South of the James

Admittedly, I’ve not been actively participating in the blog carnivals mostly due to my ever-changing schedule. However, in case I can’t make it, South Of The James readers should check it out and participate.

The Next Virginia Blog Carnival is hosted by Snoopy. Snoopy is inviting all those who would like to participate to the doghouse for the Oct. 31st edition of the Virginia Blog Carnival. Please submit entries by 7pm Sunday, Oct. 30th.You don’t have to be invited to participate, therefore, go check it out.

I’ll try to be there.

– Conaway

By Conaway Haskins

As a politically-independent centrist, neither political pole is a comfortable fit; therefore I tend to be pragmatic more than dogmatic in making my political choices. To date, I have tried to be as true to this stance, and it is up to others to assess my success. Now, I wish to offer my first statement of support for a candidate for statewide office in the Commonwealth in next month’s election. Initially, I intended to wait until the days leading up to the Election to make my decision, and in races for governor and attorney general, I am still undecided. However, it has become clear to me that, in the race for Lt. Gov., one candidate is the clear choice in terms of thoughtfulness, policy innovation, pragmatism and commitment to principles.

That candidate is Leslie Byrne.

Leslie Byrne acknowledges being to the left of many Virginians, including folks like me. However, given the history of Virginia Democrats, Byrne’s “liberalism” is actually in the mainstream of the national party and not far from many moderate and centrist officeholders outside of the Commonwealth. She is an unabashed supporter of labor unions and unwavering in her defense of women’s reproductive rights. Far from being the preferred candidate of the state Democratic establishment, Byrne is loyal to her progressive principles but willing to wheel and deal with the powers that be to get her agenda enacted. She readily works with more conservative members of the General Assembly on issues she supported, and she has been more than willing to challenge her own party’s leadership despite potential retribution. Byrne is pragmatic and committed, and she doesn’t back down from a good fight. Her positions are thoughtfully articulated, passionately defended, intellectually honest, and professionally executed. She speaks her mind regardless of the political repercussions and does not pander to voters or interest groups.

Mrs. Byrne has the most diverse public service resume of any candidate seeking statewide office, with nearly two decades in elected and appointed political positions. She served four terms in the House of Delegates, one term in Congress, and one term in the State Senate. After losing her bid for reelection to Congress, Byrne served as the White House Director of Consumer Affairs under President Bill Clinton for two years. She’s lost one election and was redistricted out of another, an experience which has provided her with a sense of humility.

As to her stances on the issues that matter, Byrne rightfully points out that Governor Warner’s budget and tax package – supported by a bipartisan coalition of Democratic and Republican delegates and senators - was the right move. Though tax increases must always been looked upon with skepticism, Virginia was languishing under a decades-old system that was in need of modernization. Given that the Commonwealth is among the lowest taxing states in the US, the burden of the new taxes is relatively light, a fact borne out by the Governor’s approval ratings. By the same token, given the privilege of hindsight, it is apparent that Virginia is heading down the right financial path, has eliminated a number of structural imbalances, and has preserved its bond rating. Mrs. Byrne rightfully makes the case that Virginia needed this strong dose of bitter medicine if it is to adequately respond to the issues that arise.

Byrne believes that state government must be labs of innovation because the federal government cannot be expected to fix the problems in our nation’s system of health care, education and transportation. She supports providing small businesses with the opportunity to join the state government health insurance purchasing pool so that uninsured workers can receive coverage and opening up the state government prescription purchasing pool so that all Virginians have the same pricing benefits as state employees. On education, she supports fully funding Head Start to make preschool available to all children, and she wants to increase the state Tuition Assistance Grants so that Virginian’s attending Virginia’s high-quality private college and universities can keep pace with rising tuition costs.

Byrne wants to relax the Commonwealth’s strict adherence to Dillon’s Rule to give localities more control over their growth management policies. Virginia’s communities must be given this ability if they are to protect their quality of life against rampant development. As opposed to replacing top-down state control with heavy-handed local control, Byrne proposes that the Commonwealth provide incentives to municipalities that develop more responsible development practices, including the critical need to link transportation infrastructure with land-use planning. She supports more expanding rail options for both commuters and freight, and she wants to protect earmarked transportation dollars from being diverted to other purposes. With the added revenue generated from the Warner tax restructuring, Byrne’s proposals would not require higher taxes.

