Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility
Upcoming Event

Best Places to Work in Virginia

Hamburger Menu Hamburger Menu

byline: Bernie Niemeier

Orange is the new blue (not quite)

It appears former Gov. Bob McDonnell will be trading the role of His Excellency for a prison jumpsuit this month. A U.S. federal court judge denied his request to remain free while McDonnell appeals his conviction on 11 corruptions charges, which netted him a two-year prison sentence.

Regardless of the pending arguments in this case, some have concluded all too quickly that the lack of ethics in government is a Republican problem.  Hold on; not so fast!

Despite the satirical nod above to the title of the popular Netflix series “Orange is the New Black,” there’s no correlation between prison jumpsuits and the color of one’s political party.

Opinions over the McDonnell case are largely divided.  Should he have been prosecuted at all, much less sentenced to two years in federal prison?  On the other hand, it is arguable that many in the general public would have viewed a sentence of community service as predictably light, especially coming at a time when communities across the country are roiled over how race and socio-economic status factor into our criminal justice system.

McDonnell’s lack of acceptance of responsibility has generally been seen as a negative.  But unlike many of his character witnesses, one ought to at least give the former governor credit for asking for the court’s mercy on his co-defendant wife, Maureen.

To some, McDonnell’s two-year sentence was arguably lenient, for others there will always be a belief that the entire case has been an unwarranted and partisan prosecutorial witch-hunt.

Despite any misguided partisanship, the hypothesis that one party or the other holds an ethical high ground turns out to be false.  Reports from a variety of sources show that both Democrats and Republicans have run afoul of the law.

Most of the data that have been collected focuses on members of the U.S. Congress.  A 2013 report on the most corrupt members of Congress by Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) alleged serious ethical misconduct or conflicts of interest by 17 members of Congress, 11 of them Republicans and seven Democrats.  None were from Virginia.

Tracking the ethical lapses of state and local politicians is sadly an enormous undertaking.  According to a report from the U.S. Justice Department, more than 20,000 public and private individuals have been convicted of corruption over the past two decades and more than 5,000 more cases still are awaiting trial.

The State Integrity Investigation, a project of the Center for Public Integrity, ranked all 50 states in its 2013 Corruption Risk Report Card (released before McDonnell’s indictment). All states were graded A through F based on 330 “integrity indicators” across 14 categories of state government.

Rather than tracking indictments or convictions, the investigation made an assessment of laws in place to ensure political integrity and the degree to which such laws are effectively being enforced. In the 2013 report, not a single state received an A grade; only five earned B’s. Nineteen states received C’s and 18 received D’s.  Eight states scored failing grades.  Virginia was ranked 47th among the 50 states with a numerical score of 55 percent and an overall grade of F.

An excerpt from the report’s narrative: “Virginia has long prided itself on ethical government, but the state’s lax oversight rules, weak consumer representation protections, dwindling capital press corps and coziness between political and economic elites, have all combined to undermine the validity of that self-image.  Meanwhile, the few ethics and disclosure requirements that do exist tend to be flawed, limited or fraught with exemptions.”

While there are many ways in which government is unlike business, let’s briefly reflect on some standard accounting controls practiced by the business community.  These include a chain of approval for expenditures, adequate segregation of financial duties, document retention, standardized reporting across all business segments and the creation of an audit trail for financial statements.

These processes and procedures exist to protect the business against fraud, regardless of the individuals involved in handling cash receipts, disbursements or other company records.  Good accounting controls are not personality based, nor are they a self-policing system.

Our politicians would do well to take note of the value of such practices.  For too long, Virginia has relied on the integrity of the individuals involved in politics rather than the quality of its systems and processes.

Virginia’s part-time lawmakers have one of the shortest meeting schedules in the country, 60 days in even-numbered years and 30-days in odd numbered years.

Regardless of what happens in the appeals process, Bob McDonnell will occupy the unfortunate place of being the first governor of Virginia to be charged with corruption.

The fact that McDonnell’s actions were found to be illegal under federal law, but not under state law, provides even more reason to reconsider the adequacy of Virginia’s ethics laws.  This year, the General Assembly is in one of its short sessions.  Simply limiting gifts won’t do much to fix a system known for its loopholes, exceptions and inadequacies.  Let’s hope our lawmakers can find the time to do more.

Double down, add broadband to the gas pipeline

A bill authorizing construction of the Keystone XL Pipeline was narrowly defeated in the U.S. Senate last November.  It should have passed and likely will once the new Republican majority convenes this year.  Our country needs to improve its infrastructure.

In Virginia, West Virginia and North Carolina, a joint venture led by Dominion Resources — with Duke Energy, Piedmont Natural Gas and AGL Resources as partners — is seeking to build the Atlantic Coast Pipeline.  This, too, should be approved.

Tight public budgets are often the culprit when funding fails to materialize for infrastructure projects.  However, zoning and land use, along with environmental concerns, can be even greater barriers to growth.  In the case of the Atlantic Coast Pipeline, it is solely these non-financial concerns that are under consideration, as the joint venture would bear all costs.

