Warner vs. Gilmore in Tysons
Just got back from the Mark Warner-Jim Gilmore debate at the Tysons Corner campus of Capital One today. The debate, sponsored by the Fairfax County Chamber of Commerce, was excellent. Both candidates were on their game and each landed some hard-hitting body punches. While Gilmore is the underdog (and, no, I'm not voting for him), he is not going down easily.
A few quick impressions:
First, the ongoing Wall Street meltdown plays to Mark Warner's strengths. He knows business. He knows the capital markets. He is well-acquainted with the uses and abuses of the U.S. banking system. Warner set the pace on these issues and Gilmore was mainly copying his answers.
Two, D.C. sovereignty and gun control are two sure-fire losers in a Virginia statewide race. Both candidates stated they would back Congressional legislation to repeal D.C.'s laws attempting to reinstate gun control in the aftermath of the Supreme Court decision.
Three, the best exchanges were on energy issues. Both candidates spoke passionately and with knowledge about the need to declare independence from foreign oil and harness Virginia's domestic assets. Gilmore attempted to paint Warner in a box on off-shore drilling but Warner wouldn't be cornered. Of course, the high price of gas is what's driving the new exploration and research, a fact neither candidate acknowledged.
Four, Gilmore tirelessly tried to state that Mark Warner and Barack Obama would raise taxes. But he never acknowledged that his fiscal policies would lead to greater deficits and U.S. dependency on foreign credit -- the exact policy that has caused our financial woes. This cycle of madness has to stop!
Here, I have to break in for some autobiographical detail. I was newly elected to the House of Delegates in December 2001, when Gilmore submitted his final budget.
It was a joke. It pretended to "finish" the car tax cut. How? By raiding the entire Transportation Trust Fund to use for general fund spending (and replacing the gap with 100% borrowing). It also forced every merchant in Virginia to prepay their sales tax receipts, so that the state could receive the funds earlier and artificially "raise revenue" for the fiscal year. Talk about anti-business. Finally, the estimates used for that budget did not account at all for the collapse of the Internet bubble or the negative economic impact of Sept 11th.
We spent two years cleaning up the wreckage from what was left behind. Of course, I'm not bitter about it. And it hasn't left me biased.
Anyway, I welcome all Virginians to see the replay of this debate on Channel 8 in Fairfax County. If you can't find it on the Internet, let me know and I'll try to post it up.
Cheers!
Chap
.
Fact:
The personal property tax needs to be eliminated! It is necessary to have a safe and reliable vehicle to commute and travel in Virginia. The due date for the tax is at the start of the holiday (as in Christmas) season. This timing lowers merchant’s revenues, as well as state tax sales revenues. This tax is regressive in that impacts the lower income citizens heavier than upper income taxpayers.
Therefore:
Either property taxes or the state sales tax or state income tax should have the rate increased to eliminate this tax.
OR
State spending should be reduced to offset the loss of revenues from eliminating this tax.
Governor Gilmore was essentially elected when he said he would get rid of this tax.
Then President Clinton crossed the Potomac to extol the virtues of this much despised tax, demonstrating his lack of understanding the Commonwealth’s hatred for this tax.
If you think this tax is a good idea, then you need to get your head out the sand and see the daylight.
The answer is lower taxes, lower state spending, and less government intervention.
For the amount of work that state legislators perform, they should only receive their expenses, based upon the federal travel regulations. State legislators should not receive a salary. While this would be a small step, it would provide a positive indication of an individual’s willingness to serve the Commonwealth. Additionally, no legislator should receive a meal, a round of golf, a paid vacation, or any travel paid for by a lobbyist or any other individual. Like wise this should be extended to our congressional representatives.(As a side note, congress should be covered by social security and the current federal retirement system “enjoyed” by our federal civil service workers, NOT the gold plated package they currently have! Also this change should be retroactive to the year 1983.)
If an inspection of a proposed project were required the Commonwealth should foot the bill for legislators to travel as required using the FTR expense reimbursement scale. This would eliminate the slightest hint of influence peddling.
Government is not to do all, aside from public schools (and universities), construction and maintenance of highways, police and fire services, water, sewage, libraries, parks, courts, and the management of game and natural resources, what do we really need ?
How much of these entities could be accomplished by out sourcing to private entities at lower cost to the taxpayers?
Pretty sad that DC sovereignty is a "loser" issue. I thought Virginia was all about getting the Federal government out of people's business? No? Mark Warner's agreeing with Gilmore was a cheap political trick. And if Warner *truly* believes that he should be preventing DC from making its own decisions about guns, it reveals a pretty ugly hypocrisy.
About time dems start realinzing the 2nd amendment right. Chap you understand it, thanks!
MB, if you think it is sad that the govt has to step in and set the record straight, you miss the whole point of why we have a Fed govt.
why should a city be able to stomp on the constitution and our rights?
Im glad Warner sees this, I just hope he keeps his word and doesnt stonewall gun rights in the future.
JB, you don't seem to understand what this bill was doing. DC was already setting its new gun laws in place, and Dems like Travis Childers (apparently with the support of people like Gilmore and Warner) decided that he was just going to run roughshod over DC's process and put in rules that his constituents - a thousand miles away in Mississippi - liked. That's just obscene. I suspect you'd start squealing like a stuck pig if a New York senator decided he was going to set the rules for guns in Virginia.
And finally, enough with the myth about Democrats threatening gun rights. Aside from a half-hearted effort at renewing the assault weapons ban, what have the national Dems done to restrict gun ownership in the past decade? That's right, *nothing*.