With GOP nominees Kilgore and McDonnell leading the races for governor and attorney general, having the entire state apparatus in the hands of one party is not the best management plan for Virginia. Although her ability to truly impact specific bills is limited by the Lt. Gov’s statutory role, the symbolism of her positions can affect the overall legislative environment on Capitol Square. With conservatives in charge, the Right is well represented and the Left growing smaller. Leslie Byrne has the stamina, gravitas, and guts to hammer away at Republicans when they overstep. The Commonwealth’s policymaking works best when all points of view are in the policy debates, and without an opposing voice, moderates and independents will be left out of the mix. In short, the lady’s got chutzpah and political courage, for that, she has my vote.

By Conaway Haskins

Published in the Richmond Voice on October 19, 2005

As the statewide elections draw to a close, sentiment is unclear as to how Virginia’s Black vote will play out. With some certainty it can be predicted that Democrat Tim Kaine will overwhelmingly outperform Republican Jerry Kilgore among African Americans, but the degree to which Kaine will win is far from certain.

Blacks comprise nearly 20 percent of the total electorate, thus a slight shift in their support toward Kilgore could make the difference in what looks like a close election. Thus far, Democrats have fallen short in their efforts to stir up animus toward Kilgore among African Americans, and Kilgore’s performance in the pair’s last debate on October 9 surely drew him additional Black votes as he responded favorable to a number of issues that concern Black Virginians.

Two of the five journalism panel members – Michael Paul Williams of the Richmond Times-Dispatch and Sabrina Squire of NBC-12 are African-American, and they asked a number of questions that spoke directly to the hearts and minds of the Black community. Kilgore’s responses indicated that he takes the Black vote seriously and that he indeed understands the issues important to many African Americans.

When asked about his support for a proclamation in honor of Confederate History Month, Kilgore deftly responded that he wants to explore the entire historical experience of Virginians living in that era. This is surely to draw some backlash from groups like the Sons of Confederate Veterans, but his position is well within the mainstream of Virginia. Kilgore added a new wrinkle to the discussion by proposing that Virginia better preserve its Civil War battlefields and historic sites to accommodate increased tourism related to the upcoming Jamestown 2007 festivities, a showcase of Virginia’s 400-year history. Refocusing the Confederate history issue on tourism was an ingenious move because more visitor dollars spent on tourism means more job opportunities and tax revenues for all Virginians, Black and White.

In response to questions about state government contracts for businesses, Kilgore did not support explicit guarantees of proportional representation for minority and woman-owned firms. However, he did agree that proportionality was desirable. His alternative was to promote equal opportunity in contract bid competitions and enforcement of laws to make the contracting process fair to all.

He noted his opposition to previous attempts to eliminate the Commonwealth’s minority business development offices and his re-opening of unfair government contract bidding processes that he found to be biased against minority contractors. Kilgore argued that steps should be taken to ensure a level playing field but that equal outcomes could not be guaranteed. This position is well within the mainstream of American and Virginian thinking, and it is in keeping with the trends in Supreme Court decision-making. Kilgore’s commitment to equal opportunity and recognition that minority business owners still face difficulties in accessing contracts and markets is commendable and must be lauded.

The death penalty played a crucial role in the debate as Tim Kaine reiterated his personal opposition to it but his commitment to enforcing Virginia’s pro-death penalty laws. With Blacks making up a disproportionate number of the general prison – and death row –population, African Americans are rightly concerned about this issue. Some leaders have called for a nationwide moratorium or outright ban on the death penalty, but Tim Kaine was not clear on his stance toward this.

Many African Americans do, in fact, support the death penalty as long as it is fairly applied as punishment. Kilgore was critical of delaying executions but he expressed a commitment to improving the administration of the death penalty by making DNA evidence testing more accessible in criminal cases, pressing state crime labs to increase their safeguards, and ensuring that defendants are treated fairly in the judicial process. If his propositions are borne out, then it stands to reason that Black defendants, and even convicts, will receive the fair treatment that their advocates argue for.

All in all, Kilgore’s debate performance indicates that there will be a place in his administration for issues important to African Americans. In the absence of any major snafus over the last four weeks of the campaign, his stances should attract support in some circles of the Black community. If this translates into votes, then-Governor Kilgore – like his GOP compatriot Jim Gilmore - will have African Americans, in part, to thank at his inauguration.

Conaway Haskins is a nonprofit executive and writer based in Chesterfield, VA. He is the editor of South of the James, a website dedicated to providing a different perspective on life and politics in Metro Richmond, the Commonwealth of Virginia and the world beyond.

