Tim Kaine: "I'm going to amend this bill significantly."

By: Lowell
Published On: 2/28/2007 7:23:54 AM

Tim Kaine was on WTOP radio yesterday for his "Ask the Governor" segment.  The main subject, of course, was transportation.  Here are some highlights of what Gov. Kaine said:

*"I hate aspects of [the transportation bill]...this is a big, complicated stew."

*This should be "about 10 bills" - land use, regional, statewide, "but they lumped it all together."

*"I've got 30 days to do amendments."  Some of the amendments are "so critical that if there aren't amendments there's a certain possibility of a veto..."

*Different pieces of bill: accountability, land use, NOVA regional package, Hampton Roads regional package, statewide maintenance, big statewide borrowing component ($2.5 billion in bonds, pay it off using General Fund money used to fund schools, health care and public safety).

*"I've got to do some surgery."  Is that a dealbreaker?  "That part of the bill is just not responsible."  "What I'd rather do is fix it."  Governor of Virginia has "line-item amendment" and "line-item veto powers."  In NOVA, 2/3 of the revenue is us "just saying to local governments, 'hey, raise taxes.'"  Already, Fairfax has weighed in and said "veto the bill."

*Gerry Connolly is right that localities would be forced to take over state responsibilites - that is a massive "unfunded mandate."

*"...at the end of the day, if the regional plans have so many poison pills in them that they never enact them, then the bill's just a piece of paper, it's not going to get anyone out of a traffic jam, solve congestion at all..."

*Fairfax, Prince William and Loudoun not happy with this bill, and Kaine can see why.  "If Fairfax, Prince William and Loudoun pull the plug,  then this transportation bill is just a 105-page piece of paper."

*The bill came out at the last minute with "no public discussion."  There are a "lot of little poison pills in there." 

*Big problem with the plan is the $2.5 billion in borrowing and pay about $200 million a year from General Fund over 30 years to pay off debt - "I don't think that's very responsible" because it "cuts too deeply into the General Fund."

*"I think it's ok to use General Fund dollars when it's auto insurance premiums or when it's surpluses" but not the additional $2.5 billion in borrowing that takes money away from General Fund over the long term.

*Seems to favor raising gas tax, in part because 20% of it is paid by out-of-state motorists, but the House of Delegates has completely rejected it.

*"I'm going to amend this bill significantly."

*Tysons tunnel option - "it was not my design" but was approved by Fairfax and Loudoun board of supervisors.  FTA said if you change to a tunnel option, "you're gonna go near the back of the line for funding" and money might not be available.  FTA was misquoted in the Washington Post.  Emphasizes that this is a "locally approved design."  This is ultimately "about the will of the people locally."  If localities say "stop" and go "tunnel only," then "that's what I'll do."  Rail to Dulles is "such an important thing."  "We put that opportunity at risk if we change that design."  "If [the locals all] tell me to stop I will."  "The perfect is the enemy of the good."  "I'd like a tunnel."  "Why was this thing [the aerial route] so good a year ago and now it suddenly is so awful?"

*Says that labels like "liberal" and "conservative" don't mean anything to me.  Wants to get results.  "Senator Obama would be a wonderful President."  Why Obama?  Thinks Obama has very good judgment, extremely bright, knows how to listen, knows what he doesn't know, "real transformative figure," can "really energize folks."  This was a gut decision.

*Cervical cancer bill - key is whether students and parents can decide to opt out (Kaine favors "a generous opt-out" provision); this is not an infectious disease so it's different than other mandated vaccines.
*Triggerman rule/expand death penalty.  Is there a problem with Virginia law that this thing fixes? If not, he will amend or veto.

*Slavery apology will not come to his desk, but he supports it.  "The state was not an innocent bystander when it came to slavery."

*The concept that we can have more roads and transit without raising new dollars just "violates the fundamental rules of math." "It's not a free lunch society."  $200 million is the budget of the state police...gives you an order of magnitude. Will people be honest and pay for what they say they want?

*Cross removal from College of William and Mary's historic Wren Chapel.  His "job is not to micromanage" but he wouldn't have done it.

*The issue of "did we get to a key transportation solution" will be a key to this year's elections.


Comments



Times Community Papers Support Kaine Position (PM - 2/28/2007 9:11:14 AM)
http://www.timescomm...

I got this out of the Loudoun version of the paper.

It's an election year and Republicans knew they had to come up with something. The hunch here is that the bill, in its current form, doesn't have a prayer of becoming law. It still needs an drastic overhaul.

Let's trust the governor to come up with the proper remedy.

That's noteworthy, because in the past the Times papers have leaned Republican.  However, I think their position is indicative of how most northern Virginians will feel.



What did you think of Kaine's answer on the Tysons (Lowell - 2/28/2007 9:15:26 AM)
tunnel situation?