The Atlantic Coast Pipeline is a $4.5 billion to $5 billion project, starting in Harrison County, W.Va., and running southeast through Virginia to Chesapeake and then south through central North Carolina for a total of 550 miles. One analysis by Chmura Economics and Analytics puts the economic impact during the construction phase at $456.3 million, supporting 2,873 jobs across the three-state region. When the pipeline reaches full operation,   Chmura estimates, an annual impact in the three-state region of $69.2 million, supporting  271 jobs.

The pipeline would connect Virginia with abundant sources of natural gas in the Marcellus and Utica shale basins in West Virginia, Pennsylvania and Ohio.
Natural gas is a lower cost and lower emission energy source, which reduces reliance on coal and other more carbon-intensive feedstock and delivers lower cost energy to households.

In order to move forward, the Atlantic Coast Pipeline needs approval from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC).  The FERC review process involves input from numerous local, state and federal entities, as well as state residents.  Dominion submitted a request to begin the prefiling process in October.  Informational open houses with stakeholders along the proposed pipeline route begin this month.

Opposition has been swift.  Soon after the project was announced, blue placards reading “No Pipeline” began to appear up and down Interstate 81.

The Southern Environmental Law Center is concerned about 30 miles of the proposed route that would go through national forest land.  Landowners opposing the pipeline in Augusta, Nelson and other counties have sought to block project surveyors from access to their land.  The Sierra Club also opposes the pipeline.

Gov. Terry McAuliffe, however, supports it, citing job creation, lower energy costs and reduced carbon emissions as benefits to the commonwealth.  He’s also made the suggestion that broadband could be laid along the same path, doubling its economic development value.  Though Dominion’s joint venture may not currently be in the broadband business, this is well worth considering.

Much of Virginia, especially its rural areas, still lacks  high-speed connectivity.  Even in Roanoke, the commonwealth’s fourth-largest metro area, inadequate
or nonexistent broadband at many developable sites hampers the region’s competitiveness.

It’s ironic that the desire for greater broadband access seems to meet little opposition, yet energy projects are generally met with a firm “No thanks, not here, not now, not ever.”  Apparently connecting our home electronics, cable TVs, laptops, tablets and the Internet is of more value than the energy required to power all these devices, not to mention lighting and heating our homes.  When the day comes that we wake up in a cold brownout, who’ll be to blame?

Sure, there are big differences between Keystone XL, carrying crude oil, and the Atlantic Coast Pipeline, which will carry natural gas.  Both have their hazards.  Still, in the case of oil, the alternative has been to use rail lines and outdated tanker cars as a less safe and less controlled alternative for moving product to market.  I’m sure the folks in Lynchburg don’t need to be reminded of the crude oil train derailment and tanker car fires in their community just last April.

Opponents to the gas pipeline cite a familiar set of arguments, trampled property rights, potential groundwater contamination, disruption of fragile ecosystems, effects on communities hundreds of miles downstream, and inadequate development of alternative and sustainable energy sources.  These objections have been raised with every energy project — coal, nuclear, gas, even wind and hydro-energy.

Pragmatists talk of an “all-of-the-above” energy strategy.  One of the great success stories of the United States’ recovering economy has been its movement away from dependence on imported energy.  Globally, this is an economic game changer.  Let’s not change this strategy to “none of the above.”

A new narrative for the Old Dominion

Storytelling comes somewhat naturally in the news business, not as a way of embellishing facts, but as a way of engaging readers — getting them to learn more about a topic.

Similarly, the purpose or strategy of a business is often best presented in a narrative format engaging employees more fully with a compelling mission or vision statement.

What about Virginia?  What is the story of our commonwealth?  When I think back to the history I learned in my early days, it involved the Virginia Company, a business and trading enterprise that sent the first permanent British colonists to the New World.

Stories about Princess Pocahontas saving Captain John Smith, early tobacco plantations, Colonial Williamsburg, the founding of the College of William and Mary, the American Revolution, Thomas Jefferson and the Declaration of Independence all painted Virginians as leaders, first among the colonies and later among states.

Virginia is known as the mother of presidents.  Four of the first five presidents came from the commonwealth.  In total, eight presidents have been Virginia-born, the latest being Woodrow Wilson.

Flashing forward to the present day, maybe Virginia is continuing its tradition of leadership.  Phillip Puckett’s resignation from the Virginia Senate led to a Republican majority in both houses of the General Assembly, working with a Democratic governor, Terry McAuliffe.

Although Puckett’s resignation was awkward, its result was perhaps a predictor of the outcome of last month’s national mid-term elections.  We now have a Republican-controlled U.S. House and Senate with an executive branch led by Democratic president, Barack Obama.
On one hand, this seems like an invitation to more of what’s become the status quo in politics, obstruction and gridlock, but perhaps not.

During the past several years opponents have largely depicted Republicans as fractured along lines of fiscal, social and faith-based conservatism, anti-immigration, anti-tax and anti-regulation, as well as libertarian or even anti-government factions. Extremists and moderates were seen as fighting for control of a single party.