By Conaway Haskins

Note: The following are prepared remarks presented at a Chesterfield County Board of Supervisors public hearing on Wednesday, October 12, 2005. The hearing was on the Board’s proposal to raise cash proffers charged to residential developers from $11,500 to $17,000. Media coverage of this issue highlighted the campaign that area homebuilders and their allies initiated to stir up public sentiment against the move to raise proffers. Following the widely-attended session which had its share of vigorous debate, the Republican-dominated (4 GOP, 1 Democrat) Board unanimously voted to raise the maximum proffer at $15,600. I would like to commend the supervisors for having the courage to stare down the homebuilder interest groups and provide vital resources to help meet the county’s needs in response toincreasing growth and development.

Good evening Mr. Chairman and members of the board. Thank you for extending to the citizens this opportunity to address this important issue. My name is Conaway Haskins, and my wife and I bought a new home last year in the Matoaca District. We moved back to this area from
Northern Virginia to have a better quality of life. We are now concerned that, without better growth management, Chesterfield may fall victim to the same clogged roads, overcrowded schools, and nondescript strip development that hurts the character and livability
of many Northern Virginia communities.

Having been trained as a regional planner, I have gained a few insights into the cash proffer issue over time. As the purchaser of a newly-built home, I am sensitive to the notion of increased home prices. However, given the pressing infrastructure needs that accompany new homebuilding, I want to express my full support for the proposed raise of the maximum proffer from the current level of $11,500 to $17,000.

Claims have been made that proffers will increase property taxes on all county homeowners, will hurt our competitiveness with surrounding jurisdictions, will hurt commercial development, will force buyers to other places, and will not provide a steady income stream for the county. Many of these claims are misleading. Opponents have also proposed a 1% sales tax increase, and or property tax rate increases. However, I don’t accept the premise that proffers will create problemsfor new homebuyers or hurt economic development.

First, no one is forcing folks like me to buy new homes; there are well-appointed existing homes available in good supply throughout the county. While owning a home is the American Dream, owning a new home is a luxury. Second, companies do not make site selection decisions solely based on the availability of new construction. Chesterfield, in particular, does not have this problem as the county is often a prime bedroom community for Metro Richmond. Your recent struggles with justifying the county’s comparably low return on investment of membership in the Greater Richmond Partnership are perfect examples of this as you’ve seen firsthand that companies moving into the region look to Chesterfield first as theplace for their workers to live.

Third, consumers of these expensive new homes make their purchasing decisions on the basis of factors like school scores, commuting times to work, and neighborhood aesthetics, not proffers. In residential housing markets, proffer sizes are not substitutes for amenities. If buyers want to save $17,000 and still access the county’s top-notch schools and quality of life, they have the option to choose existinghomes, or they can forgo certain new-home features.

As opposed to proffers, new homes price increases are governed mostly by: 1) Pure profit-seeking actions by builders such as lot price increases and premium prices charge for options above stand models, 2) Allowable broker commissions and fees, 3) Builder price adjustments for increased material and transportation costs, and 4) Greater buyer financial capacity due to creative credit and mortgage products like adjustable rate mortgages, piggyback loans, and interest-only mortgages. The proposed proffer increase represents only 5-7% of the average new home price, which is now above $300,000 in Chesterfield. Put another way, the $17,000 proffer is the equivalent of a brick front, or a combination of marble floor tiles, granite countertops, and hardwood floors.

I support the higher proffer because: 1) They allow for more strategic growth management by slowing the rate of residential building and leaving more land for potential rezoning as commercial, 2) They provide additional revenues to make up for the negative fiscal impact of new homebuilding due to needs for additional schools, sewer lines and roads, 3) This move sends the message that our community is valuable and has standards that need to be upheld, and 4) They are paid by the very people whose home-buying choices fuel the need for new infrastructure, thus preventing new buyers from free-riding off existing homeowners and other taxpayers by diverting property and sales taxes to benefit new buyers in high dollar communities.

In sum, proffers are fair and give the board another tool to finance our critical needs, help maintain high quality government management, and trulycontinue our status as a First Choice Community.

Thank you.

By Conaway Haskins

As the statewide elections draw to a close, sentiment is unclear as to how Virginia’s black vote will play out. With some certainty it can be predicted that Democrat Tim Kaine will overwhelmingly outperform Republican Jerry Kilgore among African Americans, but the degree to which Kaine will win is far from certain. Blacks comprise nearly 20% of the total electorate, thus a slight shift in their support toward Kilgore could make the difference in what looks like a close election.

