By Steve Vaughan
I got a press release from Del. John O’Bannon (R-Henrico) Friday.
He was pretty proud of himself.
He’d asked for and gotten an opinion from Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli that two of Gov. Bob McDonnell’s proposed amendments to the budget were unconstitutional.
That’s pretty unusual, because everybody involved — O’Bannon, Cuccinelli and McDonnell — are Republicans. Usually that’s not the kind of thing a delegate, or an attorney general, would do to a governor of his or her own party.
What was O’Bannon’s objection?
Was it money for the Governor’s Opportunity Fund, which provides corporate welfare to attract businesses here. These are deals on which the state usually gets the short end, since there is no enforcement if the businesses actually bring the jobs and the economic activity they’ve promised?
Nah.
Was it breaking the agreement that the state made years ago with public employees, requiring them to pick up more of their own pension costs in return for a raise that would see them lose “only” 2% from their take-home pay?
Nah.
Was it issuing between $3 billion and $4 billion in new debt to pay for highway construction?
Nah.
What O’Bannon wanted stopped were two amendments, each for $500,000, for Operation Smile and the Federation of Food Banks.
Operation Smile is a worldwide charity that provides medical volunteers to treat facial deformities — like cleft palates — in poor children.
The food bank group is pretty self-explanatory. The money was to buy food that would be distributed to needy Virginians.
So what Del. O’Bannon found objectionable in the state’s $70 billion-plus budget was giving deformed children a better appearance and outlook, and feeding hungry Virginians.
That’s certainly the way to win friends and influence people and disabuse anyone of that old notion that the Republican Party doesn’t have any compassion.
What a sweet guy, that O’Bannon. And he’s a doctor.
I’m sure he has a great bedside manner.
Cuccinelli ruled that the amendments were unconstitutional under Article IV, Section 16 of the Virginia Constitution.
And he’s probably right.
The point of that article is clearly to prohibit the use of public funds for charitable purposes.
As Cuccinelli’s opinion points out, this isn’t the first time the budget has appropriated money to charitable organizations. In the last dozen years, homeless shelters, organizations that provide rural health care, an arts festival and the Special Olympics have benefitted from state appropriations.
Why were those not ruled unconstitutional?
Probably because no one was so tone-deaf and so cold-blooded that they felt the need to challenge them.
Unlike Del. O’Bannon, those legislators couldn’t be bothered to save the Commonwealth from the dangers of Christian charity.
The General Assembly adopts lots of practices that are likely unconstitutional, but no one challenges them because they serve a good purpose.
For instance for years, to circumvent the restrictive rule that required a super majority to pass laws only affecting one locality, including charter changes, every locality in the state could be referred to as a population bracket instead of its name. For instance, the mythical city of Meganovalopolis would be “a city with a population between 1 million and 2 million” or the equally fake town of Rural would be “a town with a population between 650 and 685 persons.” Eventually, the General Assembly decided this was ridiculous and stopped it. And people stopped raising silly objections to charter bills.
I suppose the allocation of state funds to making sure that kids don’t have to go through life deformed or that needy Virginians don’t have to go to bed hungry posed some grave danger to the state.
So, thanks Del. O’Bannon.
You’ve likely saved the state from spending a million dollars on two good causes. That would have been terrible.
Maybe we can use that money for tax credits for tobacco companies or building a couple of prison cells or a couple of hundred yards of interstate highway.
I’m sure Gov. McDonnell appreciates you saving him from the “angels of his own better nature.”
I know the rest of us do.
VIVIAN J. PAIGE | All Politics is Local 
Just like with a CEO donating corporate funds, the Governor can’t give what is not legally his.
This is a good step toward consulting the Constitution; and they should obviously do it more often, henceforth.
I totally agree that more substantial targets in the budget are begging for the axe, and I look forward to seeing a healthy discussion on those other issues before the close of the session.
BTW, Doctor O’Bannon is a neurologist, so he really doesn’t need a good bedside manner, but just the same, he is one of the most honest and big hearted men whom I have met.
He is on the board of our Holocaust museum here in Richmond and his wife, Pat, is on the Henrico County Board of Supervisors. You will find few people with such an impressive and lasting record of public service to Virginia, as the O’Bannons.
Government should not be giving to charities. If a charity is worthwhile, people will donate to it of their own free will.
Steve is like a lot of liberals who can’t follow the Constitution when it is explicitly clear but can find things in the Constitution that no one ever saw there.
None of the above have addressed Steve’s biggest question, in my mind. Why now?
The other question I have is why is it ok to give “charitable” contributions to business, but not charitable organizations?
So you know, I am in favor of these types of gifts to business. But only when tied to a discernible goal, and that goal reached. But I would also be in favor of the same sort of gift to a business which happens to be a non-profit, with the same strings.
If either you or Steve actually bothered to do any research, or even to read the news, you would know that Delegate O’Bannon requested the opinion on behalf of a constituent:
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/virginiapolitics/2011/01/delegate_will_ask_whether_stat.html
Tim: I read the press release he sent me.
And, Tim, that has nothing to do with the comments I made. I didn’t question asking for the opinion, or even the opinion. I questioned the timing, and the gifting the Commonwealth does to organizations not deemed charitable.
Pun intended
BK-I said in the piece I thought Cuccinelli was reading the Constitution correctly and that it does ban appropriations to charitable organizations — although there are few exceptions. (The cases in question don’t fall into one of those exceptions). But, the General Assembly and governors of both parties have been doing this for years. Seems odd to draw the line at these particular appropriations.
Maybe he is not drawing the line here. Perhaps these were just the test cases.
It’s difficult to comment on this because of the mixing of sentiment, state constitutional law and what not. But, aside from the timing which in Virginia is always political whatever the issue, I personally lean toward considering this under leveraging Public/Private monies. We get a lot from these organizations, Public Broadcasting etc. They actually serve real people whatever their party which is what elected government is supposed to do.
That said, all orgs and agencies have to be evaluated to make sure the money goes where it’s intended. THAT seems to be one or our and the nation’s problems…we give but it either isn’t utilized, is underutilized, is stolen.