Electoral politics often boil down to fear mongering, playing on the worst images of both Republican and Democratic candidates.  But what if these stereotypes aren’t as true as they often seem?

Events of late, especially an early November session of the General Assembly to vote on transportation funding, showed very little division among Virginia’s Republicans. 

If the party can authentically build a more moderate consensus-based approach to governance in contrast to the combative stereotypes of extremism and obstructionism, much may be possible.  Virginia has the opportunity to be a leader in the transformation of legislative gridlock to effective governance.

Turning to the modern-day Democrats, they’ve got their own set of negative stereotypes — attracting labels such as tax and spend, tree huggers, union-controlled, and hard on guns but easy on crime. It’s hard to talk about factionalism in a party that generally does so poorly in local elections.  In Virginia, Democrats do best in statewide races, especially during presidential election years when voter turnout is highest.

Nationally, so-called Blue Dog fiscally conservative Democrats have all but disappeared, at best holding only a handful of congressional seats.  It’s fair to say that extremism now plagues both parties.

What should Virginia’s narrative look like going forward?  Let’s face it; despite its vaunted history, the commonwealth’s reputation for leadership has room for a few new chapters.

Let’s write them by pulling back from the extremes and into a more broad-based center.  This starts with voters.  Sparsely attended party conventions, low-turnout primaries and gerrymandered districts are largely to blame for the polarization of our political landscape.  These problems are not unique to Virginia, but we can show leadership by engaging in the process of their elimination rather than treating them as irreversible.

Our elected officials have much work to do.  The old practice of finger pointing and obstructionism has failed.  It’s not enough to chase votes by fighting from a national party playbook; let’s take care of business at home.  Budget cuts haven’t brought Virginia’s fiscal house into order; it’s time to look at revenue solutions, too.  Redistricting shouldn’t be an exercise in raw party power; it ought to be fair to both sides.  Ethics reform ought not be a knee-jerk reaction, but neither should it be a deception.

Now that one party has control of the General Assembly, what should it do?  How about re-creating that seemingly imaginary place where both parties and all branches of government work together, finding solutions through compromise.  That sounds like the place I learned about when I was growing up — a story that sets an example for our nation.

Higher taxes, please

Gov. Terry McAuliffe’s administration has made diversifying Virginia’s economy a major initiative and rightfully so.
Imagine a giant vortex, the whirling sound of Virginia’s economy dancing around the drainpipe.  After decades of over-reliance on the public sector, is this the nightmarish endgame?  If so, it’s enough to make one wake up in a cold sweat.

Public sector or public-sector contractors account for 13 of Virginia’s top 20 employers.  Overall, the commonwealth ranks fourth behind the District of Columbia, Maryland and Alaska with 22.4 percent of its employed residents working for federal, state or local government.  That’s more than one in five Virginia workers.

For some time the public sector’s been getting hit by a double whammy:  Most of the focus tends to be on federal sequestration — remember the political deal that was supposed to be so bad that neither party would let it happen?  Well, it’s been happening for some time now.

The second part of this disaster scenario is largely self-created. Long before sequestration began, Virginia’s state government dialed back its own revenue growth.  For three successive governorships — under the leadership of both Democrats and Republicans — the commonwealth has largely avoided all tax increases.  When’s the last time that our General Assembly did not have to spend an inordinate amount of time breaking a self-inflicted budget crisis?

Roughly 70 percent of Virginia’s general fund revenue comes from income taxes, and another 20 percent arises from sales taxes.  That’s 90 percent of the general fund.  Without increasing either of these taxes, the commonwealth has no choice but to make cuts in other areas, notably higher education, as well as perennially underfunding transportation and other infrastructure needs.  This problem is particularly acute during periods of economic contraction.

The unfixed potholes in our highways ultimately become a tax, requiring front-end work on our automobiles. For well over a decade, Virginia’s governors have been forced to call for all state departments to produce plans reducing their spending. Metaphorically speaking, these reductions are creating potholes that need filling in many areas other than roads.

The citizens of the commonwealth have witnessed a variety of gimmicks employed by elected officials to supposedly close budget gaps: a rainy day fund that will ultimately run dry, borrowing from state pension contributions, as well as imaginary revenues dependent on federal action, such as still-non-existent offshore oil leases and a yet-to-be passed Internet sales tax.

Recently, Virginia’s unemployment rate has been rising at a time when national rates are falling.  Looking backward, we’ve seen Virginia go from being above average on nearly all measures to having less favorable ratings. In 2013, Virginia ranked 48th in the U.S. for GDP growth with just one-tenth of one percent, barely positive. The two states behind us, Maryland and Alaska, not coincidentally, are also highly dependent on government employment.

Diversifying Virginia’s economy is certainly important, but what about the existing businesses that have long counted the public sector as their best — and in some instances their only — customers?  We’re already experiencing some consolidation among government contractors in Northern Virginia and Hampton Roads.  Building a new Virginia economy will undoubtedly take money.  We say we need it, we say we want it, but are we willing to pay for it?