Thus far, Democrats have fallen short in their efforts to stir up animus toward Kilgore among African Americans, and Kilgore’s performance in Sunday’s debate surely drew him additional black votes as he responded favorable to a number of issues that concern black Virginians. Two of the five journalism panel members – Michael Paul Williams of the Richmond Times-Dispatch and Sabrina Squire of NBC-12 – are African-American, and they asked a number of questions that spoke directly to the hearts and minds of the black community. Kilgore’s responses indicated that he takes the black vote seriously and that he indeed understands the issues important to many African Americans.

When asked about his support for a proclamation in honor of Confederate History Month, Kilgore deftly responded that he wants to explore the entire historical experience of Virginians living in that era. This is surely to draw some backlash from groups like the Sons of Confederate Veterans, but his position in well within the mainstream of Virginia. Kilgore added a new wrinkle to the discussion by proposing that Virginia better preserve its Civil War battlefields and historic sites to accommodate increased tourism related to the upcoming Jamestown 2007 festivities, a showcase of Virginia’s 400-year history. Refocusing the Confederate history issue on tourism was an ingenious move because more visitor dollars spent on tourism means more job opportunities and tax revenues for all Virginians, black and white.

In response to questions about state government contracts for businesses, Kilgore did not support explicit guarantees of proportional representation for minority and woman-owned firms. However, he did agree that proportionality was a desirable. His alternative was to promote equal opportunity in contract bid competitions and enforcement of laws to make the contracting process fair to all. He noted his opposition to previous attempts to eliminate the Commonwealth’s minority business development offices and his re-opening of unfair government contract bidding processes that he found to be biased against minority contractors. Kilgore argued that steps should be taken to ensure a level playing field but that equal outcomes could not be guaranteed. This position is well within the mainstream of American and Virginian thinking, and it is in keeping with the trends in Supreme Court decision-making. Kilgore’s commitment to equal opportunity and recognition that minority business owners still face difficulties in accessing contracts and markets is commendable and must be lauded.

The death penalty played a crucial role in the debate as Tim Kaine reiterated his personal opposition to it but his commitment to enforcing Virginia’s pro-death penalty laws. With blacks making up a disproportionate number of the general prison – and death row – population, African Americans are rightly concerned about this issue. Some leaders have called for a nationwide moratorium or outright ban on the death penalty, but Tim Kaine was not clear on his stance toward this. Many African Americans do, in fact, support the death penalty as long as it is fairly applied as punishment. Kilgore was critical of delaying executions but he expressed a commitment to improving the administration of the death penalty by making DNA evidence testing more accessible in criminal cases, pressing state crime labs to increase their safeguards, and ensuring that defendants are treated fairly in the judicial process. If his propositions are borne out, then it stands to reason that black defendants, and even convicts, will receive the fair treatment that their advocates argue for.

All in all, Kilgore’s debate performance indicates that there will be a place in his administration for issues important to African Americans. In the absence of any major snafus over the last four weeks of the campaign, his stances should attract support in some circles of the black community. If this translates into votes, a then-Governor Kilgore – like his GOP compatriot Jim Gilmore - will have African Americans, in part, to thank at his inauguration.

By Conaway Haskins

A little over a week ago, South of the James explored whether Kilgore could find a way to appeal to swing voters – independents and centrists – in order to wrap up the election. In that column, three major issues were addressed – crime, education, and taxes – that appeared to be key elements of an outreach strategy by which the Kilgore campaign could attract moderate votes. Now that the final gubernatorial debate is over and the Monday-morning spin machines have
run their course, it is worth taking a look to see how Kilgore fared with respect to those swing voters.

Hosted by UVA’s Larry Sabato, the debate’s TV audience was relatively large given concerns about voter apathy and competing network and cable programming. Stylistically, Tim Kaine’s performance was better, but this should be no surprise as Kaine prides himself on debating
excellence. Sabato appeared to be a bit harsher on Kaine than on Kilgore, thus addressing GOP sour grapes about Kilgore’s treatment at the hands of Tim Russert in the Fairfax debate. As an experienced litigator and city council leader, Kaine should be expected to hold his own against most opponents. On the other hand, Kilgore’s visible on-camera discomfort and verbal stumbling draw the ire of both critics on the left and supports on the right. Nonetheless, Kilgore stayed relentlessly on message, and for the more reflective watcher, this played directly to the base of his support.

On Sunday night, despite a better performance, Kaine failed to score a knockout. Unfortunately, when you are in your last fight against the defending champion - which Kilgore is by virtue of his incredible 2001 statewide vote totals, being the nominee of the majority party, and leading slightly in the polls - you have to knock him out and not leave it for the judges to decide. All things considered, this contest was a draw, and given expectations of a decisive Kaine victory, the big winner of the night was Jerry Kilgore. It may have taken some effort for him to get it all out of his mouth, but from the vantage point South of the James, Kilgore effectively answered conservative questions about his true positions, and he did just enough clarifyingon a few key issues for undecided, centrist voters to favor him.

