FamilyFoundationBlog.com

There must be some embarrassed members of the House right about now. At least those who consider them fans of Welfare reform and the good that it’s done to get people into productive lives.

Seems a little ol’ bill called HB 1714 got by the House unanimously, despite the fact that it would, in large part, re-institute direct payments to individuals. In bureaucratic speak, it increases the frequency of  “diversionary cash assistance” from one four-month payment every five years to one such payment every year.

How did this escape the budget hawks in the House, so eager to kill any new spending the last few years because of tight state finances? Surely it had a Fiscal Impact Statement — you know, those pesky little red flags the Department of Planning and Budget put out to the money committees as excuses to kill real reforms that will save money, ostensibly because they will cost too much?

Answer: It put out a Fiscal Impact Statement saying that spending all this money will save money. Brilliant! Because the House and Senate bought it! Literally! Congrats to all involved.

There is a chance this can be stopped. The Senate did attach an amendment, so the House has a chance to reject it, water it down with amendments, or force a conference committee, where perhaps it can run out the clock. It’s amazing how three-sentence long bill can wreak so much damage on a major reform that has improved our society.

Every year, a bill sneaks up on us and everybody else, that really takes the General Assembly by surprise. This year, perhaps more than others: There have been bills trying to expand the definition of blight (that we slowed down and got amended) and one still alive that would dismantle welfare reform (HB 1714).

But one idea no one would have imagined would surface, espeially after the HB 3202 fiasco, was the idea of regional transportation authorities. There was talk of it in the greater Richmond area, but when suburban kingpin Henrico Country said it wasn’t interested in joining, no one gave it a second thought. Nobody but Senator John Watkins (R-10, Midlothian), that is. 

(The admin’s note: Contrary to what you may think after three successive posts mentioning his name, this is not pick on Senator Watkins Day. Pure coincidence that he has been at least partially involved in the previous two posts.)

Senator Watkins, it seems, still wants the City of Richmond and Chesterfield County to get together without Henrico, with the possibility the latter and other jurisdictions can join the party later. It’s all in SB 1534, which passed the Senate yesterday 21-19. The two sides were as odd a mix as you’ll ever see, with liberals such as Majority Leader Dick Saslaw (D-35, Springfield) voting against (probably in the vein of, “If Northern Virginia can’t get that extra taxing power, no one is.”)

This new authority would, according to the senator’s own newsletter, include:

“. . . the authorization of a regional congestion relief fee, which is, in essence, a grantor’s tax that can be authorized by the respective Board of Supervisors or City Council. The primary reason for this is to give the authority, if formed, a mechanism to pay for its initial development and planning.”

That is to say, more taxes, especially on an industry (real estate that is in depression and making refinancing and new mortgages more expensive) and more bureaucracy, regulation and half-baked and costly transportation projects. So, keep your eyes open. If this can sneak up on Richmond-area citizens, it can sneak up on every region. As we all know, bad ideas in the General Assembly never go away. They just get repackaged into worse ones.

A fellow blogger gave me these lines to use in committee testimony in favor of the spending transparency bills (SB 936 and HB 2285). Thus far, the way they have travelled the legislative ladder, testimony hasn’t been needed. For the record, the borrowed lines are:

“Financial institutions and publicly traded stocks, by regulation, must make readily available to the public its investments and corporate spending. If it’s required of Charles Schwab, it should be required of state government.”

The point being that the regulators (government) have a different standard for themselves than those on whom they impose rules. Here’s a glaring and fun example. In his constituent newsletter today, Senator John Watkins (R-10, Midlothian) touts his commending resolution (SJ 394) to the crew and company of the summer 2008 HBO massive hit special event series John Adams (see our review here), much of which was filmed in central Virginia and Colonial Williamsburg. Among the reasons Senator Watkins wants to thank the crew is for the amount of money it spent in the Commonwealth:

“I previously mentioned my commending resolution to the crew of the John Adams HBO production. … Filming a movie in Virginia is good for Virginia. For example, the John Adams mini-series spent $81,775,102 in Virginia. A few examples of how this money was spent: 

Technicians, Productions Assistants, Hired in Virginia: $9,025,750

Equipment Rental: $2,412,814

Wardrobe: $1,903,678

Car and Truck Rental: $1,141,053

Construction Supplies: $3,634,900.”