Economists and economic developers often cite monetary multipliers that result from government spending or business recruitment.  These multipliers arise from income and retail sales taxes generated by job growth.

Using a conservative multiplier of 1.5 to 1.6, it can be inferred that a billion dollar expenditure would generate indirect economic growth of $500 million to $600 million.   That makes public spending look like a pretty good deal.

Conversely, when expenditures are reduced, there is a similar reduction in indirect spending, meaning that the economy loses a lot more than just the nominal amount of the budget cut.  We can leave it to economists to argue the specific multiples and how they differ for expansion and contraction, but you get the general idea.

No one likes taxes, but at some point we’ve got to restore effectiveness and public trust in government.  It is not reasonable to expect the business community to pay for all economic development.

As a businessperson, I’d gladly pay slightly higher personal taxes if it meant that my business had a better chance.  The benefits of greater commercial success would far outweigh the personal cost and also serve the greater good of the commonwealth’s overall productivity.

Instead, it seems that our legislative and executive branches are in a permanent fight.  Separation of powers is intended to help rather than hinder good governance.  It’s time to realize that being a low-tax state may be a cause of underperformance.

How about a reverse poll tax?

The originally planned title of this column was “The verdict.”  At this point, however, so much has been written, read and said about the McDonnell trial that there’s little left for me to add. (Nevertheless, see October's cover story.) A break between the jury’s verdict last month, sentencing next January and what will likely be a lengthy appeals process is a relief for now.

One thing is clear: Reform is in the air.  Despite the perennial misgivings of secessionists, the McDonnell case serves as a stark reminder to Virginia’s politicians that the commonwealth is not subject to just its own laws but also to those of the United States.  Who among the nonpolitical class would’ve guessed that our state ethics laws were among the most lax in the nation?

Regular readers of this column are by now familiar with a repeated litany of suggested changes that might benefit Virginia.  Among them, nonpartisan redistricting, gubernatorial succession, an end to the moratorium on annexation or changes that might lead to less reliance on independent cities and make government services more regional in nature.

Let’s throw a new idea into the mix:  How about a reverse poll tax?  Much of government’s dysfunction can be traced to declining voter participation.  Let’s make voter participation mandatory and levy a fine on those who don’t go to the polls.

Think this sounds radical?  Hardly.  Twenty-some countries across the globe have compulsory voting, the largest being Australia.  While not a political panacea, requiring citizens to cast votes is not at all unusual.

After all, how different is voting from other civic responsibilities such as jury duty and paying taxes?  Arguably, voting is much more important.  It only takes 12 jurors to decide a case, but what about the consequences of low voter turnout?  Should we really be content with a representative democracy selected by a minority of the citizenry?

Globally in developed countries, overall voter participation rates are about 70 percent.  In the U.S. about 60 percent of eligible voters turnout for presidential races, and only about 40 percent participate in midterm elections.  These rates have been relatively stable during the past 50 years.  During the same period of time in Virginia, voter participation has declined from about 80 percent in presidential elections and 60 percent for midterm races to about 70 percent and 40 percent respectively.

Virginia’s history is long, and laws regarding voter eligibility have generally been restrictive.  Originally, only white male landowners of age 21 or older were entitled to vote.  Changes to the state constitution after the Civil War extended the vote to freed slaves.  However, poll taxes and literacy tests eventually disenfranchised African- Americans, Native Americans and poor whites. These impediments were found unconstitutional by the Supreme Court of the United States in Harper v. Virginia Board of Elections (1966).

The 19th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution gave women the right to vote in 1920, and women began to exercise that right in the commonwealth soon after.  Virginia, however, delayed its formal ratification of the U.S. amendment until 1952.  As recently as this year, a new law went into effect requiring Virginia voters to present photo identification at the polls.

Within the framework of the U.S. Constitution, states generally are given the latitude to develop their own election procedures.  Although not uncommon in other parts of the world, compulsory voting has been enacted in the United States only once.  In 1777, 10 years before the adoption of the U.S. Constitution, the State of Georgia established a tax not to exceed five pounds on every person absenting himself from an election without reasonable excuse.  This provision was omitted when Georgia next revised its constitution in 1789.

Opponents of compulsory voting argue that it is compelled speech and that freedom of speech necessarily implies the freedom not to speak.  Another objection suggests voting is a civic right, rather than a civic duty, making it different from paying taxes or serving on a jury.  Some feel that compulsory voting also leads to more votes being cast without interest in politics or knowledge of the candidates.  Yet, there is little evidence that such ballots influence the outcomes of elections in compulsory-voting nations.

The case for compulsory voting rests on an altogether different set of arguments.  Proponents say increased voter turnout leads to a higher degree of governmental legitimacy — candidates elected this way will represent the majority rather than a politically motivated minority.  Compulsory voting also would change the dynamics of how money is spent in political races.  Vast sums now being spent on efforts to get out the vote would no longer be required.  This might reduce the role of money in politics, redirecting it to educating voters on meaningful issues.

