Lucas pre-files senate bill to give some VA localities greater revenue flexibility

In an attempt to raise local revenues, Virginia Sen. Louise Lucas recently pre-filed a bill, SB689, for the 2013 General Assembly session that would establish a state commission to regulate and license casinos.[1] 

The ability of localities to establish casinos with slot machines and table games would not pertain to localities whose land mass does not include at least 40 percent of property freed from real estate taxes.

According to Virginia’s Tax Department, only Lucas’ home district of Portsmouth and Lexington meet the criteria laid down in SB689, according to their figures from 2010. As such, the inclusion criteria will likely be changed to allow for other localities like Norfolk and York, who have close to 40 percent in tax exempt land, to take advantage of the bill.

Lucas has given at least three arguments for creating the ability for localities to establish casinos, if their governments so choose. First, doing so would give localities more flexibility (i.e. more control) over how they can raise revenue. Second, the potential profits stemming from local casinos would help localities lower their real estate tax rates. Third, the revenue streams flowing from local casinos would help bring localities like Portsmouth “up to par” with more affluent localities.[2]

But what appears to be a win-win situation for some of Virginia’s localities and the state has oftentimes been met with resistance among some local government members as well as members of the Virginia General Assembly.[3]

Whatever the reasons, it seems like the fiscal situation in Virginia may push previously anti-casino lawmakers, or those who have been on the fence, to rethink their positions.

Even though SB689 may not pass either chamber in 2013, SB689 should at least begin a serious discussion about the possibility for legal casinos in Virginia and the revenues they would bring.

As long as the direct correlation between casinos and crime remains a myth[4], there remains no good reason why Virginia cannot open up to the establishment of legal casinos.

---

[1] http://hamptonroads.com/2012/07/portsmouth-senator-prepares-bill-allow-casinos

[2] http://hamptonroads.com/2012/07/portsmouth-senator-prepares-bill-allow-casinos

[3] http://articles.dailypress.com/2011-01-31/news/dp-nws-sweepstakes-cafes-20110131_1_sweepstakes-cafes-sweepstakes-games-gambling

[4] http://www.nbcmiami.com/news/local/Officials-Little-Crime-Associated-With-Casinos-139715243.html

Tim Kaine and his U.S. Senate rival square off in their second debate: facts vs. fantasy

In their second debate on Friday in Lynchburg, former governors Tim Kaine and George Allen sought to differentiate their policy positions from one another even further, taking on issues such as the environment, health care, the real estate tax, and assistance for U.S. farmers.[1]

The discussion in Lynchburg was sponsored by the Virginia Farm Bureau and 2 forest-product associations.[2]

Allen unsurprisingly stated, “Let’s give the death penalty to the death tax,” a reference to the estate tax that was only paid by 14,700 estates in 2009.[3] Thus, the estate tax applies only to a minority of very wealthy Americans, a group that Republican political candidates like George Allen seem more than happy to coddle.

On the issue of health care, Kaine said, “I would absolutely not repeal” health care because its benefits to seniors and young adults are obvious. Not to mention that the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) recently released a report concluding that repealing the new health care law would add $109 billion to federal budget deficits over the 2013-2022 period.[4] Yes, repealing President Obama’s health care reform would increase the deficit over the 2013-2022 period by over $100 billion!

Again not surprisingly, Allen criticized the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for its alleged “anti-coal” policies that are supposedly costing Americans jobs. Like any good Republican, Allen failed to give sources for his claims and failed to notice that the price of natural gas is the real reason why coal is on a rapid decline in the U.S.[5] Is the EPA also orchestrating a massive conspiracy to assist their friends in the natural gas industry (immense sarcasm)???

As if Virginians without an ideological axe to grind didn’t already know it, the 2^nd debate between Tim Kaine and George Allen again confirmed this truth: the latter lives in a world of hyper-fantasy that is rarely punctuated with actual facts and interest in the wellbeing of average Virginians or Americans. After all, why is the estate tax in general even an issue when so few Americans have to even concern themselves with it? 

Obviously it’s because wealthy backers to George Allen would like to see the tax given the “death penalty.”

