – right?

    I just don’t think the problem of urban congestion – whether it be in NoVa, TW/HR .. Raleigh Durham, etc, etc.. is going to be fixed with just more money and especially so if the money is diverted from minimal education efforts.

    so ..we’re back to how to address NoVa transportation woes – admitting and acknowledging that education money is diverted but also admitting and acknowledging that – that money – is not what will fix NoVa congestion at the end of the day.

  17. Ray Hyde Avatar
    Ray Hyde

    tell me again.. how you would convince the rural elected to agree to raise gas taxes on their own constituents so the money can be taken from them and diverted to relieve congestion in NoVa and TW/HR?”.

    Well, the congestion may be in the central areas, but those that suffer the most from it are those that drive from far suburban and even rural areas.

    Where the money is spent, and who benefits are different things.

    I still thinkt the money should be spent moving jobs, rather than building any kind of transportation to move people. In that case your argument goes away.

    Problem is, some rural areas don;t want the jobs, either, because they know that then the problem hens will come home to roost. “We moved out here to get away from that.”

  18. Ray Hyde Avatar
    Ray Hyde

    “many ordinary folks who prefer to drive SUVs SOLO everyday at rush hour – a convenience.”

    This is a work at will state. Being able to stay at work as long as your boss needs you is hardly a conveneince: it is self preservation.

    I agree there is little reason to commute in an SUV, but driving alone is a lot less of a “choice” than you seem to think.

    “provide 30K worth of annual benefits to each kid who grew up to become an unemployable adult? “

    Well, at least he won’t be clogging the roads going to work at rush hour. Considering how much roads costs, it might be a bargain to pay them to stay home. And look at all the money you’d save by not educating him.

  19. Ray Hyde Avatar
    Ray Hyde

    “money – is not what will fix NoVa congestion at the end of the day.”

    How do you fix congestion? Send fewer cars there. What draws the rush hour cars? Jobs.

    Move the jobs someplace else. How do you do that?

    Spend money.

  20. Groveton Avatar
    Groveton

    Larry and Ray:

    Great responses. This is the most interesting exchange of views on this issue in recent memory.

    I am seriously behind schedule this afternoon and will post comments tommorrow.

    In summary, I think the rich regions in Virginia appear richer than they really are (partly because of the huge transportation funding gap) and the poor regions are not as poor as they appear (partly because they have artifically low tax rates – not revenues but rates).

    Also, Virginia is a low tax state. Question becomes whether Northern Virginia is a low tax region if we go to regional plans.

    Thanks again for the comments.

Leave a Reply

Read More