Interestingly, only about half of the countries that have compulsory voting enforce taxes or other penalties against those who fail to vote.  Still, the message is clear that voter participation in an integral duty of citizenship.  Why should we expect any less?

Come on, come on down, sweet Virginia

September is a favorite month.  With cooling weather and the beginnings of fall colors, memories wander back to college days, thoughts of returning to school and reuniting with friends after three months on a summer job, a chance to do what we did best in the 1970s — party down!

Fall weekends meant keg parties in dorm basements. The music was loud, and the beer flowed. The Rolling Stones’ “Sweet Virginia” was a popular song of the day.  When its guitar-picking intro came through the speakers, we’d pop back our shoulders doing a Jagger-like strut. “Come on, come on down, sweet Virginia…  Got to scrape that [stuff] right off your shoes.”

Being from Virginia meant good things back in those days.  Country-chic was cool.

Today, things aren’t quite so swell for the commonwealth, if you have been keeping up with the news. Once again the Old Dominion will have to clean itself up from embarrassing events that have made national news.

The messy spectacle created by the trial of ex-Gov. Bob McDonnell has vastly exceeded expectations. Who would have thought a trial defense that, in pretrial filings, ranged from charges of prosecutorial overreach to protestations that everybody does it would so quickly morph into a tawdry soap opera script once the trial began.

Regardless of the jury’s verdict, the McDonnell trial hurts Virginia’s reputation.  Once again, “The Daily Show with Jon Stewart” seized the opportunity to satirize the commonwealth.
Stewart described Jonnie Williams as creating a “tobacco-based wonder drug” and quoted trial testimony (as reported by the Washington Post) that Williams “had discovered how to remove the ‘strongest and most abundant carcinogens in cigarette smoke’ with 200 microwaves he sent an employee to buy from Wal-Mart.” 

As I’ve often said, you can’t make this stuff up!  Truth, however murky it may seem in the trial proceedings, is indeed stranger than fiction.  Stewart, a 1984 alumnus of the College of William and Mary, knows something about Virginia.  My guess is that September meant keg parties back in his college days, too.

Unfortunately, such broadsides against the reputation of the commonwealth aren’t just one-off events. 

In early August, Bob FitzSimmonds, treasurer of Virginia’s Republican Party, resigned after posting embarrassing anti-Muslim comments on Facebook.  This was not FitzSimmonds’ first Facebook miscue, having made offensive comments earlier this year regarding women supporting Barbara Comstock, a Republican candidate seeking to succeed retiring Rep. Frank Wolf (R-10th District).

Negative comments against any group of people, are ill-advised in both life and politics.  They are quickly reminiscent of George Allen’s infamous “Macaca moment,” not exactly Virginia’s finest hour.

Since playing a key leadership role in the founding of our nation, Virginia has established itself as more of a laggard than a leader in long list of causes.  There is no need to go back as far as the Civil War to find a litany of changes that have met with political opposition from the commonwealth — the New Deal, Social Security, civil rights, Medicare, Obamacare and so on. There is a tendency to identify these causes as initiatives of the Democratic Party, but many of them were opposed at a time when conservative Democrats largely controlled Virginia.

Despite opposing many federal programs, the commonwealth has long benefited from  federal spending.  More recently, efforts to downsize government have resulted in a corresponding downsizing of Virginia’s growth. 

After enjoying decades of above average ratings in many categories, our dependence on federal spending is showing its downside.  It is ironic that Virginia has prospered so much from the nation’s evolving federalism while largely opposing its growth.  As they say in real estate —location, location, location.

Less conservative modern-day Democrats have proven their ability to carry statewide elections in Virginia but have failed miserably at building the sort of bench strength that comes from winning clear majorities in the General Assembly.  At this point, it seems clear that neither party is able to govern from the middle.

What we need is a return to centrist politics with the goal being what is best for citizens, rather than a simple-minded allegiance to party power and a narrow set of partisan positions.

Here are some specific changes that Virginia needs:

  • Meaningful political ethics reform, ending a laissez-faire approach to campaign fundraising disclosures.
  • Fair redistricting reform. Visit onevirginia2021.org for more information.
  • Gubernatorial succession — despite the McDonnell fiasco.  If a second term for a governor can’t win support, we should consider term limits for the General Assembly.
  • Voter participation. The 40 percent range of voter participation in non-presidential elections means a minority rather than a majority selects our leaders.

Let’s recap: September is a wonderful month, but the world is watching, and we’ve got our work to do in Virginia.  Puffing out our chests and dancing to the old music just isn’t getting the job done.

Tone deaf, mean-spirited

Recent events are not flattering.  Our politicians are obviously angry, so angry that perhaps they’ve become reckless. 

One can only imagine what might have been overheard by a fly on the wall during an early-June conversation between former state Sen. Phillip Puckett

(D-Russell) and Del. Terry Kilgore (R-Scott), who also serves as chair of the Tobacco Commission, or was it with state Sen. Tommy Norment (R-James City), former Senate minority leader, now majority leader?  Regardless of who actually said what to whom, the outcome was unseemly.

