Governor of Virginia/Flickr
For quite a while, it seems most of the political news out of Virginia has been quite discouraging -- medically-unnecessary ultrasounds, state-based currencies, election-rigging schemes -- so it comes as a welcome change of pace to see the commonwealth approve a sweeping, bipartisan transportation package years in the making.
Responding to the news, National Journal's Josh Kraushaar argued that the deal should offer the White House a reminder of "what bipartisan compromise looks like."
I find this take rather puzzling, not because the Virginia transportation bill falls short -- as best as I can tell, the package has some worthwhile elements* -- but because I don't think it's the White House that needs the reminder.
In this case, Virginia was able to get something done because Republican leaders were willing to accept concessions their counterparts on Capitol Hill are not.
On the last day of the legislature's 46-day gathering, the Senate gave its blessing to a plan that dramatically overhauls the way Virginians will pay for roads, highways and mass transit -- but not before Democrats also won a pledge from McDonnell on the Affordable Care Act's planned expansion of Medicaid for poor and elderly people.
Soon after McDonnell wrote a blistering letter about his reluctance to expand the shared federal and state program because of growing costs, Democratic senators threatened to derail the $3.5 billion transportation measure unless McDonnell agreed, in writing, to honor their compromise on Medicaid.
He did, and despite a last-minute challenge Saturday from Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli II, the Medicaid deal held together well enough for the Senate to take up the historic transportation measure a day after the House passed it.
Virginia Republicans had to accept some new taxes -- including a wholesale tax on motor fuels and a slight increase in the sales tax on nonfood merchandise -- and expanded "Obamacare," while Virginia Democrats had to accept "diverting as much as $200 million a year in general fund revenue toward roads instead of schools or other services."
Is this an example of what "bipartisan compromise looks like"? Certainly. Is it the White House's fault we don't see examples like these at the federal level? I'm hard pressed to imagine why anyone might think so.
Looking back over the last four years, it seems President Obama, to the chagrin of many liberals, has been prepared to compromise with Republicans on just about everything. Even this week, with the sequester looming, the White House isn't calling for a revenues-only solution; it's calling for a balanced deal in which Democrats accept spending cuts they don't want and Republicans accept revenue from closed tax loopholes that they don't want. The point is to find a middle ground in which both sides make concessions in the interests of striking a larger deal.
Are there literally any examples in which Obama and congressional Republicans have tried to reach an agreement, and the president refused to compromise? Are there literally any examples in which the White House said, "It's our way or the highway"? Are there literally any examples in which the president and his team weren't willing to make concessions, in some cases, pre-emptively?
I don't think there are. Hell, Obama has even put entitlements on the table in the hopes of reaching fiscal deals with GOP leaders. On the other hand, we see quantifiably extreme congressional Republicans refusing to compromise on pretty much every issue on the policy landscape.
So why is Josh Kraushaar arguing that the White House should follow Virginia's example? Obama would love to strike deals like these, but he's dealing with a congressional GOP that finds the very idea of compromise offensive.
In Virginia, McDonnell was willing to infuriate his base, accept tax increases, and tolerate Medicaid expansion. The moment Boehner, Cantor, McConnell, et al, are willing to make concessions anywhere close to these is the day Washington gridlock becomes far less exasperating.
In short, I'm afraid Kraushaar is reminding the wrong side of Pennsylvania Avenue about the virtues of "bipartisan compromise."
* Update: It's worth emphasizing that the Virginia bill inexplicably includes a new tax on hybrids or any alternative-fuel cars, because GOP policymakers in the state hope to discourage consumers from buying more fuel-efficient vehicles. When I said the transportation package includes some worthwhile provisions, I certainly wasn't referring to this.
Leave a Comment:
Any publication that can hire Ron Fournier will have no trouble keeping a Josh Kraushaar around. I haven't read anything in National Journal that makes any sense at all in years. How they manage to continue to be taken seriously ... oh, wait, the morons in DC think Tiger Beat On The Potomac is serious political news. Never mind!
What should be important to note about Virginia, is that we have very dire needs when it comes to transportation. Since the economy took a nose dive, the Washington DC metro area, which includes southern Maryland and Northern Virginia has seen a surge in new residents from across the country. Since we have a lot of high tech here, and we have a ton of federal jobs, we rode out the recession with just a 5.5% unemployment rate, and a lot of people around the country noticed, and moved here looking for a job.
As a result, the DC metro area has seen a steady increase in our population, and we now have the worst traffic in the entire nation. It's so horrible that people around here have learned that you avoid leaving the house between the hours of 6am to 9am and from 3pm to 7pm. There's just too much traffic.
Given all this, Virginia constantly works for more funds to improve our transportation system. Even Republicans here understand the need to improve our infrastructure.