Which of his positions would you like a comment on? (PM - 2/28/2007 9:23:25 AM)


Ha. (Lowell - 2/28/2007 9:26:24 AM)
His comments in the WTOP show...do you think Kaine is simply looking for the localities to say "hell no" so he can have a good excuse to back out of the aerial option, or do you think he's committed to getting SOMETHING done, even if it's not "perfect."


You have to admit, Tim's situation has changed (Used2Bneutral - 2/28/2007 12:01:16 PM)
If I remember correctly, Tim Kaine had a gun to his head from the two Nova Congressmen Davis and Wolf. He was given on no uncertain terms an ultimatum that he HAD to approve the aerial design or the entire project would lose its federal funds.  Now it seems that the Congressional opinion on this has been circumvented by a clarification from the US DOT that says there is a time window and opportunity to present an underground alternative.... funny things like this happen when the control of the DOT budget is no longer at the mercy of a Republican sole-source award majority.

Now, Tim can't let himself look like a "Flip-flopper", because he so strongly supported what appeared to be the ONLY alternative by which the Dulles Metro would finally be built. To quote my grandmother when I was a know-it-all teenager and once was scolded about using statements that had "absolute" conclusions in them?.. "Things Change !! and you have to keep an open mind and some humble pie ready just in case. Don't ever be scared to change your mind if it is the right thing to do when things change. Being stubborn and hard headed is MUCH worse if in your heart you know the only reason to not change is to save face politically."

Personally, I think Tim is waiting a few weeks to let the political dust settle a little since the political tsunami that hit Capital Hill and the fact that he has been a little busy with the affairs of the GA in Richmond. Personally, I have absolute trust he will make the right decision given the updated truthful and accurate facts and the reality that things have changed. This is the new reality, no matter what both Davis and Wolf falsely represented as the "absolute facts" a few months back when they twisted his arm?..

Wait, isn't Davis now changing his tune too????



who knows (novamiddleman - 2/28/2007 9:38:46 AM)
Is he basically saying the design submitted was with an aerial opiton and that if a tunnel option is selected the whole project will have to be rereviewed by the feds again.

P.S. I am no expert on this anybody know someone who could help out.

P.P.S. Putting a tunnel in the ground seems like a no-brainer bipartisan effort cheaper and faster but once again I don't have all the details

 



I agree with your P.P.S (Lowell - 2/28/2007 9:50:44 AM)
This is a no brainer, the only issue is whether we'd go to the "back of the line" or not.  Well, two points on that:

1) It's the job of our representatives to fight for our place in line; and
2) If we DO go back to the end of the line, I agree with Chap Petersen and others that we'd rather wait a few years and do this right then do it half-assed, in a way that will harm Tysons forever.



Tysons with the overhead option (PM - 2/28/2007 10:01:31 AM)
el

Just kidding.  I love these old pictures of NYC, and remember in the 1950s walking underneath one such elevated. 



Great picture. (Lowell - 2/28/2007 10:10:33 AM)
I'm sure that will work REALLY well in Tysons.  Not!!! :)


Clarification Needed (elevandoski - 2/28/2007 10:43:06 AM)
I don't understand the sense behind the $2.5 billion in borrowing.  I see that this provides $300 million each year to transportation, but also requires between $110 and $140 million a year in debt service. That's a shot in the arm for transportation of essentially $200 million.  That debt service will be paid by recordation taxes, which is another thing that confuses me.  Is the income created by recordation taxes provided to the general fund?  Is that how this GOP plan is taking from the general fund, through recordation taxes?  I thought a certain percentage of recordation taxes specifically went to land conservation.  Is that still true? 


Good questions (PM - 2/28/2007 1:45:57 PM)
Also, if they'd just raise the state income tax a bit, those of us who itemize would get about 30 cents back from Uncle Sam for each added dollar in taxation.  (I'd simply up the percentage on households with $100,000+ adjusted gross income.  Fairfax and Loudoun are filled with such households -- we're one of them -- and we can afford it.) 

Raising "fees" instead of deductible taxes (personal and real property, income) as the state GOP has done actually puts more of a bite on the state taxpayer.

THANKS, GROVER NORQUIST!



Eileen's Transportation Plan (elevandoski - 2/28/2007 2:20:40 PM)
I have a compromise transportation plan of my own.  I think it is perfect coz:
1.  It doesn't take from General Funds any more than Kaine's plan did.
2.  There is no new/additional fee/tax that either Kaine's or the GOP's plan didn't propose.
3.  Provides more for Hampton Roads and Northern Virginia than did the GOP's plan.
4.  Uses Kaine's higher estimates for highway maintenance and statewide programs.

My plan includes fees collected by the Hampton Roads and Northern Virginia authorities.  One thing that I will insist upon is that the state require the two to impose these fees, and not as the GOP plan provides, through a voluntary election.

Here it is...

Eileen's Transportation Plan