Ken Cuccinelli for Governor

As I tended to the hallowed right-hand column over the weekend, I discovered, to my surprise, that I hadn’t posted an endorsement of Ken Cuccinelli in this space. It turns out my endorsement was only posted on Virginia Virtucon. Whoops.

Of course, the VV endorsement was months old, and I was speaking for VV as a whole then. In the time since, Ken has gone a little wobbly on taxes, but he righted his ship with his recent tax reform plan. Due to the extremely low level of taxable income threshold for the highest bracket ($17,000), Ken’s plan to lower that bracket rate from 5.75% to 5% will be helpful to Virginians across all income levels.

My original candidate for Attorney General (Mark Obenshain) won the nomination, so that clearly stands. I’ll have a post on the LG race later this week.

Susan Stimpson for Lieutenant Governor

There has been quite a bit of bandwith burned on the race for Lieutenant Governor in Virginia. Seven candidates have brought themselves forward. Looking at their records (or lack thereof in some cases), I have chosen Susan Stimpson.

Many of my friends have chosen differently, which does not surprise me (unanimity is rare in the rightosphere). Nor does it surprise me that the criticism other bloggers have aimed at Susan have avoided her record. After all, she is the only elected official running for a statewide Republican nomination who has never voted for a tax increase.

I would humbly submit that this is a more important gauge for a candidate than one’s proximity to Bill Howell in a photo or prior career. Lest anyone forget, when Susan had to choose between her relationship with Howell and her opposition to tax increases, she chose the latter, and emphatically – something that not every statewide candidate (*cough* Ken Cuccinelli *cough*) was willing to do.

In short, her record in office has revealed someone determined to reduce both government spending and the tax burden on her constituents. Forgive the repetition, but it bears repeating; Susan Stimpson is the only elected official running for a statewide Republican nomination who has never voted for a tax increase.

I remember bumping into Susan a few times in 2009. She struck me as a nice woman, earnest, dedicated, and likely to follow the mold of the Stafford Republican clique. I had no idea she would be asking my advice on the Stafford budget, let alone follow it to the letter (I told her if she thought spending could be cut and taxes reduced further than was being presented, she should push for it – which is exactly what she did). I certainly didn’t expect she would use her seat on the VRE board to demand an audit of the organization. As one who remembers how MSM used to portray Republicans who drifted leftward as having “grown in office,” i can happily say Susan has “shrunk” in hers.

For these reasons, I support Susan for the LG nomination. Any Republican running would be superior to the Democrats’ crop of candidates, but Susan is the best on the Republican side.

About the “local” tax increases… (UPDATED)

The tax increase fiasco continues to get worse with exposure….

Readers may recall Ken Cuccinelli’s somewhat confused statement on the bill. While he opposed the “massive tax hike,” he did add this: “If localities are given more authority to address their most urgent transportation needs, that would be an element that I strongly support…” (Lovettsville Lady).

Well, it turns out that element is non-existent. Here’s the bill’s new language on the hotel occupancy tax (emphasis added).

ARTICLE 10
Transient Occupancy Tax in Northern Virginia

Section 58.1-1742. Northern Virginia transient occupancy tax.

In addition [to] all other fees and taxes imposed under law, there is hereby imposed an additional transient occupancy tax at the rate of three percent of the amount of the charge for the occupancy of any room or space occupied that is located in any county or city embraced by the Northern Virginia Transportation Authority established under section 15.2-4830.

The tax imposed under this section shall be imposed only for the occupancy of any room or space that is suitable or intended for occupancy by transients for dwelling, lodging, or sleeping purposes.

The revenue generated and collected from the tax shall be deposited by the Comptroller in the Northern Virginia Transportation Authority Fund established under section 15.2-4838.01 on at least a monthly basis.

In other words, this “local” tax is actually state imposed, and the money will be spent by an unelected and unaccountable regional authority. Although the newest version of the bill still can’t be found online, in email correspondence, Delegate Marshall’s wife Catherine informed me that as far as she can tell all of the “local” tax increase UPDATE: I have seen the conference report version of the bill, and like the hotel occupancy tax, the grantors’ tax and sales tax are similarly Richmond-imposed and regionally shielded from the accountability of local voters. UPDATE: It appears the money will be sent back to the localities.

This, if anything, is actually worse than the referendum nonsense of 2002 or the HB3202 silliness as originally constructed. There is absolutely no increase in local taxing authority. It is all imposed from above.

Maddening…this thing must be voted down.

Bloggers join together to stand up for the taxpayers (UPDATED – and they’re not alone)

More than a dozen bloggers have signed an open letter to the General Assembly asking them to defeat the “compromise” tax increase.

The link to the letter is here. Among the key points (emphasis in original)…

If fully implemented, the bill would cost Virginia taxpayers over $1.3 billion in new taxes. With the economy on a knife’s edge, additional taxes would damage employment (by raising the cost of business), consumption (by raising overall prices), and the overall business environment. This is not the time to raise taxes on hard-working Virginian employers and employees.

