As is now becoming more well-known, Virginia Republican gubernatorial candidate Bob McDonnell has a bold idea that could change the tenor and direction of the gubernatorial contest — a proposal, still being debated — to eliminate Virginia’s income tax.

There is still a great deal of work to be done on this issue, and it is quite possible the particulars may be so daunting that it never sees the light of day. But at least they are beginning to think about and wrestle with big ideas, rather than opening yet another bag of relatively safe, if not utterly banal, wedge issues.

Virginia Republicans won majorities on the basis of big ideas. They abandoned that approach in the last decade and have suffered for it. Eliminate the income tax? That’s big — so big it may be impractical. But as Dr. Bob Holsworth notes:

…a number of Democrats…expect McDonnell to run a cautious campaign. But given the mood of the voters this year, Virgil’s axiom that “fortune favors the bold” may be excellent advice.

The word is Jeff Frederick has been removed from the RPV chairmanship by two votes. Was there foul play? I can’t say (and really, Ben doesn’t exactly have Republicans’ best interests at heart). But if there is any truth to it, then the convention will be most interesting to watch.

I suspect that long before then, however, conservatives with longer vision will get behind another candidate and most likely, that person will win.

So. Who’s next?

Jerry Fuhrman notes that there may be a permitting problem with the Tea Party down in Abingdon, Virginia. Here’s a note from the event’s organizer, Ted Dingler, on the group’s Facebook page:

The town of Abingdon has denied us the use of the muster site as well as all town owned property. We are currently working on a substitute site as well as several other options. Rest assured, there will be a tea party somewhere in the Abingdon, VA area.

This strikes me as a rather novel decision regarding “town owned” property…which, by any other name, is public property. Paid for, and thus owned by, taxpayers.

Contact Information for the Abingdon Town Council

If you’d like to share your thoughts and concerns with the town council about their novel understanding of public property and First Amendment rights, you can contact them here.

Remember: polite, but firm.

(cross-posted at Tertium Quids)

Jim posts the latest rumor that Jeff Frederick will resign as RPV chair by the end of the week.

My understanding from discussions I’ve had is that Frederick may indeed have reason to resign.

Jim also notes some of the names that have been bandied about for a Frederick replacement. They range from the sublime to the ridiculous, but include folks like Jay Hughes and Pat Mullins. Those are quite interesting.

But one name that isn’t mentioned, but perhaps should be, is former Del. Jack Reid.

We all know he’s strong on gun rights…but he’s also very strong on a number of other matters of concern to conservatives.

(cross-posted at Tertium Quids)

The list of Virginia Tea Party sites keeps growing. According to the listing here, there will be April 15th events in:

Abingdon: 5-8 pm, at the “original muster site of Kings Mountain Men”

Charlottesville: 3-5 pm, at the Downtown Mall by the Pavillion

Rocky Mount: Noon, in front of the Franklin County Courthouse, 40 East Court Street in Rocky Mount

Lynchburg: 6 pm, Downtown Waterfront

Peninsula/Newport News: 11 am-1pm, Oyster Point City Center in Newport News

Richmond: 6-8 pm,at Kanawha Plaza, South 8th St near the Richmond Federal Reserve Building

Roanoke: 5-7 pm on Wiley Drive (near footbridge to old Victory Stadium)

Virginia Beach: 11 am-1pm, at the Central Plaza in the Virginia Beach Town Center (across from Sen. Webb’s office)

Jim Hoeft at Bearing Drift has the text of a letter from Bill Howell, Kirk Cox and Sam Nixon asking that Jeff Frederick be removed as RPV chairman.

While I continue to find the public release of such letters entertaining, and useful, they do serve their intended purpose: tightening the noose around Frederick.

Erick makes a case that Shaun Kenney would be a solid replacement for Frederick. While I can’t disagree with the choice (Shaun is about as conservative as they come, in spite of that five o’clock shadow), I’m not sure that those baying for Frederick’s head (for the second time in four months) have given the matter that much thought. They are in the position of the dog who chases a truck and then catches it. What does that ol’ dog do now?

Many names have been floated, including that of Tom Davis (which is a non-starter).  And more will be…some of them quite interesting and even energizing.

However, that a replacement will be a conservative ought to be taken as a given.  And the one person who will most likely influence that choice is Attorney General candidate Ken Cuccinelli.

