|
Blue
Dog:
How significant are contributions and fund raising in
running a statewide political campaign?
Del.
Viola Baskerville, D-Richmond:
Unfortunately,
money is inordinately important in a statewide political
campaign. Virginia is a state that requires disclosure
rather than a state that sets limits on private funding
of campaigns. As a result, we're often referred to as
the "Cayman Islands of campaign finance."
Because of our no caps/no limits system, leaders who
want to focus on getting their message out to voters
must instead beat the bushes for funding in an
atmosphere in which the sky is the limit.
Moreover,
as reported in a recent report, The Color of Money,
funding for campaigns comes almost exclusively from
people with incomes over $100,000, potentially skewing
the discussion of issues, and, all too often, the
outcomes of legislation.
But
that doesn't mean that's the way it has to be.
I
don't just support campaign-finance reform--I've been
working to do it. For two years, I have sought to have
the legislature give serious attention to adopting a
clean-election act, modeled on successful efforts in
Maine and Arizona. This would create a Clean Election
Commission and Fund for all qualified candidates who
choose to run clean campaigns, allowing candidates to
focus on the issues important to Virginians and taking
private funding out of the process.
I
will continue to work for real campaign finance reform
if elected as lieutenant governor.
Sen.
Bill Bolling, R-Mechanicsville:
It
is important for a candidate to raise enough money to
effectively communicate their vision for the future of
Virginia to the voters, and in this day and time it
takes a great deal of money to do that.
However,
money is not the only thing that is important. It is
also important for a candidate to have broad-based
grassroots support all across Virginia. Fortunately, our
campaign has been able to generate both. In fact, I am
the only candidate for lieutenant governor who is
running a true statewide campaign.
I
have supported campaign-finance reform in the past,
including limits on the amount of money that individuals
and corporations can contribute to political candidates.
However, such reforms are not the panacea many people
think they are and they can often be manipulated by
candidates.
Historically,
the General Assembly has resisted efforts to implement
meaningful campaign-finance reform in Virginia, choosing
instead to rely on full disclosure of political
contributions and expenditures.
Puckett:
Money is, unfortunately, very important in running a
political campaign. With the low rate of voter
participation and turnout that we have often times have
in our state elections, it is important to have money to
get your name and your message out to voters.
With
a primary that is expected to have a very low voter
turnout, it will be terribly important to have adequate
funds to introduce myself and my priorities to the
primary voters across this Commonwealth and to urge
folks to vote on June 14.
I
would support campaign-finance reform by placing a limit
on the amount of funds that a candidate can raise for a
particular election cycle.
Connaughton:
It is an unavoidable fact that fund raising is an
element of successful political activity. Given the size
of the Commonwealth, fund raising is necessary to get
one's message out.
The
state's current campaign-finance laws are open and fair;
the key is full disclosure.
I
do not believe we should change the law unless there are
demonstrated problems.
Blue
Dog: If elected, would you sign a pledge to not
discriminate in hiring, in this office, on the basis of
sexual orientation?
NOTE:
The Blue Dog also requested the statewide candidates
thoughts and comments on current legislation concerning
the the proposed constitutional amendment defining
marriage as being between one man and one woman-- including last year's House Bill 751--
and Del. Glenn
Weatherholtz' proposed legislation banning Gay-Straight
Alliance Clubs (and the discussion of sexual
orientation) in Virginia high schools.
Baskerville:
Yes, like Sen. George Allen, I believe that a person
should be hired based on the skills, ability and
experience that he or she brings to a job, not on the
basis of his or her sexual orientation, religion, race,
gender, national origin and regardless of any disability
that does not prevent the person from meeting the
requirements of the job.
Regarding
the marriage amendment, I support the right of any
church or faith tradition to marry any couple it chooses
or not to marry any couple it chooses. It is beyond
reasonable question that both the state and federal
constitutions absolutely protects these rights. To the
extent that the government provides civil recognition
and benefits for any private relationships, it should do
so equally and without discrimination.
Virginia
has already enacted one of the strictest laws in the
nation prohibiting marriage between persons of the same
sex, civil unions and any contractual agreements that
purport to give the benefits of marriage. There is no
evidence to suggest that it is necessary to do more. Not
one single case has been filed challenging our laws
since the prohibition against same-sex marriage was
first enacted in 1986.
Local
school boards should continue to address without
legislative interference questions related to
non-curricular clubs and whether such clubs should be
permitted on school grounds.
Bolling:
My office does not inquire as to an applicant's sexual
orientation, nor do we discriminate against anyone in
making hiring decisions. Hiring decisions are based on
an applicant's background, knowledge and experience and
their ability to do the job.
I
have supported efforts to prohibit the recognition of
same-sex marriages and same sex unions in Virginia. In
fact, this year I served as Senate co-patron of
legislation to amend Virginia constitution to prohibit
same-sex marriages and same-sex unions. I believe it is
important for Virginia to do its part in protecting the
sanctity of marriage.