If George Allen is elected to the U.S. Senate, we’ll all certainly be sitting in the electric chair!

---

[1] http://www2.timesdispatch.com/news/virginia-politics/2012/jul/29/kaine-allen-speak-to-farm-group-ar-2092286/

[2] http://vafarmbureau.org/

[3] http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/briefing-book/key-elements/estate/how-many.cfm

[4] http://www.cbo.gov/publication/43471

[5] http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2012/07/06/512192/king-coals-throne-under-threat-us-natural-gas-generation-rivals-coal-in-april/?mobile=nc

A Virginia Republican conscious? Randy Forbes may have committed the yearly GOP good deed

Could it be that members of Virginia’s Republican Party are concerning themselves with the disadvantaged of the commonwealth? Rep. J Randy Forbes (R-4^th) appeared to buck the VA GOP trend when he recently asked Gov. Bob McDonnell to scrap a proposal to locate a toll along I-95, south of Richmond. Forbes said that he is worried that the tolls “will disproportionately burden the citizens of a region unable to shoulder additional economic challenges.”^[1] More of this crazy thinking and he might turn into a Democrat!

Forbes sent letters to Gov. McDonnell and the Federal Highway Administration this week, noting that Virginia identifies several of the communities around the toll location proposed for Sussex County as “economically stressed.”^[2]

The National Association of Truck Stop Operators, the Virginia Trucking Association, and the American Trucking Association have already put into play a grassroots campaign to stop the proposal to place a toll plaza north of Emporia, a toll that would obviously hurt truckers that travel through this part of Virginia. Large trucks would have to pay a whopping $12 at the plaza north of Emporia!

According to a spokeswoman for Gov. McDonnell, Taylor Thornley, “Governor McDonnell believes this is a commonsense way to generate more revenue for transportation projects without raising taxes – revenue that would be generated, in large part, by drivers from other states.”

Thus, not only does Gov. McDonnell want to issue a new tax (that isn’t called a tax, but it is!), for driving along certain roads, he apparently wants to discourage travelers from outside of Virginia to travel along Virginia’s highways. Isn’t the old GOP mantra that taxes are “disincentives?”^[3]

Randy Forbes did what a political leader should do, fight for his constituency, rich or poor. Unfortunately, many members of the Virginia GOP seem more interested in fighting for the wealthy among their constituents.^[4] I won’t be holding my breath for repeat instances of compassion on the part of members of Virginia’s Republican Party.

---

^[1]  http://www2.timesdispatch.com/news/news/2012/jul/27/tdmet01-forbes-urges-mcdonnell-to-drop-i-95-toll-i-ar-2087711/

^[2]  http://www2.timesdispatch.com/news/news/2012/jul/27/tdmet01-forbes-urges-mcdonnell-to-drop-i-95-toll-i-ar-2087711/

^[3]  http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/10/14/1026339/-Republican-economic-thinking

^[4]  http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/how-the-gop-became-the-party-of-the-rich-20111109#

OPEN Act by Sens. Warner and Webb closes the door on more beneficial sources of energy

It’s a topsy-turvy world for Virginia’s Democrats, and there’s no better example of this than the announcement of The Offshore Petroleum Expansion Act of 2012 (i.e. the OPEN Act), on Wednesday, by Sens. Jim Webb and Mark Warner. Not only does the act have a catchy acronym (i.e. OPEN), it also distinctly shows that environmental advocates in Virginia have few friends in the U.S. Congress, let alone the state’s General Assembly.#

In the case of Webb, the act doesn’t come as much of a surprise. Webb noted, “I have long advocated opening up more of the nation’s outer continental shelf resources to responsible natural gas and oil exploration.”# Indeed, but where has responsible oil and natural gas exploration been found in the U.S.?#

Warner’s part in the OPEN Act doesn’t come as too much of a shocker either. Warner has always been a politician who makes political decisions like the businessman that he is. According to Warner, “Our economy and national security will be strengthened by an ‘all-of-the-above’ approach to energy, including the expanded production of our own domestic energy resources.”#

So, as usual, we have the national security and economic lines of argument being lined up in favor of drilling off of Virginia’s coast. But here’s a big wrench that has yet to be removed from the idea of drilling off Virginia’s coast: the 2011 estimates used by the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management to determine how much oil and natural gas is under the Atlantic Ocean and consequently how much annual revenue Virginia can hope to receive are based on 40 to 50 year old surveys!#

Furthermore, it is going to take more than 10 years for production to “ramp up.”# Thus, national security will have to wait at least a decade!