Read More →

Bob Lewis gives the world a look at the charges made against Jeff Frederick by those who seek his removal from the RPV chairmanship:

—Spent party money for unbudgeted purposes without consent from either the central committee or the executive committee;

—Gave central committee members little or no time to review the proposed 2009 budget in December, failed to complete either a show-of-hands or roll-call vote by the committee on the budget, then declared it passed without a complete vote count.

—Damaged the party in last fall’s elections by refusing to “coordinate activities, including campaign messages, with Republican nominees for public office.” Democrats won three GOP House seats, the second of Virginia’s two Senate seats, and carried the state in a presidential race for the first time in 44 years.

—Failed to tell the executive committee of a possible security breach of party data on computer servers and not promptly investigating the matter after he was asked to.

In some ways, it reads like a negative employee review — actions taken without approval, actions not taken at all, and possible self-dealing.

Are they firing offenses? In a private company, they might be. In the three-ring circus that passes for the Republican Party of Virginia, they appear to be hanging offenses.  Or at least they are for some.

It does appear that Frederick’s hold on the chairmanship is tenuous at best, though I also believe that the release to the press of the charges against him — in a letter that was previously held in strictest confidence — shows that those who want him gone were sensing a change in the winds…against them.

That only follows, considering that in the last day we’ve learned that the McDonnell campaign may have been a driving force behind all of this (a potentially grave unforced error) and that the whole thing has made folks like Bob Marshall (who, despite the enmity of some within his own party, remains a potent force), openly warn that if it looks like Frederick is being railroaded, there will be hell to pay.

With the payee being Bob McDonnell.

Those who want Frederick gone may prevail. But it could also be a Pyrrhic victory.

Conversely, there are those conservatives, like Lt. Gov. Bill Bolling and Attorney General candidate Ken Cuccinelli who are arguing a different course — Cuccinelli making the case for caution, lest the whole episode blow-up in the party’s, and Bob McDonnell’s face, and Bolling, who says he’s going to stay neutral.

Virginia’s Republican congressional delegation, which in the past has been silent on matters of state import, is also calling for Frederick to go.

No matter what comes of this episode, there really won’t be any winners, and as my friend and boss John Taylor wrote: “…the members of the GOP may find that no serious-minded adult with a pulse would consider being the leader of such a dysfunctional cluster ….”

The WaPo’s Tim Craig throws fuel on the fire in what is becoming an almost MacBeth-like effort to remove Jeff Frederick as RPV chairman. Consider this about GOP gubernatorial candidate Bob McDonnell:

McDonnell injected himself into the debate to help undermine Frederick. In a statement last week, McDonnell said it would be helpful for the Republican Party of Virginia to have more effective leadership. On a conference call with reporters Monday, McDonnell said the “grass roots” of the party want new leadership. GOP insiders say McDonnell’s campaign staff played a key role in lining up signatures to call the special election.

Frederick said in an interview that he’s “not surprised” McDonnell is trying to oust him because “Bob didn’t support me for chairman in the first place.”

If true, then Bob (or his people) may be playing with forces they have no idea how to control. For example:

In late May, the GOP will convene to formally declare McDonnell the nominee. This year’s convention will probably be dominated by many of the social conservatives who helped install Frederick last year.

They might not go along with a love fest for McDonnell. He might have to quell unrest from delegates angered by Frederick’s removal. Some Republicans say they think Frederick could also launch a floor fight at the convention to get his job back, which would be a major distraction for McDonnell.

And that’s where Del. Bob Marshall enters the stage. Marshall, for those who aren’t familiar with him, challenged former Gov. Jim Gilmore for the GOP Senate nomination last year — and came within a whisker of winning:

Marshall predicts the conservative base will quickly turn on McDonnell if it appears Frederick is “railroaded.” Marshall said an independent committee should be set up to evaluate the accusations against Frederick.

“If an independent group doesn’t do this, this is going to seriously damage Bob McDonnell,” Marshall said. “The folks who came to the convention who voted for me and voted for Frederick, they just won’t work for McDonnell.”