Which is just great for everyone involved. But it begs the question: If we can get this kind of info out of a company doing temporary business in Virginia, why can’t we get our own state government’s expenditures? Stay vigilant. Improved transparency is on the way, but anything can happen. I’m keeping my testimony at the ready.

Here’s how they voted on the Cuccinelli floor amendment, which added Choose Life license plates to SB 817, the sale proceeds of which will benefit pregnancy resource centers:

YEAS — Colgan, Cuccinelli, Hanger, Hurt, Martin, McDougle, Newman, Norment, Obenshain, Puckett, Quayle, Ruff, Smith, Stolle, Stosch, Stuart, Vogel, Wagner, Wampler, Watkins (20).

NAYS — Barker, Deeds, Edwards, Herring, Houck, Howell, Locke, Lucas, Marsh, McEachin, Miller, J.C., Miller, Y.B., Northam, Petersen, Puller, Reynolds, Saslaw, Ticer, Whipple (19).

NOT VOTING — Blevins (1).

That’s 18 of the 19 Republicans in the affirmative, with Senator Harry Blevins (R-14, Chesapeake), abstaining as is his want (he, apparently is not a fan of specialized plates and does not vote on any such legislation, just as he abstained in committee). Two Democrats, Senators Chuck Colgan (D-29, Manassas) and Phillip Puckett (D-38, Tazewell), joined the 18, while the remaining 18 Dems voted en bloc against. This is a perfect illustration of exactly how difficult it is to get even modest, middle ground life legislation through the House of Lords, err, Senate.

Interestingly, here is the vote on the bill itself, in its amended form (and where Senator John Watkins (R-10 Midlothian) earned the Trifecta Award for voting every which way possible: abstained in commitee, yes on the amendment — for which we are grateful — and no on the bill):

YEAS —Barker, Colgan, Cuccinelli, Deeds, Edwards, Hanger, Herring, Houck, Hurt, Lucas, Marsh, Martin, McDougle, Miller, J.C., Miller, Y.B., Newman, Norment, Northam, Obenshain, Petersen, Puckett, Quayle, Reynolds, Ruff, Smith, Stolle, Stosch, Stuart, Ticer, Vogel, Wagner, Wampler, Whipple (33).

NAYS —Howell, Locke, McEachin, Puller, Watkins (5).

NOT VOTING —Blevins, Saslaw (2).

This is where we get a sense of the true extreme, abortion-at-all-costs senators: Saslaw, Howell, Locke, McEachin and Puller. Not a vote between them for the amendment, nor the bill — which included a number of special plates designed to encourage tourism in different localities. They’d rather vote against the localities that would benefit than help avert abortions. For this gang of five, anything to do with life, even such a minuscule nod to helping crisis pregnancy centers, is an abomination. 

Questions for these senators: Do you agree abortion is a problem? If yes, then do you or do you not agree pregnancy resource centers contribute to solving the problem? If not, why not?

Not that we have a dog in this fight, but just curious . . . it seems that Senator Ralph Northam (D-6, Norfolk), late of rumor fame that he considered flipping the balance of power in the Senate yesterday (see BearingDrift) —something that held up Senate proceedings for four hours — had his SB 1106  pass that chamber on a 30-10 vote. The bill would prohibit smoking in cars in which children are present.

According to a blurb today in the Richmond Times-Dispatch, Senator Northam, a physician, told his colleagues on the floor that riding in a car for an hour with someone who smokes is equal to smoking 10 cigarettes.

We’re not doctors here, but: How many cigarettes does one smoke in an hour in a car? Let’s say five. If the non-smoker is theoretically taking in the equivalent of 10 smokes, how many is the actual smoker taking in? Is the doctor saying one cigarette is equal to more than one cigarette? Or is math calculated a little different in med school?

In “A Charlie Brown Christmas,” Charlie Brown’s sister Sally tells him that for Christmas, “All I want is what I have coming to me. All I want is my fair share.”

Enter the “Stimulus” Package and Governor Tim Kaine.

Didn’t have the Christmas you had hoped for? The Governor has a Web site for you!

Yesterday the Governor announced stimulus.virginia.gov, a Web site where you too can go and submit ideas and projects to be paid for by the “stimulus” bill being debated in Washington! In one of the more disturbing lines from the Governor’s press release: “Projects will be evaluated and selected through a process similar to the way Virginia develops its biennial budget.”

Wow . . . I feel better already.

Merry Christmas.