As expected, taxes played a central role in this debate, with Kilgore constantly hammering away at Kaine’s liberal tax record of overseeing increased tax burdens, while Kaine struck back that Kilgore never cut a tax in his life. True, Kilgore has not held offices that allows for proposal or implementation of tax policies, but he did stand against the Warner-Kaine (it works both ways, Lt. Governor) tax increases. Kilgore was right to make the issue about the overall stress of
taxation on Virginians, as his previous ad campaigns relied instead on fuzzy math that ignored real tax-rate reductions that Kaine helped facilitate. Pressed by Sabato, Kaine refused to take a no new taxes pledges as he craftily noted that his only pledge would be his oath of office. Unfortunately, this does nothing to reassure voters that he would not seek to raise revenues even more by attacking the wallets of Virginians.

While not pledging to repeal the tax increases – increases that this writer begrudgingly admits were needed to address longer-term public finance issues – Kilgore promised to “hold the line” on state taxes, refused to make a pledge against allowing localities to increase their taxes, and continued to support local and regional referendums on tax increases. This position has been met with opposition by the anti-tax crusaders at the Virginia Club for Growth; however Kilgore seems to understand the implications of such a rollback on smaller rural localities that comprise the core of his support. Given this, he has effectively staked out a softer conservative position that moderatesand centrists can be happy with.

On education, Kilgore reinforced his understanding of the reality of the public schools in the Commonwealth. He noted, time and again, that his experiences as a public school student in rural Scott County gave him first-hand knowledge of the value of education to success in life.
Admittedly, his continual references to a “Commonwealth of Opportunity” and “Impact Teachers” were cliché and reminiscent of President Bush’s failed “Ownership Society” mantra. Kilgore reiterated his focus on improving and rewarding better teacher performance. Given
that most Virginia schools are at or near state and federal mandates in terms of student performance and teacher qualifications, reforming classroom teaching itself is one of the last pieces of the puzzle to ensuring that Virginia’s K-12 system is on the right track.

On the issue of universal preschool – a Kaine campaign centerpiece – Kilgore challenged the proposal to spend millions of additional dollars on it. Credit must be given to Kaine for making valid points about low and moderate income kindergarten students are often behind their middle and upper income counterparts prior to entering school and that pushing for universal pre-K is more politically palatable because programs for at-risk kids are cut quicker than ones for middle and upper income families. This is a wonderful exposition on political calculus, but without a financially sound plan for funding this universal system without major tax increases, Kaine’s case is undermined. Kilgore’s focus is less sexy but more financiallyrealistic.

Religion and faith issues loomed large as both candidates were pressed about their views on abortion and the death penalty. Kaine deftly handled the question about his personal opposition to the death penalty and abortion compared to his pledge to uphold contrary state laws. He handled this issue with clarity and precision that escapes many politicians. Voters clearly can see where he stands on this. It should be noted that Kilgore’s coy “No Jack Kennedy” response was ironic in that it seemed like an unintentional endorsement of aDemocratic icon.

Kilgore, too, gave a more compelling answer than is commonly heard from most pro-life politicians when he responded to questions about the apparent inconsistency in the “culture of life” where the death penalty is concerned. Kilgore’s position is that the culture of life protects “innocent life,” such as unborn fetuses and the infirmed, but that it does not extend to the “guilty,” such as convicted murders (and by logical extension, enemy combatants in armed conflict). Kilgore’s pledge to not criminalize abortion for women while holding doctors responsible is troubling and paradoxical. Thus, one can only hope that, since he was not questioned on it further, he finds a way to demonstrate how such a provision would not violate
physician-patient privilege. Christianity asks its followers to “judge not” and compels forgiveness, and in light of this, Kilgore’s political stances do not directly apply such thinking. Thus, in an ironic way, this represents a separation of personal religious tenets from public policy perspectives, much like Kaine’s.

All things considered, despite his less-than stellar performance, Kilgore held his own against Kaine in a manner that should at least open the door for greater support of his candidacy by moderate and centrist swing voters, particularly undecided independents. As the campaign enters its final weeks, voters will have no other opportunities to directly compare the candidates. Unfortunately for Kaine, if the final debate is any indicator, Virginia will mostly likely wake up onNovember 9 to Governor-elect Kilgore.