Tim then goes on to wonder whether Frederick will go the Russ Potts route and start a “shadow party” that might even lead to Frederick challenging McDonnell from the right.  For those who have pushed Potts out of their minds, Rusty was one of the more unstable members of the old Republican guard in the state Senate who threw it all away to run as an “independent Republican” in the 2005 race. He garnered a whopping 2% of the general election vote.

I discount the “shadow” possibility. Frederick may be many things, but he’s not in the same, kooky and desperately lonely league as ol’ Russ. But the possibility does make for good copy, no?

Regardless, McDonnell and his people would be wise to listen to Marshall. He has a statewide following — and Marshall is right to warn that if the folks who supported him sense Frederick being railroaded, and McDonnell’s fingerprints are on the caboose, then McDonnell may have made the first and biggest unforced error of the campaign.

With the news that six GOP Senators are now calling for RPV chairman Jeff Frederick to step aside, one wonders just how much of a chance he has of remaining in place:

“An overwhelming majority of our caucus has expressed grave concern over the state of affairs at the Republican Party of Virginia in recent months and has lost confidence in Del. Frederick’s leadership,” the senators wrote last week in a letter to Michael E. Thomas, vice chairman of the party.

And who signed?

The senators’ letter was signed by Sens. Thomas K. Norment Jr. of James City County, the Senate Republican leader; Stephen D. Newman of Lynchburg, the GOP Caucus chairman; Walter A. Stosch of Henrico County, the Republican leader emeritus; Kenneth W. Stolle of Virginia Beach, the leader pro tempore; and Mark D. Obenshain of Harrisonburg and Frank W. Wagner of Virginia Beach, both whips.

Norment, Stolle and Stosch…their “grave concern” doesn’t surprise me at all.  Members of the Senate’s dwindling old guard are always concerned about something and their dislike of Frederick is hardly a secret.

What ought to concern Frederick most is the presence of Steve Newman and Mark Obenshain on the list.

If he’s losing the support of the small band of Senate conservatives, then Frederick may just be done.

Now here is something that could work to Republican gubernatorial candidate Bob McDonnell’s favor in November:

…some Republican members of the General Assembly have become timid about standing up for conservative principles. Their actions during the most recent session put McDonnell in a difficult position -forcing him to choose between alienating conservative and libertarian voters who want to limit the growth of government and repudiating the terrible legislative handiwork of both Democratic and Republican members of the legislature, particularly Republicans in the House of Delegates.

This is particularly true regarding the worst piece of bipartisan legislation passed by the General Assembly during its most recent session: the retreat on welfare reform. The one bit of good news is that McDonnell gives every indication that he is willing to break with his fellow Republicans when they do the wrong thing.

It is important to remember that while the General Assembly managed to gut welfare reform this year, not every self-styled conservative in the House or Senate rolled over. There was stronger opposition in the Senate (which, despite objections, passed the measure 22-17). The House passed the bill 88-10…which means that at least a few of the worthies weren’t sleeping at the switch (as for the rest, there’s still plenty of time for them to explain how paying welfare benefits more often actually lowers costs).

And it seems McDonnell gets it:

Asked Friday about the General Assembly’s actions on welfare and other issues, a spokesman for McDonnell told The Washington Times that the candidate disagrees with the welfare expansion measure passed by the General Assembly. As a member of the House of Delegates, McDonnell “was a strong supporter of Gov. Allen’s welfare reforms during the 1990s,” spokesman Tucker Martin said. “He would oppose any effort to expand welfare,” including the legislation passed by the legislature. Martin said McDonnell opposes a smoking ban that the General Assembly passed at bars and restaurants as a “violation of property rights.” Robert McDonnell clearly understands that if he is to be elected governor, he must side with conservative/libertarian voters and against Republicans who act like RINOs – Republicans in Name Only.

At least on these two matters, McDonnell is taking the right course.

It’s not a particularly fashionable one in some Republican circles (who on matters like the smoking ban demonstrate that their understanding of Edmund Burke is, at best, nonexistent). Nor is it likely to sit well with the more prissy members of Virginia’s dwindling press corps.

But it’s the sort of stand that will serve McDonnell well with the groups Virginia’s Republicans have long neglected or abused over the last decade or so — namely those who still believe in quaint ideas like limited government, the rule of law and property rights.  His positions against the restaurant smoking ban and the Assembly’s unconscionable back-tracking on welfare reform may not heal the breach immediately. But it’s a start.

