Expecting a candidate whose instincts are to speak honestly with voters to sign a “No Tax” pledge is absurd.
Mills Godwin, the only man since Patrick Henry to serve two terms as Governor of Virginia-one at the helm of each Party-refused to give up the option to do what he thought was in the best interests of Virginians in the circumstances in which he found himself. His is a good example to follow.
No candidate can responsibly “pledge” for an entire four years not to raise a single tax. Not one tax. Not one penny. None of us has that clear a crystal ball.
And to expect an honest and responsible candidate to make such a promise is preposterous. He must serve Virginia as its Chief Executive for four years. He won’t have the luxury of merely writing editorials or sitting in a plush office tossing out policy edicts.
He must govern. He cannot know what the next three or four years might present. He must maintain all the options that a governor has to serve Virginia and not give up one because it might be politically expedient in a campaign environment.
Candidates of both parties for years have made this promise and then confronted situations they did not foresee. They broke their promise. The wise man will not make it. Not absolutely. He won’t say never.
Remember on the GOP side: “Read my lips.” And for the Dems, Mark Warner promised repeatedly not to raise taxes. Whoops!!
The simple fact is that transportation needs must be met. Maybe it can be done without a tax increase at the state level. I hope so. And there are options.
Clearly taxes should not be raised now or in the near term due to the cratered economy. In fact, some taxes might be reduced to spur job creation.
A candidate with a record provides the best indication of the likelihood that he or she will propose significant tax increases during their tenure in office.
A record of supporting tax increases is one signal. One of opposition is another. Voters need to make judgments on records, not on promises made under circumstances where the unpredictability of the future may require a reversal.
So-called “pledges” that ask a person aspiring to govern a state as complex as Virginia with the challenges of four years on the horizon should be rejected.
A Governor’s obligation to meet the demands of the office in circumstances he cannot contemplate require him to keep options open, even one he may not want to employ.
Most Virginians will respect a candidate who chooses not to make promises that future exigencies may require him to break. They are intelligent enough to judge the candidates by their records and conclude for which one a tax increase may be near the bottom of the options list and one for which is much nearer the top.
We don’t need to increase voters’ cynicism towards politicians. There is enough already. Promises based on circumstances that are inherently unknowable invite reversal.
Virginians are looking for leaders with the wisdom and courage to be straight with them. And that is a good thing.
Wyatt Durrette is a Director at DurretteBradshaw, PLC (www.durrettebradshaw.com) and co-founder of the XDL Group. He served three terms in the House of Delegates and was the Republican candidate for Governor in 1985.
I’m with you, Wyatt. Signing such a thing is irresponsible. By the way, Bolling has signed. Cantor has signed. Half the Republican members of the General Assembly have signed. But you’ve got it right. Just plain irresponsible. Thank you for pointing it out. Best. BKD
Mr. Durrette is exactly right. yet, that is not a surprise.
he did go to VMI.
Thank you both. Always good to get comments. Barnie, we may disagree on legislative candidates, at least in part. I see a difference between a candidate seeking a two year term representing a small district, who might in representing that district during a two year stretch believe his district wants him to oppose tax increases of any kind and in any amount and so he or she takes the pledge. More of a gray area for me. Might be hair splitting but I see a difference. But for a governor and a four year window, we agree. No way.
Wyatt, ‘no new taxes’ pledges are nothing more than cheap theatrics, expressive of the basest political cynicism. Have you ever encountered a ‘no new spending’ pledge? Neither have I. A few years ago, just for kicks, I spent some time looking at spending bills filed by legislative pledge signers. They had all–House and Senate–signed one pledge or another against raising taxes, while simultaneously filing budget amendments for additional spending in excess of $3 BILLION! Unworthy, gutless behavior, in my opinion. BKD
“The simple fact is that transportation needs must be met. Maybe it can be done without a tax increase at the state level. I hope so. And there are options.”
OK, what are they? Probably public-private partnerships, the GOP’s favorite answer, although no one has explained to me how we can get something cheaper by including in the calculation a profit necessary to make these attractive to companies. And as the HOT lanes on the Capital Beltway deal shows, if the private company doesn’t make what it thinks it should, the state pays them. Who wouldn’t like those terms: Big bucks, no risk.
“Clearly taxes should not be raised now or in the near term due to the cratered economy. In fact, some taxes might be reduced to spur job creation.”
With Republicans these days, there never is a good time to raise taxes. Why not raise them a few years back when we knew we had a major transportation problem? But the House GOP said not only no, but hell no.
“A record of supporting tax increases is one signal. One of opposition is another. Voters need to make judgments on records, not on promises made under circumstances where the unpredictability of the future may require a reversal.”
What are you saying here? What sane voter (and I recognize I’m leaving out a good portion of GOP voters here) votes for someone based on what they might do about taxes. It’s the cart before the horse. A leader shows where he wants to take people and how he plans to pay for it.
It seems all you are doing here is saying that a candidate should never promise not to raise taxes, but elected officials should never raise them nonetheless. And voters should never vote for one who has.
we have transportation needs here in lunenburg county. some of our state roads are not even paved. so i really understand your problem up there in northern virginia.
No, we have the opposite problem, Kelley. We have too many paved roads.