With the charges and counter-charges flying fast and furiously between the various candidates, it is hard to keep up. One thing caught my eye in a recent ad by Republican challenger Chris Stolle was his intimation that incumbent Democrat Joe Bouchard supported the transfer of transit funds from Hampton Roads to Northern Virginia.
The ad references SB 6009, which was introduced in the special session on transportation. In an analysis that Bouchard wrote about this and other bills being considered in that session , he said:
The allocation of transit funds – 73.5% to Northern Virginia and 13.7% to Hampton Roads – roughly reflects transit ridership in the two regions. Northern Virginia has a much more extensive transit system and much greater ridership than does Hampton Roads.
As it turns out, Bouchard’s numbers were slightly more favorable to Hampton Roads. According to a presentation by Tom Biesiadny, Chair, Jurisdiction and Agency Coordinating Committee, Northern Virginia Transportation Authority, to House Appropriations Transportation Subcommittee on February 2, 2009, NoVA’s share of transit ridership was 75%. And according to this article, that share has grown to 79%.
So in reality, Bouchard’s allocation would have benefitted Hampton Roads, giving us a boost in transit funding from state-wide revenue sources. That’s a good thing, right?
VIVIAN J. PAIGE | All Politics is Local 
A good thing if you think a 25% sales tax increase is a good thing. That’s what that bill would have given us.
Ah but that’s not the point. The point is that Stolle’s charge is bogus. And that if the formula proposed was used, more money would be flowing to Hampton Roads.
Well, i haven’t seen the ad you didn’t link to, but the overwhelming majority of the taxes raised in that bill are not for “transit” – they are for highways, and we are a donor region in the highway funding formula.
Nice to see when someone points out huge tax increases, the Democratic response is “that’s not the point.”
The ad isn’t available online so I can’t link to it.
And changing the subject doesn’t change the truth: your guy is lying.
and your guy voted to raise taxes
Public transportation is one of the few areas in which prudent government spending pays real dividends by way of future growth in tax revenues. Investments require capital — that’s why we call it “capitalism.”
Do you have a better way to pay for that improvement than an increase in the sales tax?
Anon, 59% of voters oppose tax increases for transportation.
I don’t have to know how to fly to oppose jumping off a cliff.
That Pilot poll is confusing though. Because the respondents apparently think that you can improve transportation infrastructure without increasing funding for it. The poll I think better demonstrates that people do not have an appreciation of what the problem is. Especially if they are under the impression that a one-time privatization of VABC is going to cut it. Even if it is $500+ million, the minimum need is a an additional billion per year and that was before the Commonwealth Transportation Fund dropped off a cliff.
Rarely does someone win an election telling the voters they don’t understand.
“59% of voters oppose tax increases for transportation.”
Irrelevant, unless you always agree with the majority opinion.
“I don’t have to know how to fly to oppose jumping off a cliff.”
Let me see whether I understand your analogy. In it, flying is analogous to improving our transportation (the goal), and jumping off a cliff is analogous to increasing taxes (the means). Yes? You do not oppose the goal (improving our transportation system), but you do oppose the means proposed (increasing the sales tax)?
I have a funny appreciation for democracy.
Gee Brian, when did you become such an anti-tax advocate? Is this an epiphany? In the past you ridicule the VBTA, support regional taxing authorities, and 80 percent transportation, governmental art grants. Wassup?
Brian, I was just saying they don’t appear to have a full appreciation. That just requires communicating to them all the challenges that there are with this particular issue so that they may make a fully informed decision. Leveling or sharing information with voters doesn’t prevent you from being elected.
“I have a funny appreciation for democracy.”
It’s a good thing we have a republic, not a democracy.
Anyway, Brian, that does not answer my question. Is my interpretation of your analogy correct?
Of course it isn’t. It is, however, more boring.