Ryan Nobles at NBC 12 here in River City (Richmond, to you out of towners) has the statements of both GOP gubernatorial candidate Bob McDonnell and RPV chairman Jeff Frederick on today’s events. First, from McDonnell:

“I am aware of the grassroots effort initiated by the State Central Committee to seek new leadership at the Republican Party of Virginia. This process is being handled within the State Central Committee, and is an internal Party matter. It is clear to me, after hearing from Republican leaders across the state, that as we move forward with our campaign, as well as the other statewide and House of Delegates races, it would be helpful for the Republican Party of Virginia to have more effective leadership in this pivotal year. I look forward to continuing to run an inclusive, grassroots campaign that is reaching voters all over Virginia with our good-government, conservative message of job creation, opportunity, and results for all Virginians.”

Nice way to stay on message, while still managing to stick the boot in. Now Frederick’s prepared statement:

“Yesterday, I received notice of a Call for a meeting of the State Central Committee to be held on April 4. The central purpose of this meeting will be a vote by the members of the State Central Committee to determine whether I will remain as Chairman of the Republican Party of Virginia.”

“Nine months ago, I was elected to this position by thousands of rank-and-file Republican volunteers and activists who attended our Party’s convention in Richmond. I was humbled by their support then, and I have worked hard to make RPV the responsive, effective organization they want and deserve.”

“My campaign for Chairman promised to change the way our Party had been operating. I pledged leadership that would be driven from the grassroots up, not the top down. I have kept that pledge, and am proud of the work we’ve accomplished in just nine months.”

“I will not retreat from the commitment I made to the core of our Party who clearly and unmistakably expressed their will at last May’s convention. I have every intention of continuing as Chairman and completing my term in May 2012. I have the commitments necessary to win the vote on April 4th, and will fulfill my term and the commitment to the people who entrusted me to lead our Party back to victory.”

Which one blinks first? The betting window is open…

Now Republican gubernatorial candidate Bob McDonnell is calling for RPV chairman Jeff Frederick’s head:

“It is clear to me, after hearing from Republican leaders across the state, that as we move forward with our campaign, as well as the other statewide and House of Delegates races, it would be helpful for the Republican Party of Virginia to have more effective leadership in this pivotal year,” McDonnell said in an e-mail.

One would think that statement puts a coda on Frederick’s brief party chairmanship. Assuming, of course, that Bob McDonnell swings that kind of lumber. And perhaps he does.

In other news, Dave Rensin has been named the RPV’s finance chairman, according to a press release from the RPV this afternoon. Interesting timing. But whether it makes a difference for Frederick remains to be seen. Either way, it is a positive move for the RPV — and they’ve really been needing one of late.

Jim Riley’s sources say Jeff Frederick has no intention of leaving his post as RPV chairman.

I suppose that’s admirable, and really, not unexpected. This, however, was interesting:

Those same sources say that Del. Morgan Griffith is whipping the vote count on SCC to make sure that there are at least 20 votes in support of Jeff so as to defeat the attempt to remove him. There are claims that some people signed on to the letter without fully understanding exactly what it was they were signing on for, with some believing that it was merely to bring up the allegations for discussion, not removal.

Hmmm. Considering the hot water Griffith got Frederick into over the possible Ralph Northam party-switch last month (that would have switched control of the Senate from Democrat to Republican), I can see why Griffith would set aside his duties as House majority leader to engage in a little fence-mending for Frederick.

But it ought to be somewhat disturbing that some Republican Party committee members can’t read, or understand, what they are signing.

Can’t anyone in Virginia play this game?

After an aborted attempt to remove Jeff Frederick as RPV chairman at its December “Advance,” it seems as though the discontented are, again, telling Frederick to go, and with a 30 day deadline to do so.

Even better are the proposed replacements — Tom Davis and former Del. Paul Harris.

It is to laugh.

There may be plenty of solid reasons to remove Frederick from his position. There may even be the votes to do so and make it stick. However, would a change at the top really make a long-term difference in the RPV’s fortunes? Doubtful. Installing a new captain on the Titanic after it hit the iceberg would have made no difference. And those baying for blood would be wise to consider the long term consequences. Does the RPV wish to be seen as a modern version of a banana republic that changes its leaders on a whim? Perhaps so. And if that is the course they wish to take, then happy trails.

