Sorry, JR, but you’re just wrong on HB6055 (UPDATED)

My friend JR over at Bearing Drift has waded into the debate on HB6055 - actually, he has tried to come to the thing’s defense.  Unfortunately, he makes more than a few wrong turns, starting with his description of what these regional authorities are (BD):

While I believe the government that governs best is the one that governs least, I also believe that the most accountable form of government is the one that is closest to you. Which is why I have been a bit flummoxed by the calls from what I will call the “no” section of the Republican Party to any kind of entity that will be appointed by local governments to manage transportation projects and funding.

First of all, regional authorities are not “closest” to the people.  In fact, since their positions are directly elected by no one, it could be argued that they are in fact the farthest away, because no one on that board is directly accountable to the people.  We have seen this in Europe, where the leadership of the European Union has increasingly become arbitrary, anti-democratic, and secretive, despite the fact that all of the officials involved are appointed by elected national governments.  The NVTA is a little different in that locally elected officials themselves serve, but not all NVTA members are elected officials.  Several are simply appointed to that body, including – in what was nothing less than a slap in the face to Prince William voters – the Chairwoman, who by law is appointed by the Governor.  Governor Kaine chose Sharon Pandak, the very woman PWC voters rejected as a choice for Chair of the Board of Supervisors last year.

Sadly, that wasn’t the only mistake JR made (same link):

One of the primary arguments, generally, by people in Northern Virginia and Hampton Roads is that gas taxes or any kind of revenue generating scheme, like port fees, etc. ought to have much of that money spent on regional transportation needs. “Getting our fair share” of the money we send to Richmond is commonly offered, even from “no” folks.

I agree with that approach. But who is going to administer it?

If you were to listen to the GOPs “anti” wing, that authority should rest with the state.

Not true, J.R.  Many of us have embraced an entirely different approach, one that takes the responsibility for local roads out of the state’s hands entirely and gives it to local governments.  Newly elected RPV Chairman Jeff Frederick made that the center of his transportation plan, only to have Bill Howell bury the bill in the House Rules Committee.

Be that as it may, J.R. compounds his mistake and misses the point:

The counter is that if we did use something akin to the Hampton Roads or Northern Virginia Transportation Authority, (however, that might shake-out in the new-and-improved constitutionally viable HB 6055), if there is an elected official or council that is locally not addressing our transportation needs adequately, only a targeted, local campaign will need be waged against that particular elected official or council. This is a far more controllable, and, quite frankly, conservative approach.

I must disagree.  A “targeted, local campaign” will mean zilch because in neither case does one county or city have control over the board.  Moreover, uinder the provisions of HB6055, the localities in question are banned from repealing the taxes and opting out of the authorities so long as at least one sqaure inch of asphalt is being paved there by said authority (not even the EU is that draconian).  Besides, in Northern Virginia, the “targeted, local campaign” actually led to the “particular (would-be)elected official” landing on the regional authority – and as the Chairwoman, no less!

In Hampton Roads, where the money would go to an all-appointed Metro Planning Organization, the lack of accountability is an even greater problem.

All of that said, J.R. misses the larger point: the Commonwealth is in no condition to absorb tax increases when the economy stands on a knife’s edge and state spending has risen more the 70% in six years.  Even if the tax ihkes are localized, the entire state will suffer.  The particular tax increases up for discussion here – mainly on commercial real estate and on home sales (I) – would be particularly awful (which is why the latter it was rejected as a component of Tim Kaine’s disastrous package).

The real solution is to find savings elsewhere in the budget and either shift the revenue streams to put more into transportation or download local roads (I’d prefer the latter).  HB6055, by contrast, will do nothing but add another layer of unnaccountable government, damage the economy with tax increases, and likely have minimal (if any) amelioration of traffic.