Based on this editorial, I'm starting to think that the Washington Post - whose endorsement of Creigh Deeds in the Democratic primary this spring is widely believed to have played a major role in Deeds' surprise, come-from-behind victory - will not endorse either Deeds or Bob McDonnell in the general election this fall. Given that crisis in [Virginia transportation] funding, and the centrality of transportation infrastructure to Virginia's economy, you'd think the candidates for governor would advance serious, plausible proposals -- and that they would include fresh revenue from new taxes or fees. Unfortunately, former attorney general Robert F. McDonnell, the Republican, is pushing a plan that mostly rules out such revenue and that would deliver significant new funds for road-building only at the probable expense of the state's colleges, public schools, police departments, prisons and health programs. And state Sen. R. Creigh Deeds, the Democrat, has not even bothered to formulate much of a plan at all. As a result, the candidates' first face-to-face debate last weekend was deeply unedifying on what each rightly identified as the central issue.I agree, the first debate - and, for that matter, the entire campaign so far - was utterly "sterile" when it comes to serious proposals for fixing Virginia's transportation mess. The fact is, our current funding model for transportation in Virginia is completely broken. As the Post says, if this were a business, it would be bankrupt. For instance, Virginia's total state taxes on gasoline are just 19.4 cents per gallon, or 9.2 cents per gallon under the national average. That's extremely low. And Virginia's gas tax hasn't been raised in 23 years, which means that it hasn't even come close to keeping up with inflation in every other area - e.g., the cost of labor and materials for repairing and building rail, roads, and bridges. That's completely crazy, and certainly not a "business model" by which to run the Commonwealth (unless we're talking about running it into the ground, that is).
Mr. McDonnell's transportation plan -- all 19 pages of it -- deserves credit for the extent and specificity of its proposals. He acknowledges that current funding sources are inadequate and proposes some new ones. Unfortunately, the new revenue he identifies is one-time-only, many years distant or paltry....
[...]
As for Mr. Deeds, his approach to transportation funding is to sidestep the subject, a stance even more irresponsible than Mr. McDonnell's...
[...]
If Mr. McDonnell wants to shortchange education, public safety and health to pay for roads, let him say so clearly and honestly. If Mr. Deeds wants to raise taxes for the same purpose, let him level with Virginians. Otherwise, the two are condemned to a fall campaign every bit as sterile as their first debate.
Beyond funding, I also don't hear either gubernatorial candidate talking seriously about dealing with the main root cause of our traffic problems. That would be mindless, unconstrained sprawl, as opposed to "smart growth" and "transit-oriented development," which are the obvious answers here. In the 2005 gubernatorial campaign, I was highly encouraged when Tim Kaine raised the issue of tying land use planning much more closely to transportation development. As Tim Kaine wrote in June of this year, that means things like "better road design standards, traffic impact statements that must be prepared before major land-use decisions are made, authority for local governments to assess impact fees for transportation and forthcoming stormwater regulations that will reduce overpaving." Unfortunately, in the 2009 gubernatorial campaign, I haven't heard much (if any) serious talk about any of this. Instead, we've got Bob McDonnell's deep dishonesty (and, to the extent that he's being honest, deep immorality) and Creigh Deeds' lack of specificity (and faulty comparison to the Gerald Baliles model on transportation; it's a completely different situation today in Virginia than in the late 1980s). That's extremely unfortunate and disappointing.
The bottom line is that the Washington Post is correct on this one: without a serious discussion of raising major revenues for Virginia's transportation system - and, I'd add, an equally serious discussion of dealing with land use - this entire debate is utterly "sterile." Making matters worse, whoever is elected governor in November will face a General Assembly which has demonstrated absolutely no appetite or ability to deal with any of this. So, unless Bob McDonnell and Creigh Deeds run on a robust platform regarding transportation, neither will have a mandate to get things done if and when they become governor. Another four years like the last 3 1/2 years is the last thing Virginia needs, yet that appears to be exactly where we're headed. Argh.
UPDATE: I just wanted to point out that the Deeds campaign does talk, for one paragraph, about connecting transportation planning with land use in its economic plan. I hope to hear Creigh speak about this on the stump at least as much as Tim Kaine did in 2005. Today, the problem's more urgent than ever.