But maybe Mr. Frederick does go and takes his baggage with him. Are the rumored replacements really better? I can already tell those slobbering after Davis (whose disdain for RoVa is a thing of legend) that if they really want to see their fortunes sag, then by all means, give Tom the job. As for Harris…he’s an amiable man who, since his sole term in the General Assembly, has been mentioned as a possible candidate for every office under the sun. He is the Republican equivalent of former Democratic Rep. L.F. Payne, but without the charisma.

Which, oddly, could be just what the RPV needs right about now.

The WaPo has a long piece on Bob McDonnell in its digital pages this morning that achieve two ends:

1. To remind (and perhaps horrify) the denizens of the North that Bob is one of those weird social conservatives who may just likely be taking his marching orders from Pat Robertson.

2. To tell conservatives that McDonnell is running to the middle in search of independents, moderates and assorted other odd beasts who hold the keys, it’s said, to political victory.

Slice and dice.

As for the crypto-social conservative strangeness…I lay that more to the Post’s endless fascination with things they neither understand nor countenance. They don’t get it, so, it must be bad. Or evil. Or evilly bad in a really, truly, terrible way. At least, that’s what they are all saying in Cleveland Park, so you know it’s true.

As for the rest…here there are both rays of hope and reasons for concern.

First, the hope:

“I’m the same person I’ve been,” McDonnell said in an interview from his office, where he displays a painting of George Washington with his head lowered in prayer. “I’m conservative. But conservative means that you believe in limited government and low taxes and keeping regulations to a minimum. . . . It’s not just the social issues.”

If things ended there, we’d all be fine. Regrettably, they don’t:

…McDonnell, 54, the former state attorney general, is trying to follow the lead of successful statewide candidates, in the mold of such moderate Democrats as Mark Warner and James Webb. On the trail, he touts a record of bipartisan compromise and peppers his speeches with references to crime-fighting proposals that won broad support. Even his campaign Web site prominently features accounts of his “working effectively with” Gov. Timothy M. Kaine, now chairman of the Democratic National Committee.

One would hope that this reflects more of Anita Kumar’s vision of what makes for a successful candidate than what the McDonnell campaign actually believes. If their aim is to run in a Warner-Webb mold, then the right may as well stay home or, failing that, do what some did in 2005 and skip the top line on the ballot, and cast their votes for candidates elsewhere.

But still, we’re running on hope — hope that this is really just Postie throat clearing and not campaign strategy. But hope gets dinged here:

McDonnell was widely credited with persuading feuding members of his own party to consider solutions to Virginia’s transportation mess when they had been unwilling to do so before. He told them that they didn’t deserve to lead the state if they couldn’t come up with a plan.

The result: a landmark package in 2007 to add $1.1 billion annually for transportation needs across Virginia.

“It took tremendous time and effort and political capital to put together,” McDonnell said.

And, let’s never forget, it was also a plan that the state’s supreme court eviscerated. If this monstrosity — with its unelected, regional taxing authorities — reflected the leadership caliber of the existing Republican political class, then Virginia is better off without them.

Even with this big hit, hope still remains, at least for the McDonnell campaign. Their biggest asset is the almost clownish opposition they face in the state’s Democrats. Two of the Democratic candidates — Creigh Deeds and Brian Moran — have said that tax hikes are on the table, believing somehow that it is possible, in a deep recession, to tax one’s way back to financial health. Moreover, all three Democrats, while embracing the chimera of energy independence, aren’t keen on the idea of offshore drilling. Each has eagerly embraced big labor, even walking pickets lines to show their bona fides. There are other issues too — McDonnell staked out a position opposing the smoking ban (based upon property rights), unlike the three Democrats and many Republican legislators. He waffled horribly on the stimulus bill, but even that placed him above the Democrats, and again, many Republican legislators, who eagerly accepted the (borrowed) cash, with few-to-no questions asked.

But then there was this:

In December, when the four candidates for governor shared the stage for the first time, McDonnell stuck to his script. He said his focus on welfare reform, Internet safety and reducing drunken driving was intended to appeal to new voters, younger residents and minorities — swing voters for a new era in Virginia politics.