Moreover, the “local” tax increases (on Hampton Roads and Northern Virginia) will have numerous consequences in addition to exacerbating the damage mentioned above.

The grantor’s tax is an especially cruel tax to impose on these regions as they still try to recover from the housing slump that began over five years ago.

The higher sales tax will damage business on the regions’ outskirts (Prince William, Loudoun, Gloucester, Suffolk, Isle of Wight, James, City, York, Chesapeake, and Virginia Beach) as their neighbors’ lower taxes attract businesses and consumers.

The regional hotel occupancy tax may or may not affect tourism, but it will certainly bean increased cost to business travel, further damaging the business climate.

Compounding this confusion will be the internet sales tax, which will now be expected(assuming Congressional passage) to be imposed not evenly throughout Virginia, but according to the sales tax quilt woven by this bill.

Finally, the creation of these regional taxes will encourage revenue-addicted politicians in other regions throughout the Commonwealth, adding greater uncertainty in tax regimens, and a patchwork of local taxes.

That’s just the economic damage. We also noted the political damage:

Every Republican statewide official (and most legislators) were elected on a promise not to raise taxes. This bill erodes the credibility of all future candidates and the ability of voters to hold said candidates accountable.

This violation of faith damages our democracy in incalculable ways.

The legislature listened to us in 2008. Will they listen to us now?

UPDATE:  Joining us, Susan Stimpson, Pete Snyder, E.W. Jackson, and Grover Norquist in opposing this are Corey Stewart, Steve Martin, both Attorney General candidates (Rob Bell and Mark Obenshain), the Family Foundation, the Fairfax County Taxpayers Alliance

The pdf version of the letter is…

Open Letter Regarding the Transportation Tax Hike (HB 2313) by Shaun Kenney

The gory details on the tax hike “compromise” (UPDATED)

The numbers are out on the conference committee’s tax hike plan…and if anything, it’s worse than we thought.

For starters, the plan raises taxes by $682 million annually (once fully implemented) at the state level for transportation, and by another $135.5 million for other stuff. That’s over $817 million in tax hikes, just from Richmond alone.

Moreover, the plan also gives localities in Northern Virginia and Hampton Roads the “option” of raising taxes by a total of $475-$550 million annually. UPDATE: The local tax hikes include a 1% sales tax, an increase in the grantor’s tax (that’s right, they’re taxing real estate sales as we’re still trying to recover from the housing slump), and a hotel occupancy tax (which will hit business travel).

I should note that just about every previous “local option” tax increase package has included the financial version of a gun to the head of localities to force them to enact them. I don’t have the language of the conference committee version, so I can’t say for certain if this one includes it, too. That said, odds are the localities will knuckle under, meaning the annual tax increase is likely to be roughly $1.3 billion annually.

Not even Grover Norquist thought it was that high at first.

Yet even that isn’t enough for folks like the Northern Virginia Transportation Alliance, whose leader is looking forward to “being able to build on this in the future” (Washington Post).

In fact, Virginia stands at a crossroads (especially Virginia Republicans). Do we simply shrug our shoulders and do what is easy (raise taxes with the premise that we can do it again)? Or do we recognize the economic damage that would be done by a tax increase, roll up our sleeves, and take a cold, long, hard look at the Virginia budget to determine what is not as high a priority as transportation (as well as determining within transportation what should be a state function and what shouldn’t)?

The House has this tax increase (known as HB2313) on their calendar today. There is still enough time to stop it, enough time for state leaders who have currently been silent – are you reading this, Mr. Cuccinelli? – to stand up for the taxpayer and make themselves heard. UPDATE: Ken has put out a confused statement approving of “localities…given more authority” but opposing tax increases. Given that the bill disguises the latter as the former, I’m not sure where Ken lands on this.

The conference committee deal: higher sales tax, higher local taxes, higher other taxes… (UPDATED)

The conference committee, remarkably, came up with a “deal” that is worse for the taxpayer than the two versions that were supposed to be the bookends of the negotiation. According to Grover Norquist at ATR:

Governor Bob McDonnell’s proposed transportation fix started as a $2.4 billion tax increase. As the House and Senate conferees debates the final language, the size of the tax hike has evidently increased by 250 percent, to nearly $6.1 billion in new and higher taxes once fully implemented over five years.

That’s over $1.2 billion fleeced annually from the taxpayer. The Richmond Times-Dispatch has the details. The plan is so bad that its foul scent even reached National Review.

I can’t tell if Pete Snyder or E.W. Jackson was the first statewide candidate to publicly oppose this fiasco; both deserve credit for taking that stand, however. Unless I seriously miss my guess, Stimpson, Stewart, Lingamfelter, Obenshain, and Bell – all of whom opposed smaller tax hikes – will likely oppose this one. That said, some words to that effect wouldn’t hurt. UPDATE: Stimpson just declared her opposition to this fiasco in my Inbox.

