|
Virginia’s
transportation system is the topic of recurring
discussion in Richmond
and throughout the Commonwealth. Just this month,
Gov. Mark R. Warner made headlines when he dumped
all but two members of the Commonwealth
Transportation Board (CTB), the policy-making body
that oversees Virginia’s
road-building program. That maneuver followed a
national search for a new chief of the Virginia
Department of Transportation (VDOT) earlier in the
year. Of course, changes at the agencies in charge
of
Virginia’s
transportation system are not unique to the
current occupant of the governor’s mansion. Gov.
Jim Gilmore made headlines a few years back when
he dumped the commissioner of transportation and
reorganized VDOT with the promise of curing the
state’s transportation woes. Gov. George Allen
before him also reorganized VDOT and trimmed
personnel with the goal of increased efficiency.
A
reshuffling of the organization chart of state
government and rotation of key personnel occurs
with the regularity of the election cycle. The
problem isn’t the person in office – it’s
the structure of government. The Old Dominion is
the only state in the union that prohibits a
governor from serving a second term. Governors
focus on the organization of state government
because, with the one-term limit, it’s one of
the few ways they can leave their stamp on the
institutions of government.
The
time has come to amend the Virginia Constitution
to allow for a two-term governor.
Limiting a governor to a single term makes
it exceedingly difficult to institute a promised
change in policy. In many cases, four years just
isn’t enough. Look at the obstacles:
First,
a new policy must be steered through the General
Assembly, which rarely adopts a major change (nor,
perhaps, should it) without first studying the
matter for several years.
Second, once legislation is adopted,
implementation encounters delay at the hands of
state personnel who, having been whipsawed between
policies from administration to administration,
have learned to respond gradually to change.
Third,
Virginia’s biennial budget process provides a
governor only one legislative session with
beginning-to-end control over the budget.
The state budget is by far the most
important policy document that comes out of the
legislative process.
In the first two years, the governor must
work with the budget submitted by his predecessor.
In the fourth year, the governor’s budget is
submitted right before he leaves office, so the
General Assembly and incoming governor can keep or
discard various items as they see fit. This causes
substantial waste as each governor establishes new
funding priorities.
Instead
of real reform, Virginia
ends up with a re-drawing of organizational boxes.
VDOT is but one example of the major changes that
occur every four years. Gov. Gilmore garnered
praise when he created a Secretary of Technology
from pieces of the Secretariats of Administration
and Commerce and Trade. Now, Governor Warner has
promised to create two new cabinet secretaries --
a Secretary of Agriculture and a Secretary for
Older Virginians. And who knows what ideas for
reorganization the commission chaired by former
Gov. L. Douglas Wilder will come up with? When
those reforms are implemented, over much ado,
don’t be surprised if they’re undone four
years from now by the next administration.
The
point is not whether any specific restructuring is
a good idea but whether it is productive to put
state government through such turmoil every four
years. We need a two-term governor to limit this
constant churning. Each shake-up costs money and
morale. Attention of both state workers and the
public gets diverted from critical issues to
carrying out the reorganization – or, as often
as not, to fighting it.
Permitting
gubernatorial succession also would address a
glaring flaw in Virginia’s democratic process.
Under the current system, the governor is a lame
duck from the moment he takes office. Voters never
have a chance to pass judgment on his key policies
as they take shape. Therefore, the natural desire
of voters to express their views on the current
governor turns the election of his successor into
a perceived mandate on the incumbent.
Witness the last election: Mark Warner
successfully saddled his opponent, Mark Earley,
with the onus of the budget gridlock that had
taken place on Gilmore’s watch.
Lastly,
politicos and normal Virginians alike could use a
break from the ever-present political process. No
sooner is an election complete in Virginia
than the posturing begins for the next statewide
elective cycle. Moreover, the fact that Virginia
is the only state in the nation that limits its
governor to a single term diminishes our chief
executive's ability to stand on equal footing on
the national stage with other governors.
Proponents
of the status quo will say that the Virginia
governor’s vast appointment powers make the
office so strong that one term is enough. True, a Virginia
governor appoints the heads of key agencies and
thousands of members during the course of a term
to various boards and commissions. A few of these
boards are important to all Virginians: i.e., the
Commonwealth Transportation Board. But the vast
majority -- the Virginia Irish Potato Board, the
Virginia Water Resources Center Statewide Advisory
Board and the Litter Control and Recycling Fund
Advisory Board, to name a few -- are irrelevant to
most of us. Moreover, the General Assembly must
confirm a governor’s appointments -- not always
a rubber-stamp approval, as I learned first-hand.
The
bottom line: Recent history has shown dramatic
shifts, starts, stops and turnarounds in policy
with the election of a new governor each four
years. Every other state and the federal
government permit succession of the chief
executive, and we should adopt it in Virginia
for a more productive future.
--
July 22, 2002
Joshua
N. Lief, a Secretary of Commerce and Trade during
the Gilmore administration, is an attorney at
Sands Anderson Marks & Miller in Richmond. He
can be reached by e-mail at jlief@sandsanderson.com.
|