Chasing “swing voters” with small-bore issues like Internet safety doesn’t fill me with confidence. And welfare reform? Well the General Assembly punk’d you on that one.

Like voters everywhere, swingers are concerned with the large-bore issues: the economy, jobs, taxes, education — in other words, the issues that conservatives have run on and won on in the past. And there are plenty of openings: Terry McAuliffe doesn’t like charter schools, for example. Take it and run with it (just be a lot bolder than those in the General Assembly). Democrats and others beat back attempts to strengthen property rights, the right to work law and even managed to snooker the Republicans on welfare. Take them up. Democrats balked at putting the transportation trust fund off limits, and refused to address the matter of sunsetting taxes that have outlived their intend purpose. Take them up.

There was also a move to adopt a tax and expenditure limitation measure in the last session. It got through the House, but died in the Senate (with Creigh Deeds gleefully sticking a knife in its back). Pick it up and run with it.

The opportunities are there. The only question is whether Bob McDonnell will seize them.

This is an interesting development:

A group of more than 200 Virginia residents, calling themselves the “Pitchfork Rebellion” and frustrated with the way the state selects judges, wants the public to have more say in who sits on the bench and for how long. Virginia is one of only two states, along with South Carolina, that empower their state legislatures to pick state judges, a process primarily conducted behind closed doors.

The citizens group is advocating term limits for judges and an overhaul of the state’s process of evaluating judges. It also wants public participation in judicial selection from start to finish, hearings that are open to the public and anonymity or immunity for those who testify against sitting judges.

There are arguments for keeping the judicial selection process the way it is. But they’ve never set well, particularly as the process tends towards secrecy. And high-handedness:

The group became particularly frustrated trying to find out when legislators would meet to discuss judgeships. On Friday night, in response to an e-mail from Elizabeth Haring of Leesburg, Sen. Henry L. Marsh III (D-Richmond) wrote that his “Senate Courts of Justice [committee] is not meeting regarding Judge Finch.”

Then, on Saturday, the committee did meet, discuss and vote on Finch and refused to let Haring testify. Marsh has declined repeated requests to discuss the process. An agreement has been reached in which Finch will be reappointed to another eight-year term and then retire at the end of this year.

So much for honesty (let alone transparency).

Will this “rebellion” gain steam — especially in an election year?

Maybe so. It will definitely be worth watching.

I recall not liking being told to read “Candide” before heading off to college. But over the years, that little exercise has continued to pay dividends.

That’s particularly so where matters like state budgets are concerned. They are political documents and regardless of the amount of “core services” treacle drizzled on top of them, these unwieldy beasts remain statements of will and faction.

But there’s another dimension to them that is just as important: Panglossian optimism.

Take the just-approved state budget. Here’s how the governor views the budget, the holes in which were plugged with (borrowed) federal dollars:

“If anybody wonders whether the stimulus package mattered, 7,100 people are going to have jobs with the state government, continuing to serve others and not be out on the streets in the midst of the worst job market that this nation has seen in the last quarter-century,” said Kaine.

Praise be. The additional debt that will have to be repaid, by someone over a period of years, is of no consequence compared to the government workers who have been spared today. This is an even greater blessing because they “serve others.” The rest of you who serve others outside the garden of government delights…well, your children will be getting the bill. Have a nice day.

The Governor’s reaction pales to the ecstatic outbursts of others, however:

“If you don’t like the stimulus package, vote no,” said Del. Kenneth R. Plum, D-Fairfax, chairman of the House Democratic Caucus. “The stimulus package is our salvation,” he added, referring to the $3.7 billion hole in the budget attributed to the deepening recession.

Salvation comes in many forms, it seems. I never expected it to appear in the guise of an IOU.

But Mr. Plum does have a point — those who disliked the “stimulus” and the burden will inflicts on the future could have voted “no.” Most chose not to.

That’s not to say that the euphoria was unanimous. As Sen. Obenshain, who was among the very few in the Senate who voted “no” notes:

What that means is that we have plugged our budget hole with one-time money without making any adjustments in our long-term spending patterns. Unfortunately we are spending these funds on recurring obligations (like Medicaid) of the Commonwealth rather than one-time expenditures.