Meanwhile, Ken Cuccinelli is maddeningly silent – his only statement on this battle so far is his support for Steve Newman’s tax increase. There are whispers he’ll be presenting something in “a few weeks.” Let me say it plainly: that’s not good enough. For Ken to have any hope of making voters forget his mistake with Newman, he needs to oppose this now.

Quinnipiac confirms: backing a tax increase hurt Cuccinelli

I suspect that most of the discussion on the latest Quinnipiac Poll will be about the effect of Bill Bolling in the race as an independent. However, Quinnipiac had already included Bolling in its January 9 version of the poll. Bolling’s numbers did not change; he’s still at 13%.

What did change was Cuccinelli’s numbers: he dropped 3 points in voter preference (from 34% to 31%); his favorable rating fell 3 points (from 33% to 30%); and his job approval rating fell 7 points (from 48% to 41%), while his job disapproval rose 5 (from 27% to 32%)…

…and what did Cuccinelli do between January 9 and today? He backed Steve Newman’s tax increase.

I’m just sayin’….

Could the taxpayers be spared by a Richmond train wreck?

If what Steve Contorno (Washington Examiner) hears is correct, Democrats in the State Senate could be so wedded to Frank Wagner’s tax hike that they’ll refuse to support something too close to McDonnell’s tax hike, while Republicans who backed the latter may not like anything to close to the former:

“As long as the [final bill] resembles the Senate plan, we will have a transportation bill this year,” said Senate Minority Leader Dick Saslaw, D-Springfield. “If it varies too widely, we likely will not.”

…

Senate Democrats allowed $50 million a year to come from the general fund, but that came reluctantly. House Minority Leader David Toscano, D-Charlottesville, said it’s unlikely they’ll budge on that.

Those kinds of lines in the sand are already threatening a compromise as representatives from both parties begin to meet behind closed doors to find a solution that can pass both chambers.

“If we’re going to start ruling out things almost from the beginning,” said House Majority Leader Kirk Cox, R-Colonial Heights, “we’re going to have a lot of trouble getting there.”

The House version takes a lot more road money out of the general fund (pursuant to McDonnell’s tax hike).

My guess is the Republicans are so desperate for anything that they can claim well help “transportation” (remember, all three statewide Republican officeholders are backing different tax hikes) that they’ll agree to anything – meaning the Democrats can probably squeeze as much from the taxpayers as they wish.

Still, there may be some hope that political gridlock can leave the taxpayers unscathed.

…and it just gets worse in Richmond

Well, the Senate Finance Committee replaced McDonnell’s tax hike with one that, according to the Daily Press, came from Frank Wagner. Wagner’s proposal is the third different Republican tax increase plan in Virginia this year (McDonnell and Newman/Cuccinelli being the other two).

Wagner’s plan would raise the gas tax and then index it to inflation, plus it would bring back a smaller version of the old regional taxes from HB3202 fame. In short, it’s an appalling debacle, but one with the Democrats’ support.

In response, McDonnell himself partially criticized Wagner’s version, and partially praised it. Odds are we will see a “bipartisan” tax hike coming out of this, which should lead us to wonder if either of the parties really care about the taxpayer any more.

The Newman-Cuccinelli plan: yet another tax hike (albeit smaller)

After a somewhat annoying silence on Governor McDonnell’s transportation tax hike, Ken Cuccinelli has come out in favor of a different tax hike, presented by State Senator Steve Newman (Washington Post):

Newman’s legislation would remove the 17.5-cents-per-gallon tax on gasoline and diesel — McDonnell’s plan had kept it on diesel— and replace it with a new 5.5 percent sales tax on the wholesale price of fuel. The sales tax would remain at 5 percent for other items under Newman’s plan, which also does away with the fee hikes called for under McDonnell’s proposal.

Newman’s plan would lose about $20 million in fiscal 2014, but he said with inflation and increases in the cost of gas, it would bring in $500 million to $650 million a year by 2018. Those figures also count on $200 million a year from the federal legislation related to collecting online sales tax.

Newman had the unmitigated gall to call this tax hike, “a very conservative approach.”

Never mind that the national sales tax relies on Congressional approval (highly unlikely, as it was buried in Congress last year – even before Democrats had an incentive to oppose it). Never mind that there is not even the beginning of a discussion about reducing spending (especially on subdivision roads, which should be off the government maintenance grid entirely).

Mr. Newman and Mr. Cuccinelli (see previous link and Washington Examiner) would now have us believe that the “very conservative approach” to roads is to hit up the taxpayer for more revenue, the economy and efficiency in government be damned.

Unless tax cuts are added to this bill to make it a net tax-reduction (my preference remains cutting income tax), this is a tax increase…

…and for his refusal to demand one before falling in line behind it, Ken Cuccinelli is – I’m sorry (yet compelled) to say – a squish.