Puckett decided to resign from his seat in the Virginia Senate, turning a Republican minority into a majority, just before the long-delayed state budget came up for a vote

Puckett’s daughter, Martha P. Ketron, an interim juvenile court judge, was being denied a permanent seat on the bench because of a Senate  practice of not appointing family members of sitting senators. Furthermore, there was a job vacancy at the Tobacco Commission that Puckett allegedly might occupy after resigning, considerably fattening his state pension.

Since the fly on the wall isn’t talking, we don’t know what was said by whom or to whom.  The U.S. Justice Department, however, heard enough to launch an investigation.

In short order, the Republican-controlled House and the new Republican majority in the Senate passed a budget that stuck Democratic Gov. Terry McAuliffe in the eye with a stick, adding language to make Medicaid expansion difficult, if not impossible, to implement and stifling the governor’s ability to make interim judicial appointments when the General Assembly is not in session.

Constitutionally, the governor has seven days from the time the budget is delivered to his office to act upon it.  Presumably to speed the process, Republican Speaker Bill Howell saw to it that the budget was delivered to the governor’s office during weekend hours on Father’s Day.  The governor’s office was not only closed, but also locked.  Access was gained by staffers from the House clerk’s office with the help of Capitol Police.  (You just can’t make this stuff up!)

The end result: more gubernatorial vetoes, most of which could not be overridden, blockage by Howell of action on a Medicaid reform-related veto, based upon Howell’s reading of the Virginia Constitution (not the attorney general’s).  Now, everyone is lawyered-up.

One has to wonder why our politicians are so focused on party control?  Not surprisingly, money is at stake.  The House speaker selects committee chairs.  Members of the party caucus, subcommittee chairs and committee chairs make cash donations to the party caucus fund, which is controlled by the caucus leadership.  The level of donation depends upon the status of the committee assignment, which is largely a function of its importance to lobbyists and political donors.

Given the paltry official salaries of our part-time lawmakers, this little-publicized practice, along with tax-free daily stipends when the assembly is in session and low-cost health insurance, may explain why these posts are sought.  In Virginia, the legitimate use of campaign funds is subject to interpretation.

To make matters worse, these events occurred just before former Gov. Bob McDonnell and his wife, Maureen, were scheduled to go on trial on charges of conspiracy to use the powers of the governor’s office for personal gain.  In pretrial filings and publicity, the defense seemed to consist largely of she said, he said and everybody does it — excuses our mothers never would have bought, and neither should we.

On the other hand, former Del. Phil Hamilton, now serving a 9½-year sentence for bribery and extortion, is on the record as saying that federal prosecutors can be “overly zealous.”

Let’s face it; the recent track record of our elected officials isn’t attractive.  Listening to many of these tone-deaf politicians, you’d think everything is business as usual and that nothing is either unusual or wrong.

That Puckett wouldn’t realize the obvious perception of quid-pro-quo in the timing of his resignation is embarrassing and unimaginable.  It is equally embarrassing that McDonnell wouldn’t realize the perception of conflict of interest in his acceptance of vacations, loans and golf junkets.  Howell’s wielding of power to attack the governor’s office is simply mean-spirited.

Just ask Eric Cantor; gerrymandered districts don’t guarantee re-election. It’s time to vote these career politicians out of office.  Virginia deserves better.

Yes, the economy is better

“Do you think things are getting better?”  By now I’ve been asked this so often that it’s like a cruel joke, along the lines of “The whippings will continue until morale improves!”  What do you think?  Have things gotten better?  Of course they have.

Economists tell us the recession officially ended in the summer of 2009.  That was five years ago.  Looking at previous recessions due to oil and energy prices in the early 1980s and 1990s, as well as the dot-com bust in the early 2000s, these business cycles typically last about 10 years.

Since we’re five years out from the end of the Great Recession, things are probably about as good as they are going to get.  And that’s pretty good!  Just last year Wall Street reached record highs.  The S&P 500 finished 2013 with a gain of 29.6 percent on the year, its largest gain since 1997.  The DJIA finished up 26.5 percent, its best gain since 1996.  The Nasdaq finished 2013 at its highest level in 13 years with a gain of 38.3 percent.  If you don’t think that’s good, just what were you expecting?

Now, it’s true that some of those stock gains fell back and then rebounded this year, and what’s happening on Wall Street doesn’t necessarily reflect Main Street.  But beyond stock prices, corporate profits are also up.  Earlier this year Bloomberg reported that 74 percent of S&P 500 companies beat their first quarter profit estimates.

Turning to employment, April’s statistics for Virginia, the latest available, show an unemployment rate of just 4.9 percent, the lowest since November  2008. 

Though their ability to quickly affect these numbers is dubious, politicians do like to take credit for them.  In overall numbers, the commonwealth’s civilian employment now stands at 4.1 million persons, up almost 75,000 jobs since January when Gov. Terry McAuliffe took office.  For those keeping score on governors, during the same period at the beginning of the McDonnell administration, Virginia added fewer than 26,000 jobs.