I have never noticed McDonnell or Cuchanelli call for more spending of any kind, "infrastructure" included. Also, I have yet to hear anyone tout Virginia Republicans as being so gosh darn bipartisan on anything. If what you say is true, a National story is in order...
Alva, don't blame the recession or the resilience of the job market in the DC area for the transportation ills. That part of the world has been a cesspit of transportation woes since LONG before Reagan made his way to the White House.
As for the bipartisanship of the Virginia legislature, this should be front page news everywhere.
As for President Obama and his willingness to deal with the GOP hostage takers in the US House... I continue to hope he will NOT give in to them over the sequester. It will be painful, but not as painful as what we will end up with if the GOP gets their way yet again.
Lebowsky, keep in mind that we used to have pretty sensible Republicans in this state. Virginia always prided itself on keeping itself out of the press and just getting things done. That all changed with Governor Ultrasound.
The voters in Northern Virginia are some of the most sophisticated voters in the nation. It leans far enough to the left that even Pat Buchanan lamented that we're a bunch of commies. In reality, we just like to get things done. And the traffic situation is always on everyone's mind. Republicans at the local and county levels often don't disagree with the Democrats on much of anything, especially when it comes to transportation. Usually the only disagreements is how the money is going to get raised to do it.
Even under a loon like McDonnell we've widened roads like I-95 and local roads in the Dullas corridor. We've expanded Dullas airport, and built new HOV hot lanes on the capital beltway. All with a nut like McDonnell in office.
Virginia Republicans historically have not been national embarrassments. Today they are, but when it comes to transportation, it's a really hard sell to say you're opposed to any new road construction in this part of the state.
Sandy, I once talked to my local county representative who's a Republican. He's served here for 20 plus years. I asked him why he didn't try to run for the Virginia state Assembly, and he said it was because the higher you go, the more politics you have to deal with.
That's the basic attitude here. Represent people and try to avoid political disagreements. I know that sounds crazy considering what Gov. Ultrasound has done, but that's really how it was all my life.
When Mark Warner was our governor, nobody so much as noticed that he was a democrat. Virginia is mostly just pro-business. Keep the taxes low, encourages businesses to come here, and that seems to be the position of Democrats and Republicans alike. That's how it was even when George "Mecaca" Allen was our governor.
Virginia politicians have for years had an attitude of keep your head down, don't make a fuss, get things done. My Congressman for years was Rep. Tom Davis. Ever heard of him? Nobody has. Keep your head down, don't make a fuss.
The last 4 years have been like something from another planet. I think it's a sign that the Republicans here are panicking, because the demographics have changed so much, particularly in northern Virginia, that northern Virginia Dems now out number the Republicans who live out in the sticks. They're panicking because Virginia is now trending blue and it doesn't look like we're going to turn back anytime soon.
I would temper the praise of old-line Virginia Republicans by noting that though they were less publicly crazy than the current crop, even when they recognized the need for infrastructure, they still didn't want to pay for it. The gas tax, which was the source of funding for road construction and maintenance, hadn't been raised since <em>1985</em>, meaning it wasn't done during the entire careers of most of those "sensible" Republicans. Meanwhile, fuel efficiency steadily increased, so the amount of tax money went down compared to the amount of wear and tear on the roads.
Red, that's certainly true. Virginia has done some workarounds of this by putting questions on state wide ballots to issue bonds to raise funds for road maintenance. These measures typically pass. Virginia also usually tries to get federal funds for infrastructure too, and usually succeeds.
"...National Journal's Josh Kraushaar arguedthat the deal should offer the White House a reminder of "what bipartisan compromise looks like."
This is yet another example of the GOTP non-reality world. They like to pretend that it's all the President's fault to the public, even as they play "monkey see & hear no evil", I'd say "speak" but all they speak is evil.
Which part of "Republicans already raised taxes" are you all having difficulty with?
What difference does it make?
Are you trying to say that in all of the fiscal things that have happened since Obama took office that raising taxes can only happen once?
Even dear old Ronnie raised taxes 11 or 12 times.
So what part of that don't you understand?
What part of, "They didn't raise them, they lowered per the legislation that the Republicans rammed through" don't you understand Shooter?
If you're going to troll, at LEAST try and be intelligent about it and make your points using something close to the truth.
Just because we did the smart thing once doesn't mean we have to do something for the Party of Stupid to balance it out.
Dream on. The pound of flesh has been taken, don't expect any more for at least another 20 years. Crying poor over a 2% cut just isn't believable any more.
The National JOurnal has an agenda, and it is based upon attacking anything Obama.
Earlier this hour Limbaugh gave us his take on the Oscars. Obama's campaign video (Zero Dark Thirty) lost. Obama's Biopic (Lincoln) lost. So they (liberal "Hollywood") HAD to compensate by giving 'Moochelle' a giant screen to announce Best Picture. Then he drew a comparison to the 1984 Super Bowl commercial announcing the Macintosh computer. And from there went to to posit it was the rollout of a Moochelle for 2016 campaign.
