Lawmakers begin budget dickering

• Article
• Comments ()
• Click-2-Listen
• Videos

By

RICHMOND -- Lawmakers in Virginia yesterday began negotiations to reach a compromise on transportation spending and amendments to the state's budget. Each chamber of the state legislature rejected the other's proposed budget amendments, a traditional move that forces the negotiations into a conference committee where a handful of powerful senior legislators hammer out the details. Those close to the budget process said last year's extended and bitter debate over spending and taxes will not be repeated this year. The result of last year's 115-day session was a $60 billion budget funded by a $1.38 billion tax increase. Transportation spending will be a major negotiating point. The House has proposed to spend $1.03 billion on roads and the Senate has offered a $670 million transportation spending plan. Lawmakers have a $1.2 billion surplus to work with and must agree on how to spend that money in budget amendments before the General Assembly is scheduled to adjourn Feb. 26. The Senate yesterday rejected several components of the House transportation plan, including an "abuser" fee that would have targeted aggressive drivers. The "abuser fee" bill, authored by Delegates Thomas Davis Rust and David B. Albo, Fairfax County Republicans, would impose civil fines on those with multiple driving penalties. Sen. Richard L. Saslaw asked the delegates why they did not propose a 5-cent gasoline tax increase instead. "That tax hasn't been raised since 1986," the Fairfax County Democrat said. Mr. Rust said he knew such a plan would not have passed the House, where all 100 delegates are up for re-election in November. He also noted the abuser fee program would raise about $115 million, the equivalent of a 3-cent or 4-cent gas tax increase. "And unlike a fuel tax everyone pays, if you do not break the law, you do not pay," Mr. Rust said. Mr. Saslaw, who opposed the bill, said delegates were being intellectually dishonest about trying to fix the state's transportation problems. "It continues to perpetuate the myth that you can do something about transportation without paying for it," he said. Other legislators said the fee was unfair. "These are pretty significant fines that we're talking about," said Sen. Kenneth W. Stolle, Virginia Beach Republican. The committee also rejected a bill proposed by House Appropriations Committee Chairman Vincent F. Callahan Jr. that would have dedicated one-third of the tax on insurance premiums to transportation. The measure would have raised about $265 million for transportation projects by 2007. Mr. Callahan, Fairfax County Republican, said the death of the measures ensure that this year's roads package will amount to "a pittance." Senators will hold onto their plan to significantly increase trans-portation funding until next year. "I think all you're going to see now is a pittance," Mr. Callahan said in an interview after the vote. "All we wanted to do this year was get our foot in the door." Besides Mr. Callahan, the House budget negotiators are: Delegates Phillip A. Hamilton, Newport News Republican; Leo C. Wardrup, Virginia Beach Republican; and M. Kirkland Cox, Colonial Heights Republican; Johnny S. Joannou, Portsmouth Democrat; and Lacey E. Putney, Bedford independent. Senate budget negotiators are: Sens. John H. Chichester, Stafford County Republican; William C. Wampler Jr., Bristol Republican; Walter A. Stosch, Henrico County Republican; Charles J. Colgan Sr., Manassas Democrat; and R. Edward Houck, Spotsylvania County Democrat. n n n A Senate committee yesterday rejected legislation that would have required social workers in adoption cases to determine whether the applicants are homosexuals. On an overwhelming voice vote, the Courts of Justice Committee refused to send Delegate Richard H. Black's bill to the Senate floor. The House passed the bill 71-24 last week. "This thing comes awfully close to being pretty bigoted, so I can't support it," Mr. Saslaw said. Mr. Black's bill originally would have prohibited homosexuals from adopting in Virginia. However, the bill was amended in the House to require home studies prepared for the circuit court to include whether the applicant "is known to engage in current voluntary homosexual activity or is unmarried and cohabiting with another adult to whom he is not related by blood or marriage." Mr. Black, Loudoun County Republican, said he was only concerned about the best interests of the children. Virginia tradition has long recognized the benefits of a home with a mother and father, he said. Sen. Kenneth W. Stolle, Virginia Beach Republican and chairman of the committee, said the law already protects the child's best interests by requiring thorough background checks that include, among other things, the applicant's moral suitability. Opponents attacked the credibility of Mr. Black's chief witness: Paul Cameron, chairman of the Family Research Institute in Colorado Springs, who asserted that homosexuals, drug users and prostitutes "disrupt society" and have a much lower than normal life expectancy. Responding to questions from Sen. Janet D. Howell, Fairfax County Democrat, Mr. Cameron acknowledged that the American Psychological Association expelled him in 1983 for violating its ethical principles. The American Sociological Association adopted resolutions in 1985 and 1986 saying he had consistently misrepresented sociological research, Mr. Cameron acknowledged. Mr. Cameron said those rebukes stemmed from "political differences." He said the ASA and other groups have begun a covert "affirmative action" program favoring same-sex couples in adoptions to make up for what they believe to be past discrimination. Claire Guthrie Gastanaga, an attorney for the homosexual rights group Equality Virginia, said the legislation was too vague. "We don't know what voluntarily engaging in homosexual activity means," she said. "Does going to a gay bar qualify?" • This article is based in part on wire service reports.