Similarly, the Virginia Economic Development Partnership reports 111 project announcements through mid-June, accounting for 8,005 jobs and $1.23 billion in new investment in Virginia so far this year. During the same period four years ago, there were 139 project announcements, but only 7,362 new jobs and $1.08 billion in investment.

All this talk of improvement is no doubt meaningless to those who are still unemployed or underemployed.  Individual hardships are more real than any statistic.  In truth, a lot of the jobs lost in the recession were ones made less relevant by technology some time ago, such as administrative support and manufacturing. These jobs will never return to the numbers that once existed.  Thinking that they might is kind of like expecting coal, tobacco, furniture and textiles to return as the kings of Virginia’s economy. 

The commonwealth is changing and diversifying. There’s less manufacturing but more professional services jobs and a much-expanded high-tech sector.  We are still overly dependent on federal spending, but while areas like defense are shrinking, others like electronic medical records are growing.

Four years ago the slogan, “Bob’s for jobs!” had a nice ring to it.  Now we’ve got Terry and he’s for jobs, too.   Putting campaign slogans aside, it’s fair to say that our economy isn’t totally changed by a few short months in office or even the full four-year term of a Virginia governor.  Still the prevailing winds are blowing in the right direction.

It’s good for the state’s chief executive to also be Virginia’s top cheerleader.  However, there’s a decidedly less jubilant tone being set by the McAuliffe administration.  Four years ago, all we heard was Virginia’s the best state for business.  Four years later, we’ve slipped a bit in some of those rankings, but remain among the best.  Instead of just trumpeting our successes, the McAuliffe administration is candid about the fact that Virginia has work to do.   We need to diversify our economy away from its dependence on the public sector, and to improve the profitability of our ports, and grow workforce development, as well as access to and affordability of quality health care.

Let me say it again, “Yes, things have gotten better.”  Those who are still waiting for a better economy are probably mixing their business outlook with their politics.  There’s no doubt that just about everyone is frustrated with the slow pace of progress or the lack thereof, by our elected officials.  Partisanship remains at an all-time high, but that’s a political problem, not a business one.

Environmental regulations serve the public interest

A couple of years ago, Southern Virginia was deeply divided. To some, the existence of large underground uranium deposits near Chatham represented a job-creating economic opportunity. To others, uranium mining was an environmental disaster waiting to happen.

Mining proponents were quick to point out that such operations are carried out safely elsewhere, so why not in Virginia, where a uranium mining moratorium had been in effect since the early 1980s?

Not surprisingly, the General Assembly followed its time-proven approach to controversy — first the moratorium, then an industry study and talk of regulations, followed by a Joint Legislative Audit and Review Commission (JLARC) review.  If all parties are not completely satisfied, add more time and repeat until the commonwealth’s collective attention span is exhausted.  When campaign money is on both sides of an argument, some might call this the Virginia Way.

In the end, the opposition won the battle, but the war will inevitably return.  After all, the uranium is still there and so is the need for campaign funding.

All this sounds a bit too skeptical, perhaps even jaded.  So, too, did the radioactive groundwater Armageddon scenarios of the environmentalists — at least until a few months ago.

In early February, North Carolina-based Duke Energy spilled 39,000 tons of coal ash into the Dan River from a fractured pipe running under a retention pond near Eden, N.C. The spill coated the river bottom 70 miles downstream, through Danville, South Boston and into the John. H. Kerr Reservoir.  This was the third-largest U.S. coal ash spill on record.  The Eden site is one of 32 retention ponds maintained by Duke in North Carolina.

Then in late April, a train derailed in Lynchburg, destroying three tanker cars and spilling thousands of gallons of crude oil into the James River.  The Bakken shale oil rush in North Dakota has turned America’s rail systems into moving pipelines, carrying a particularly volatile grade of light crude packed with flammable natural gas.

The number of trains carrying Bakken crude has jumped from fewer than 10,000 tank carloads four years ago to more than 400,000 last year.  Many of them move through large cities to ports and refineries.

In another case of crumbling infrastructure, it turns out that nearly 70 percent of America’s fleet of rail tank cars needs to be replaced or retrofitted to meet higher safety standards.  Furthermore, the railroads often don’t own these cars.  The vast majority are owned or leased by the customers who use them.  Just where are projects like the Keystone Pipeline when you really need them? Certainly not in anyone’s backyard.

There have been nine oil train derailments in the U.S. and Canada since March 2013.  After the Lynchburg spill, the U.S. Department of Transportation issued a nonbinding safety advisory suggesting that shippers use the sturdiest railcars in their fleet to carry Bakken crude.  A safety advisory has less weight than an emergency order, and it was immediately criticized for not going far enough by calling only for voluntary compliance.

Regulatory agencies are easily damned — for what they do and for what they don’t.  A populist stump speech line from last year’s statewide elections was to refer to the EPA as the “Employment Prevention Agency.”  Now that there’s coal ash and oil in our rivers, maybe it’s time to rethink.