But even more disturbing is the rose-colored future:

The second and more troubling problem is that the revenue projections upon which this budget is built require a total disregard of current national economic conditions. In order for the budget to balance, the economy must somehow turn on the proverbial dime and state revenues must begin to grow at an annual rate of 4.5% beginning on July 1 – that would be 120 days from now. Optimism is one thing, but sadly, this is in the realm of fantasy.

It’s a sentiment echoed by Lt. Gov. Bolling:

…I am concerned that this budget is balanced by the inclusion of an overly optimistic revenue projection of 4.5% in the second year of the biennium which begins on July 1, 2009. While I hope that robust economic growth will return this year, the fact is that most economic indicators project continuing economic decline in the short term. If we fail to meet these overly optimistic revenue projections we could face significant budget shortfalls again next year.

By relying on one-time federal funds and overly optimistic revenue projections to balance the budget, we are not addressing the fundamental structural problem in the budget. Simply put, we are spending more money than we are taking in and we cannot continue to do that. Unless we see significant economic growth over the next 18 months, we will once again face massive budget shortfalls when the federal stimulus dollars expire, other one-time budget balancing actions are repealed and revenue projections are adjusted to reflect economic reality.

So there it is. Between now and July 1st, the economy must rise from the doldrums in an unprecedented way in order to meet the Panglossian expectations upon which this budget is built. If they fail to arrive, then we’ll be back where we started…looking to our increasingly impoverished Uncle to borrow even more money to bail us out.

Truly this is the best of all possible worlds.

Bart Hinkle relates a bit of a conversation the RTD recently had with Terry McAuliffe. It turns out the wannabe-governor doesn’t like charter schools:

“We don’t want to drain money out of the public schools.” The danger of charter schools is that “the public schools get left without anything.”

Nevermind that charter schools are public schools, and that Virginia’s charter law is as weak as a kitten. Any efforts to create more of them is a threat to…somebody (most likely the VEA, assorted race hustlers, and those who fear anything remotely associated with change).

If charters could somehow be linked to that magical alternative energy — chicken waste — McAuliffe would be all over the idea.

I know that Bob McDonnell likes school choice, and may make expanded choice (hopefully more than the halting half-steps that routinely get stuffed in the General Assembly) a part of his campaign.

It’s not a wedge issue. It’s a matter of justice and common sense. And what better place for a former Attorney General to be than on the side of the children…and their parents…and the taxpayers?

Gov. Kaine is going to use whatever tools he has to ensure that the Democratic gubernatorial candidates uses the right tone:

“We would like to keep it in acceptable bounds,” Kaine said. “I can see myself weighing in with these guys, saying, ‘Hey, think about November. You’re acting in ways that may not be helpful in November.’ ”

The three Democrats recently began waging what will be the state’s first seriously contested primary for governor since 1977. Kaine said all three will be under “intense pressure” to make sure they are “calibrating the right tone.”

That might have been possible when only Deeds and Moran were in the race. Maybe. But the McAuliffe juggernaut has already spooked Brain Moran out of his House seat and into a perfect snit from which he hasn’t recovered. Meanwhile, Creigh Deeds is burning up his Beatles albums (how long before he’s found curled-up in a darkened room listen to “Revolution 9″ over and over again?).

Rather than urging grown-ups to adopt “the right tone,” perhaps the more useful approach would be a time out.

If works for two year-olds, surely it will work for sensible adults. If they can be found on the campaign trail, that is.

Via Sen. Mark Obenshain comes a quote from Democratic Sen. Chap Petersen on HB 2506, a bill that would allow utilities to charge higher rates to customers to defray the costs of going “green.” Said the Senator from Fairfax:

“This will raise utility rates and save the environment at the same time.”

Looks like it’s time to start burning peat.

But not every utility customer will get nipped for Gaia’s sake. In the bill is this nugget:

The costs of new energy efficiency programs shall not be assigned to any large general service customer that has implemented energy efficiency measures.

So even if you, as an individual customer, have put in that new insulation, upgraded the windows, sealed all the doors and closed all the vents and turned the thermostat down as far as it will go…well, you’re still going to have to pay while the “large general service customers” who did the same, won’t have to.

We are all equal under the law. It’s just that some are more equal than others.

The worst part of this? It passed the House unanimously.

Thanks guys — you’re doing a heckuva job!