"But seriously, folks",-as he likes to say- WTF?
Why do you have to be so disrespectful of the first lady?
To the Republicans there is no compromise unless the President gives up new revenue and the President recommends the cuts. The damage to the economy from the cuts that the Republicans want (in general of course and not in their states/districts) can be blamed on the President and the Dems. And the Republicans can tell their base that they did not vote for any new taxes.
Any cuts or reforms to SS, Medicare, Medicaid must be proposed by the Dems. so that the Dems will get the blame. They propose outrageous "fixes" for these popular programs that they know will not pass so that they can claim they tried to save the programs, but the Dems would not compromise.
Perhaps there is some more insight here.
What the Democrats in Virginia appear to have found is something that the Republicans wanted to spend money on and then to hold that hostage.
With all of their spending, there isn't something that Obama and the Democrats can't find to hold hostage against the Republicans? Not austerity items. Spending such as the subsidy to the oil companies.
Infrastructure is necessary spending. Medicare expansion is also necessary and it is law.
I just wish that they would all get back to work..haggle the stuff out and do their JOB! I'm really sick of the drama..these are things they're suppose to be doing every flippin day they work.I have noticed tho that the republican party has been actin like spindoctors for the last 4 yrs thinking we are all too stupid to see it..That's why I LEFT THEM.
Kraushaar said Romney was poised to win Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania. That should tell you all you need to know about the quality of his political insight.
When this debate started, there was a move to raise gas taxes (this legislation actually removes present state gas tax and replaces it with wholesale gas taxes) and the rationale was that people with hybrids should do their share as they were using the highways too. OK, maybe I could buy that. But now every Virginian will pay somewhat higher sales taxes (03%) which will go to transportation, including people with hybrids. Why they didn't take off the hybrid tax, I have no idea (well, I do, but I'll be polite.) The whole thing would have been much more environmental friendly if they had just raised gas taxes instead--and then the hybrid tax would be acceptable. So I'm baffled by the whole thing, but glad to see that Medicaid will (may?) serve more people who need it. That seems to have been the deal maker for the democrats.
That is a concern too. I believe we still allow hybrids to go onto the HOV, even when there's only 1 passenger in the car. Virginia did this years ago to encourage buying hybrid vehicles, but they're so popular now that we probably ought to just make it a standard HOV.
According to a legislator I know, the conference committee was supposed to replace the hybrid tax with one applying only to non-gas (i.e., electric) vehicles, but they were in a rush to get done, and they just plugged in the language they already had about hybrids. The idea was that vehicles that don't use gas wouldn't be paying the gas tax, but they should still contribute to road maintenance.
I have to disagree with Steve on the point that Republicans were trying to discourage people from buying more fuel-efficient vehicles. I don't think they care much about that, they were just boxed in by their general anti-tax ideology and scrambling for places other than the gas tax to get money from. I do think they probably liked the idea because Democrats are more likely to own hybrids than Republicans, but not specifically because of the gas mileage. (And I have a real problem with the "punishing people for doing the right thing" rhetoric from some local Democrats -- taxes aren't punishment, and adopting that language won't be helpful to many of our causes.)
The $100 hybrid tax is a slap in the face to all environmentally minded, clean energy folks everywhere. Even in his earliest proposal, which eliminated the gas tax entirely, the hybrid tax was in place. So Gov. Ultrasound's argument that hybrid owners need to pay their fair share is entirely mute. In addition, there are many high MPG non-hybrid cars on the market whose overall mpg beat my hybrid Camry and Escape. So, where does the GOP reasoning land? In a pile of carbon-based poo, I say. My guess is that the $100 tax will go to appease their big oil buddies... after all, reducing the gas tax (a usage tax) and increasing the sales tax (regressive tax) helps big business and the big trucking companies, hurts the poor and elderly and scores big kutos for the GOP in Northern VA and Tidewater areas. I doubt if we here in SW Va will see much benefit at all. This governor and his tea party cronies continue to embarrass us here in VA. Can't wait for November! Keep up the great work Rachel!
I drive a Prius in Va and I don’t know how to justify charging me $100/yr additional tax. The math: I drive 10,000 miles/year and get 50mpg. So I burn 200 gals. of gas per year. If I was paying 17.5-cents-per-gallon tax that equals $35. So my taxes just went up by $65/year in addition to the increased sales tax that everyone will pay. Why am I being penalized for driving a car that is good for the environment and my wallet? Can someone explain this to me and all the other Virginians who own hybrids? I think there’s another agenda here and it has nothing to do with raising revenue. It’s a punishment to anyone who believes in trying to do something towards getting away from fossil fuels.