Most Americans, including myself, want to see a secure America with continuing economic growth. But there are short-term policy roads that shouldn’t be taken. Drilling off the coast of Virginia is one of them. What may be politically convenient now may not prove to be a resounding policy success in the future.

Let’s turn Virginia away from “drill, baby, drill,” with energy policies that look towards the future. Let’s reinvest our time and our energy in renewable and high-technology forms of energy, even though it may not be the politically easy road.


#  http://augustafreepress.com/2012/07/25/webb-warner-cosponsor-legislation-to-expand-offshore-leasing/
#  http://augustafreepress.com/2012/07/25/webb-warner-cosponsor-legislation-to-expand-offshore-leasing/
#  http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/subjects/o/offshore_drilling_and_exploration/index.html
#  http://augustafreepress.com/2012/07/25/webb-warner-cosponsor-legislation-to-expand-offshore-leasing/
#  http://www.politifact.com/virginia/statements/2012/mar/23/jim-moran/moran-says-dilling-virginias-coast-will-net-4-mill/#
#  http://www.politifact.com/virginia/statements/2012/mar/23/jim-moran/moran-says-dilling-virginias-coast-will-net-4-mill/

Hanover County efforts to draw exemption under Voting Rights Act of 1965 rightly rejected

The Democratic Party of Hanover alongside the Hanover NAACP[1] righty rejected the county’s efforts to relieve themselves of requirements mandated by the Voting Rights Act of 1965[2].

In particular, Hanover County is seeking exemption from Section 5 of the law. Section 5 requires Southern states to seek and win approval from the U.S. Justice Department and courts before election changes can be made.

Hanover County supervisors[3] all agreed to ask for exemption from preclearance requirements mandated under the Voting Rights Act of 1965, a law which made discriminatory voting practices illegal.

Hanover County Registrar, Teresa F. Smithson, did make a valid point for exemption when she commented that “bailout status means simply we have proven that we’re not a racist location anymore and that we will not disenfranchise voters based on color.”

It’s hard to argue that hanging the Voting Rights Act of 1965 over the head of localities in the South is not a means of branding these localities in some way racist.

But the past has left indelible scars that haven’t yet healed in the South, evidenced by the Hanover County NAACP’s rejection of the supervisors’ move to end their requirements under the Voting Rights Act of 1965. As Robert Barnette, president of the Hanover County NAACP, explained, “We feel like if we don’t have someone looking over our shoulders, our voting rights could be further eroded.”

The legacy of the past in the South has left an entire group of people feeling like their voting rights are only a few short breaths away from being stripped again. Can a democratic form of government function appropriately when a sizable group of people feel this way about their democratic institutions?

Even though the requirements under the Voting Rights Act of 1965 subject localities to a lengthy process of approval, for now at least, the time and energy is worth the relief that is gained by an entire group of people whose history of voting rights has been far too restricted[4].

---

[1] http://www.hcbnaacp.org/

[2] http://www2.timesdispatch.com/news/news/2012/jul/25/tdmain01-democrats-naacp-opposes-hanovers-request--ar-2081523/

[3] http://www.co.hanover.va.us/board/default.htm

[4] http://www.history.com/topics/voting-rights-act

McDonnell’s federal aid request highlights continuing narrative of conservative hypocrisy

Gov. Bob McDonnell’s recent request for federal “disaster aid”[1] to reimburse the costs incurred by state and local governments for their response to the wind storm that slammed Virginia June 29-30 and the thunderstorms that wreaked havoc in the commonwealth June 30 and July 1^st adds another line to the hypocritical narrative of many conservative politicians and private citizens[2] who decry the role of the federal government while conversely accepting federal aid[3].