To their credit, both the American Petroleum Institute and the Association of American Railroads have recognized the problem and advocated tougher tank-car standards.  On the other hand, in the Duke Energy coal ash spill, a too-cozy relationship has been alleged between the company and North Carolina state regulators.

Here’s the rub: Self-regulation works only so well.  Businesses work to mitigate risk.  For the most part this is done through safety programs to reduce operational risk and insurance to reduce financial risk.

Managing risk doesn’t mean eliminating it.  Financial risk in particular is more about who pays when things go wrong than keeping bad things from happening. Insurance policies are bought, repackaged and resold.  Much like mortgage-backed securities, they are sliced and diced to minimize exposure, making the real risks less apparent.

A predilection to blame government for being the problem rather than the solution fails to recognize the legitimate role that it plays in protecting the people’s interest.  Essential services like transportation and public safety necessitate regulation.  Rather than eliminating rules, we should insist that they be created without regard to political interests and that they are consistently and fairly enforced.

One dollar, one vote

“Impeach Earl Warren!” was written in large block letters across the billboard. Seen from the back seat of our family station wagon, an off-white Rambler American, I remember asking who Earl Warren was and being told he was the chief justice of the U.S. Supreme Court. Back in the early 1960s such signs were common in the rural South.

President Dwight Eisenhower ap­­pointed Warren, a former Republican governor of California, to the Supreme Court  in 1953.  The Warren Court, as it later became known, presided over several landmark cases ultimately reshaping the social landscape of the U.S.

Brown v. Board of Education (1954) banned racial segregation in public schools.  Engel v. Vitale (1962) held that public school-sponsored prayer violated the separation of church and state.  Gideon v. Wainwright (1963) established publically funded legal counsel for indigent defendants in criminal cases.

Reynolds v. Sims (1964) established the principle of “one man, one vote,” still used today in legislative redistricting.  Miranda v. Arizona (1966) held that persons in police custody must have their rights clearly explained, including the right to remain silent and the right to an attorney.

Brown v. Board of Education as heard before the U.S. Supreme Court combined five cases, including Davis v. County School Board of Prince Edward County originally filed in Virginia and argued by Oliver Hill of Richmond. 

Furthermore, the decisions of the Warren Court are said to have fueled the early activism of Lynchburg preacher and televangelist Jerry Falwell, who would later found a political organization called the Moral Majority in the late 1970s.

Perhaps to some these decisions remain controversial today, and one can only imagine how they boiled in the cauldron of civil unrest in the 1960s.

Warren was never impeached and remained on the court until his retirement in the spring of 1969 at age 78.  In the ensuing years, appointments to the Supreme Court have often been contentious. Our contemporary understanding of politics is shaped by the legacy of the Warren Court, a time when conservative values clashed with liberal ones and ideological divisions among the justices were a deciding factor in many rulings.

It is unfortunate and perhaps politically naïve to think that because Supreme Court justices are appointed for life they will rise above partisan divisions and ideological differences.  But then again, after more than 200 years, the intent of the framers of our Constitution does require occasional interpretation.

Today’s court is much different from the Warren Court.  The political pendulum has swung to the right; the Roberts Court is more conservative, at best evenly divided.

Much like the Warren Court had an impact on social issues, the Roberts Court is reshaping our electoral landscape.  Two decisions, Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission (2010) and McCutcheon v. Federal Election Commission (2014) have rolled back much of what Congress had previously done to restrict, limit or reform the influence of money in politics.

The Citizens United case struck down portions of the McCain-Feingold Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002, specifically those that prohibited independent political expenditures by corporations, nonprofits and labor unions.  This change has engendered the rise of so-called super PACs.  Karl Rove’s American Crossroads super PAC and nonprofit Crossroads GPS, spent over $300 million in the 2012 election cycle, a princely sum greater than the entire amount spent by the Republican National Committee.

Last month, the McCutcheon decision upheld the $2,600 limit on contributions by donors to individual candidates but entirely eliminated the aggregate cap of $74,600 that an individual was permitted to donate to candidate committees, PACs and political parties during a two-year election cycle, meaning that there is virtually no limit on the flow of money into politics.

Central to these two decisions by the Roberts Court is the concept that political contributions are a form of “political speech” protected by the First Amendment. The court has opined that the only reason for intervention in political donations is to avoid corruption or the appearance of corruption.  Furthermore, in McCutcheon, corruption is narrowly defined as only quid pro quo  (something for something) and does not include efforts to obtain access to elected officials or influence over parties.

These hard decisions reflect the court’s thinking that limits on political spending are an attempt by the legislative branch to level the economic playing field of politics, something not envisioned by our founding fathers for whom social and economic status were both important qualifiers for leadership.

The judicial branch rarely wins a popularity contest.  Despite enjoying support from a public weary of seeing so much money flowing into elections, campaign finance restrictions largely are unconstitutional, the court has found.  If a significant legacy of the Warren Court was “one person, one vote,” perhaps for the Roberts Court it will be “one dollar, one vote.”