Check It Out

Looking for something to do this holiday weekend? See our picks for some fun local events.

Updated: Top Virginia Republicans at odds on transportation compromise

RICHMOND –Supporters of a compromise transportation funding package may have to quell dissent in nboth political parties to get the bill through the General Assembly.

One day after Gov. Bob McDonnell urged lawmakers to pass the carefully crafted compromise,  Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli said he can’t support a bill that contains “a massive tax increase.”

Cuccinelli’s criticism underscores an emerging rift in the Republican Party over a proposed transportation funding package that House and Senate negotiators agreed to on Wednesday. The plan would produce about $3.5 billion in new, statewide transportation funds over the next five years, according to legislative projections. The House and Senate likely will vote on the compromise Friday.

Democrats also raised the prospect of conditioning their support for the transportation bill on approval for the expansion of Medicaid, something McDonnell has resisted. McDonnell sent a letter to legislative budget negotiators Wednesday reiterating his opposition to expanding Medicaid without first getting a guarantee of major cost reductions.

The transportation plan would scrap the state’s 17.5 cents per gallon tax on gasoline and apply a 3.5 percent tax on the wholesale price of fuel. It also would increase taxes on retail and automobile sales, impose a 6 percent tax on the wholesale price of diesel fuel, and dedicate a greater portion of the sales tax to help fund road, rail and transit needs.

McDonnell has made transportation funding a top priority in his final legislative session.  House Speaker Bill Howell, R-Stafford County, has been a key legislative ally and has endorsed the compromise. Eight of the 10 House and Senate negotiators who brokered the deal are Republicans.

Republican Lt. Gov. Bill Bolling, who is weighing an independent bid for governor, also has backed the compromise.

McDonnell said the passage of the bill “will strengthen Virginia’s economy, help create thousands of good paying jobs, and improve the lives of every Virginian in every city and county.”

But Cuccinelli,  a tea party hero who hopes to succeed McDonnell in the governor’s office, took a different view of the compromise.

“If reports are correct, this new bill contemplates a massive tax increase,” Cuccinelli said in a statement released by his office . “In these tough economic times, I do not believe Virginia’s middle class families can afford massive tax increases, and I cannot support legislation that would ask the taxpayers to shoulder an even heavier burden than they are already carrying, especially when the government proposes to do so little belt tightening in other areas of the budget.”

Cuccinelli noted the he has not seen the conference report on the transportation bill and said lawmakers “should have the opportunity to thoroughly review this new legislation in its entirety once it becomes available, evaluate the fiscal impact it will have on the people of Virginia, and determine if this proposed legislation will actually resolve our serious transportation problems before it is brought to the floor for a vote.”

Some conservative legislators and anti-tax groups were quick to criticize the plan after House and Senate negotiators released details of the compromise on Wednesday.

“When you combine these tax increases with the looming sequestration coming out of Washington, it’s a devastating one-two punch on Virginia families and small businesses,” said Del. Ben Cline, R-Rockbridge County, the House chairman of the legislature’s Conservative Caucus.

Grover Norquist, the president of Americans for Tax Reform, said the transportation bill was “hijacked by a number of Republicans who join Democrats in believing that all transportation costs must be paid for by higher taxes.”

Democratic votes will be needed to pass the plan, perhaps even in the Republican-dominated House of Delegates. When the House passed the original version of McDonnell’s transportation bill earlier this month, four Democrats delivered key votes to get the bill throughchamber with a slim majority. One of them, Roanoke Del. Onzlee Ware, was named to the conference committee that hammered out the compromise.

Some Democrats have discussed withholding support for the transportation bill until McDonnell and House Republicans agree to expand the Medicaid program under the federal health care law. McDonnell has said he will not agree to the expansion — which the federal government will fully fund for three years — without federal approval of cost-cutting reforms. The issue is tied up in budget negotiations between the House and Senate.

“There’s a lot of discussion about, ‘Look, transportation is important, but getting Medicaid expansion is just as important,’” said Sen. John Edwards, D-Roanoke.

Ware said it would be a mistake to link Medicaid expansion to the transportation bill. He said the strategy would “put the transportation bill in danger.”

Terry McAuliffe, the presumptive Democratic nominee for governor, said Wednesday that he supports the compromise even though he doesn’t like some elements of the plan.

“However, Virginians are demanding that we compromise to find a mainstream solution and that compromise will necessarily be imperfect for both sides,” McAuliffe said in a statement .

“Virginia simply cannot afford to miss this opportunity to make substantial progress on transportation,” McAuliffe said. “If we want the commonwealth to be the best place for business and jobs of the future, we need to have a transportation system that is modern and efficient.”

McAuliffe campaign spokesman Josh Schwerin said Cuccinelli is trying to derail the compromise.

“Cuccinelli’s work to undermine this mainstream proposal reflects his unique unwillingness to compromise under any circumstances,” Schwerin said in an email. “Once again, Ken Cuccinelli has demonstrated that his ideological agenda is outside even the Republican mainstream.”