McDonnell wants to reimburse 47 counties and 15 cities through federal funds routed through the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA).

To add insult to this hyper-narrative of duplicity, the McDonnell administration noted that the aid request was not intended for individuals and families with uninsured losses, just those vehicles of tyranny, governments.

The absurdity of this “great deceit” on the part of many conservatives across the country is so mind-blowing that it feels as though we are living in George Orwell’s world of 1984, where words and ideas are shaped merely for political gain.

It is difficult to imagine how individuals can claim one idea while contradicting themselves with the next. The world of many conservatives seems shaped by distorted truths and myths that if objectively scrutinized, would quickly fall away. 

Under tyrannical forms of government across the globe, government or the ruling elite(s) is made to appear as benevolent. It is ironic that the “great deceit” in the U.S. has formed a kind of tyranny over many conservatives in the U.S., a tyranny which disallows these individuals from seeing the good that the federal government can produce, along with the bad.

---

[1] http://www2.timesdispatch.com/news/virginia-politics/2012/jul/24/tdobit02-mcdonnell-seeks-federal-aid-for-recent-st-ar-2078431/

[2] http://politicalwire.com/archives/2012/07/23/star_of_romney_ad_did_receive_government_assistance.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+PoliticalWire+%28Political+Wire%29

[3] http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2011/11/states-federal-taxes-spending-charts-maps

Shooting in Richmond leaves three victims and another debate about gun laws

Police in Richmond are continuing their search for a shooting suspect who apparently began firing at a party full of college-aged kids in Jackson Ward[1]. So far, no deaths have been reported but three individuals were taken to the hospital. The three, ages 20, 19, and 17 received bullet wounds in the back, leg, and arm.

According to the host of the party, the shooting suspect began firing from across the street less than an hour after he had been kicked out of the gathering for attempting to steal a stereo.

Following this shooting in Richmond and the recent shooting at the new Batman premier in Colorado which has claimed the lives of 12 people so far[2], questions are again being raised about gun laws across the country[3].

According to the Brady Campaign[4], gun-related killings have increased annually since 2002, making the gun murder rate in the U.S. 10 to 20 times greater than in other industrialized countries.

While this statistic is grim, I admit that I am conflicted about the issue of gun rights. On the one hand, I believe whole-heartedly in the right to bear arms, but which kind of arms is the real question that policymakers have considered. On the other hand, gun-related deaths are rising, as noted above, and this trend may not recede anytime soon if these recent shooting events in different parts of the country are any indication of how the future will play out.

Either way the policy pendulum swings, no side of the argument will come away completely satisfied. But what is clear is that policymakers need to find some healthier median between gun rights and human safety, between individual freedom and state intervention, between reasoned policy and reactive legislation.

The task won’t be easy, but most Americans will not continue to tolerate repeated senseless killings by angry and/or mentally unstable individuals whose access to firearms is almost as open as their local Walmart.

---

[1] http://www.nbc12.com/story/19085499/shooter-fires-repeatedly-into-jackson-ward-party

[2] http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/07/21/usa-shooting-denver-idUSL6E8IK4FG20120721

[3] http://www.huffingtonpost.com/larry-bodine/denver-shootings-highligh_b_1692203.html

[4] http://www.bradycampaign.org/facts/

The Homestead debate highlights Kaine’s debating & political prowess and Allen’s lack thereof

In what has been described as a “crushing” defeat[1] for U.S. Senate aspirant George Allen during his first debate with former Virginia governor and U.S. Senate hopeful Tim Kaine, their Homestead debate once again established Tim Kaine’s adept political and debating skills.

During the debate, Allen attempted to tie Tim Kaine’s political aspirations to President Obama, referring to Kaine as President Obama’s “handpicked” candidate for U.S. Senate[2].  But what Allen’s line of attack against Tim Kaine signals is the formers lack of confidence in primarily attacking Kaine on his own policy positions and previous political record.

Instead of primarily challenging Kaine on his record as governor of Virginia or mayor of Richmond, Allen and his campaign have chosen to focus on the relationship between the president and Kaine. Unfortunately for Allen, this narrow approach has left him vulnerable on matters of actual political substance.

