Tuesday, March 04, 2008

Virginia's GOP Senate Nomination Battle: Marshall v. Gilmore

While we're awaiting election results in Texas and Ohio, let's get to a couple of closer to home stories here in Virginia, which happen to be related to each other.

First is a story in yesterday's Washington Post on the growing support amongst GOP insiders for Delegate Bob "Taliban" Marshall's bid for the party's nomination to run for the U.S. Senate seat being vacated by John Warner. (See "New Face Winning Hearts In Va. GOP.")


Second is the Virginia Supreme Court's ruling invalidating a significant portion of the bastardized funding mechanism the General Assembly set up last year to support much needed transportation projects. (This is related to the story above because Marshall was a lead plaintiff in the lawsuit that succeeded in getting the funding mechanism declared unconstitutional.)


If the WaPo is to be believed, Marshall has a shot at upending the plans of former Governor Jim Gilmore to get the GOP nod to face off against presumed Democratic nominee Mark Warner for the open Senate seat in November. That's pretty ironic, because Gilmore outmaneuvered another potential opponent--retiring congressman Tom Davis--by persuading the Republican state committee to make the selection at a state convention rather than via a primary. Davis, a moderate, would've had a better shot in an open primary with independent voters participating, whereas Gilmore, a staunch conservative, figured he had things locked up in a convention.


But along came Marshall, who we've nicknamed "Taliban" because of his propensity to sponsor bills that would heavily regulate your social life, including your sex life, to fit his views of what's moral and what's not. Marshall is one of those social conservatives favored by the hard core evangelical Christian right. It just so happens that Virginia's Republican Party has a lot of those types at its inner core, especially amongst the activists who tend to show up at a state convention, so Gilmore may be in for a fight.


We'd still put our money on Gilmore, but we'd love to see Taliban Marshall pull the upset and make for a twistedly interesting November match-up.


Now, about that Virginia Supreme Court ruling engineered by Mr. Marshall. We don't agree with ol' Taliban on much, but here we did agree. The General Assembly put together a horrific "compromise" of a transportation package last year that never much passed the smell test.


The problem, of course, is that the rabid anti-tax wing of the GOP wouldn't go along with anything that looked like a tax to fund roads. Instead, they were willing to let at least some of their colleagues support a series of "fees" that were, in fact, taxes on Northern Virginians. So we're glad the Supremes struck most of it down, although it does further delay and complicate the critical issue of getting roads and other transportation infrastructure built.


Now the problem with Mr. Marshall is that he isn't proposing any alternative. He hails from Stafford County, which is about midway between Washington and Fredericksburg. If you've ever tried to drive down there on just about any weekday afternoon or evening, you know what a traffic nightmare it is in that region.


But Marshall could care less, as long as you're not using birth control and you are fornicating in the missionary position. He's anti-tax and anti-regulation, unless the regulation is of your social life. He'd just as soon turn Virginia into a theocracy--and if he did, it would like Taliban Afghanistan: bad roads and public executions in soccer stadiums.


The purpose of a body politic, such as the Commonwealth of Virginia, is to provide for the common good where it makes sense to do so publicly. Roads, bridges and other transportation infrastructure are generally considered one of those services better provided by the state via a taxing mechanism. The alternative is to let the private sector do it. Where does Marshall stand on this? Does he believe Virginia should plan for and invest in its future with appropriate funding for transportation, especially in fast-growing Northern Virginia? Does he believe the state should get out of the business and leave it to the private sector (which would still need laws to facilitate the process)? Or is he just in favor of letting it all go to hell (where he assumes most of us are headed anyway)?


Marshall proclaims himself to be "pro-life." But what kind of life is it when your parents are on the road, stuck in a massive traffic jam twice a day? (Oh, we forgot, the womenfolk shouldn't work--then there'll be a parent at home.)


The Virginia General Assembly needs to go back to square one on transportation. It's important--if they can't get this done, then there's no point even having a legislature. This time, they should do it right: increase the gas tax by a few cents a gallon (the tax, as a proportion of the price of gas, is now at a historic low) and invest that money directly in transportation.


No comments: