Phil Chroniger gives his thoughts on the upcoming Marshall vs. Gilmore nomination contest.
In short, he’s torn… but for the right reasons:
(Marshall) is a tried and true fiscal conservative, and he’s fairly pragmatic about it. In the end, if you’re strong on fiscal prudence, you win with me. He’s been a voice of cost-cutting in a sea of seemingly-endless spending increases under Governors Gilmore, Warner, and Kaine.
His “no-confidence resolution” towards Republican leadership earlier this year brought him lots of attention and praise from the grassroots. He’s been an active opponent of the Abuser Fees, as well.
One must also think that, with Marshall/Newman being approved with 57% of the vote in a Democratic wave election, Marshall could get the attention of many swing voters.
Chroniger also goes over some of Gilmore’s weaknesses on spending. A very thoughtful post.
January 2, 2008 at 10:27 am |
[...] response to NATP I didn’t think I could squeeze my answer to Phil’s concerns in a comment, so I made it a post [...]
January 2, 2008 at 12:19 pm |
I guess you guys want to over look the fact that under Gov. Gilmore’s Leadership the taxpayers and the VA economy has an extra $950,000,000 in tax savings annually…
I am so glad that our good friend former Sen. Bell pointed out that this part of the VA budget (car tax cut, or personal property tax relief act) is actually seen as an expense, and/or line item. Therefore, the spending you are speaking of is actually part of a tax cut to the taxpayers, some thing no other Governor has acheived… Long term and lasting tax cuts to the citizens.
Also, Gov. Gilmore left office with of $1,000,000,000, that would be a Billion dollars in our rainy day fund…. $$$ going into that would also be counted as spending, would it not?
and bottom line on spending, if the economy sends the money to Richmond, the General Assembly is going to spend it! Gov. Gilmore stood in the way of the General Assembly spending even more, while providing a lasting tax break to the citizens…
Trying to ’spin’ this any other way is pretty ingenuous…
January 2, 2008 at 12:31 pm |
STD,
I have said it before, and I’ll say it again; even if you back out the car-tax cut money (which was higher under Warner than under Gilmore, so actually, it makes the comparison worse), Gilmore’s spending increase is still larger than Warner’s.
I have repeatedly commended Gilmore for the car-tax cut, but Marshall supported it, too – and it has been Marshall, not Gilmore, who has led the fight against HB 3202.
January 2, 2008 at 3:50 pm |
DJ:
The point is that General Assembly spending is as much a funtion of the economy as anything… I forget whose quote it was, “If you Send It, We’ll Spend It!” You’re suggesting that Gilmore should have vetoed budgets sent to him that were delivering actual tax breaks to the people… meanwhile his administration did not short change eductation, funded our portion of the Woodrow Wilson Bridge replacement in DC, and left us with over $1 Billion in the rainy day fund…
uhhh, that would be disingenuous (my first comment) BTW… I thought about that eating lunch… with a grimace
January 2, 2008 at 3:55 pm |
You know, the Moderate Republicans in the Senate said that through their leadership (despite the 2004 and 2007 tax hikes) the so-called “Gilmore majority” saved taxpayers $1.3 billion.
AFTER THEY RAISED YOUR TAXES TWICE.
Lies, damned lies, and statistics. I call dibs on the latter in this case.