When referring to the automatic spending cuts to the defense budget that could take place in January if a debt-reduction deal fails to be hashed out, Allen responded, “National defense should never be used as a bargaining tool to raise taxes.”[3]  Not to mention that the automatic spending cut deal was passed with bipartisan support in the U.S. Congress[4], the implication seems to be that all other sectors of the economy are open to be used as bargaining tools to increase taxes. How does this approach make political sense?

Furthermore, when asked to name any particular disparities Allen shared with presidential candidate Mitt Romney, Allen couldn’t cite any[5]. That’s odd considering Romney’s form of health care while he was governor of Massachusetts, “Romneycare,” was the model President Obama used to form his own health care reform legislation[6].

As usual, Allen came off during the first debate as visionless and concerned primarily with reactionary policies and attacking Tim Kaine’s relationship with President Obama. For undecided voters among Virginia’s electorate, I can’t imagine this is a winning strategy.

---

[1] http://bluevirginia.us/diary/7177/allenkaine-debate-at-the-homestead-blacked-out-well-do-our-best-to-cover-it-regardless

[2] http://www.roanoke.com/politics/wb/311871

[3] http://www.roanoke.com/politics/wb/311871

[4] http://news.firedoglake.com/2012/07/19/bid-to-freeze-defense-budget-has-bipartisan-support/

[5] http://www.roanoke.com/politics/wb/311871

[6] http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2012/mar/20/romneycare-and-obamacare-can-you-tell-difference/

Virginia’s government provides its own “Hail Mary” with Virginia’s taxpayer dollars

Another landmark victory for corporate welfare was finalized a few days ago when the government of Virginia and the NFL’s Washington Redskins finalized their deal (bribe) for the latter to stay and invest in its HQ and training facility in Loudoun County[1].  

In related news, Richmond’s mayor, Dwight Jones, convened a commission[2] to assist in locating a suitable site for the Redskins’ 2013 training camp in Richmond[3]. As the mayor of Richmond, Jones understands the difficulties associated with finding anything suitable in Richmond! The city has not however finalized its agreement with the Redskins yet.

The “deal” between Virginia and the Redskins does admittedly look pretty sweet on paper.

In order for the Redskins to receive the $4 million grant, the team must meet a number of “targets” outlined in the so-called “Project Hail” agreement.

Some of the targets include making cumulative capital investments at the Redskins HQ or its training facility at an estimated total of “up to $30 million” (why would the agreement cap capital investments?!), and keeping the Redskins HQ and training facility in the state until 2020.

The Redskins would have to give back a portion or all of its grant money if one or more of the targets failed to be achieved.

Furthermore, the agreement includes a four-year deal between the Virginia Lottery and the Redskins, a continuance of the relationship they have shared for a number of years.

Arguably, the biggest problem with the deal is the grant itself. When the incentive was announced in June, even Republican lawmakers in the state asked the McDonnell administration to prove claims that the Redskins would have left its Loudoun complex without the incentives[4]. To my knowledge, no such evidence has yet been provided.

Furthermore, one gets the sense that the “targets” that have been set are paper thin and easily side-stepped, if necessary. The ambiguous language used in the 8-page “Project Hail” agreement (e.g. “commercially reasonable”) is the kind used by lawmakers to write seemingly substantive legislation without teeth.  

And of course there is the tried and true skepticism that follows from most legislative moves pulled by the government of Virginia when it claims to be looking out for the interests of Virginians while paying millions to groups and businesses that hardly need the extra revenue.

Hail to the Redskins! How about hail to the average Virginian?!

---

[1] http://www2.timesdispatch.com/news/virginia-politics/2012/jul/21/tdmet02-virginia-finalizes-loudoun-deal-with-redsk-ar-2072975/

[2] http://richmondvaannouncements.blogspot.com/2012/06/mayor-jones-statement-on-redskins.html

[3] http://www.loudountimes.com/index.php/mobile/news_article/redskins_relocate_training_camp_to_richmond_in_2013/

[4] http://washingtonexaminer.com/va.-house-committee-questions-redskins-deal/article/feed/2003699