– Michael Sluss

Join the conversation [ADD A COMMENT]

8 COMMENTS

  1. Other John | February 21, 2013 at 6:02 pm

    What more belt tightening can be foisted onto our transportation infrastructure? It’s been bare-boned for years due to legislative inaction. Construction projects have been scrapped, maintenance has been deferred or canceled (at the greater expense of needing to replace things later, rather than simply keep them up). Can we really afford more conservative anti-tax mantra? No. And why in the world is Grover Norquist so dang important anyway? Conservative worship of the guy is getting kinda freaky deaky.

  2. crooked road | February 22, 2013 at 12:09 am

    It is total insanity to remove the gasoline tax FOR FUNDING TRANSPORTATION EXPENSES and instead putting the burden on retail sales, which would include people who might only drive limited amounts or not at all.
    -
    Thus an elderly person on a fixed income who drove 5K miles a year would pay based on their retail purchases, while a business person who drove 50K miles a year would also pay based on their retail purchases. NOT based on their fuel consumption and use of the transportation system, but on retail purchases.
    -
    Only McDonnell could devise something so idiotic. Only the spineless Dems in Richmond could roll over so willingly to go along.

  3. Jack | February 22, 2013 at 8:13 am

    As a democrat hoping we seem transportation funding at least, what is Sen.
    Edwards talking about on medicaid? I am not qualified for medicaid, I thought
    the federal/state government had health care funded for the poor,uninsured?
    Oh well, and now Grover comes in and doesn’t think a massive tax increase is in order. WHAT massive tax increase? An increase in the sales tax will only
    bring our tax up to NC’s which will allow us to pay our bills! Transportation is a key issue,vital to our lives!

  4. JerryB | February 22, 2013 at 8:46 am

    Extreme Republicans denying the factual need to provide new revenues (taxes) for our increasingly inferior transportation system and extreme Democrats trying to tie an unrelated topic (expansion of Medicaid) to the transportation deal. Let us hope that sanity prevails among enough representatives on both sides to at least begin to address our transportation infrastructure needs.

  5. wayne goodman | February 22, 2013 at 10:53 am

    OJ

    They don’t want to tighten the belt in transportation. They want to take the money from the general fund , cutting and privatizing education and other critical services. This transportation deal already pokes their nose deeper into the general fund than it should be. To believe that the transportation needs can be solved without increased taxes and more revenue is insanity.

  6. gdad | February 22, 2013 at 11:32 am

    “Grover Norquist, the president of Americans for Tax Reform, said the transportation bill was “hijacked by a number of Republicans who join Democrats in believing that all transportation costs must be paid for by higher taxes.”
    -
    How then to pay, Grover, when, as OJ says, things have already been cut past the bone? Crickets.
    -
    “When you combine these tax increases with the looming sequestration coming out of Washington, it’s a devastating one-two punch on Virginia families and small businesses,” said Del. Ben Cline, ”
    -
    I thought spending cuts in D.C. were a good idea. Oh, that’s right, not when your state stands to lose disproportionately.

  7. SDBlacksburg | February 22, 2013 at 11:34 am

    The Tax on Hybrid vehicles is a no-no. Why punish those who choose cleaner safer vehicles for the environment?

  8. Blue John | February 23, 2013 at 12:30 am

    In a nutshell, McDonnell believes he is qualified to run for President one day and his cockamamie transportation plan will be the centerpiece of his campaign. The fuel tax has been too low for years, raise it and increase the sales tax by a penny dedicated to transportation for five years, to get us out of this mess. After five years reassess the sales tax increase as well as the fuels tax. Like it or not, we will have to pay for our infrastructure. Look closely at the fine print in some of his PPTA contracts, he guarantees the operating contractors reimbursement if traffic volume lowers from population or economic changes, or new roads are constructed that cause volume reductions. Grover Norquist is entitled to his opinion, but I fail to see the relevance or why we are subjected to his unqualified blather.

Error submitting comment

Name is required

A valid email is required (test@test.com)

Comment is required

Add a comment

Your email address will not be published.
All fields are required to comment.

processing

Saturday, May 25, 2013

Weather Journal

Cold AM; blog fill-in hits big time

Fri, 24 May 2013 22:01:28 +0000

About this blog

The Blue Ridge Caucus is written by Roanoke Times newsroom staffers including Dave Ress, Chase Purdy and Dwayne Yancey. The blog covers all things politics, especially west of Virginia’s capitol, with historical perspective on issue and positions, and money and campaign finance.

RSS feed








Recent Comments

  • Bubba Greene: Gosh Art, I had no idea. Somehow I suspected you only cared when there was the possible question...
  • Debra Talin: Environmental regulations should not be touched.
  • Cold n P: McAuliff will not get out the vote in Virginia and we will indeed have the likes of Cuccinelli in Richmond...
  • Art Hill: “Who really cares! “ As a taxpayer, I do. Crickets from our hosts?
  • Scamuel Jones: These two Republidiots (McDonnell and Cuccinelli) have opened themselves to be proven in the media to...

Categories

Archives