I
do not believe that organizations based on sexual
orientation should be permitted in the public schools.
Puckett:
I am not a supporter of signing pledges, nor do I
believe in doing so. However, I can say that I would not
discriminate in hiring in my office on any basis. I
cosponsored and voted for the constitutional amendment
that states that marriage shall only be between a man
and a woman.
I
voted for House Bill 751 (the Affirmation of Marriage
Act) last year.
I
support banning Gay-Straight Alliance Clubs (discussion
of sexual orientation) in Virginia's public school
systems.
Connaughton:
I have never asked prospective employees about their
sexual preferences. However, I will not sign pledges at
the behest of interest groups or individuals.
This
is my consistent policy and has been since I first ran
for public office.
There
are too many politicians around who sign pledges
thinking that it's an easy way to lock up votes or
funds. I won't do that.
I
support efforts to define marriage as between one man
and one woman.
Blue
Dog: As far
as growth and transportation in the Shenandoah Valley,
what are your thoughts on the Interstate 81 widening
project. Is it the best solution for congestion on I-81?
Baskerville:
It is important to find a way to link transportation
planning and land-use decisions. Currently, these
decisions are made at two different levels of government
that are not coordinating their decisions, much less
collaborating, the state transportation board and local
government.
I
believe that we need to make I-81 a priority for the
Commonwealth. You don't have to live in the Valley to be
aware of the problems with safety, congestion and aging
infrastructure of the highway. Widening I-81 alone is
not the answer. Rail should play a part in the
resolution of the congestion problems. My stand on
environmental and environmental-health issues and the
need for alternative modes of transportation has been
consistent. We need to take a multimodal approach
including rail--not as an afterthought but as a central
part of our transportation planning.
I
am concerned about unplanned growth and sprawl in every
part of our Commonwealth. We need to make smarter
decisions about growth that are informed by the idea
that smart planning is not inconsistent with encouraging
and supporting economic development, private-property
rights or the American dream of home ownership.
Even
though I represent an urban area now, my family has deep
rural roots and made its living off the land for many
years. I see a big correlation between the issues of
urban and rural business; both are backbones of the
state's economy. Saving farmland and family farms will
require effort along several fronts. My support of the
creation of the secretary of agriculture position was an
effort to elevate issues like encroachment to statewide--rather than regional-- importance. In addition, I
voted to establish the Virginia Agricultural Vitality
Program, an effort to keep farming viable for future
generations and to preserve Virginia's farmland.
The
encroachment problem is worsened when farmers must
struggle just to make ends meet. We must do all that we
can to help these businesses remain viable by enhancing
farmers' ability to grow and distribute their products
as well as strengthening our laws on eminent domain to
increase citizens' awareness and participation in the
process. In addition, I have proposed amending our
estate-tax law to exclude working family farms. The
fewer obstacles that family farms have to overcome in
their livelihoods, the better will be their ability to
withstand the rising land values and pressures of
encroachment.
In
2001, I voted to establish the Office of Farmland
Preservation and regret that funding for that office was
cut during the budget reductions of 2003. I am pleased
that the office--despite those cuts--has been able to
complete the first step in the process for completing a
model purchase of development rights. If we support
Virginia agriculture, we simply can't continue to lose
45,000 acres of farmland a year; creating a model PDR
program will help protect the farmland remaining.
We
now have the opportunity to renew our investment in
farmland preservation through programs like this, so we
should not squander the chance during this time of
economic recovery.
Bolling:
I support efforts to widen Interstate 81. However, this
is a very expensive project, and it will take a
coordinated effort from the federal and state government
to make it happen.
In
addition, major portions of this project will have to be
completed under the Public/Private Transportation Act
and will include some form of toll funding.
I
am concerned about sprawl in every part of Virginia.
As
Virginia's urban and suburban areas continue to grow,
growth pressures are arising in rural areas and
resulting in the loss of farm lands and family farms. To
combat this problem it is important to implement
smart-growth programs in Virginia, including phased
urban-development plans, cluster development and
incentives that encourage the preservation of farmlands
for future generations.
It
is also important to lessen the tax burden on family
farms by promoting land-use valuation, keeping local
real-estate taxes in check and eliminating the death
tax.
Puckett:
I support addressing the traffic-congestion issues on
Interstate 81 with a combination of putting more freight
onto rail with improvements to our rail system and with
the widening of Interstate 81, especially in the most
dangerous and unsafe locations.
I
do not have an immediate concern with sprawl in the
Shenandoah Valley; however, each locality should have
the necessary tools to address urban sprawl when they
are affected by growth.
Farmland
and family farms could be protected from encroaching
development by conservation easements.
Connaughton:
I-81 is a safety and congestion problem that needs to be
solved.
The
state has not provided sufficient funds to make either
long-term or incremental improvements to I-81. I believe
that interim improvements, such as adding additional
lanes on hills and inclines, should be sought
immediately.
Long-term
solutions require local support; I will work closely
with local political, business and civic leaders to
ensure that a solution is developed that addresses
I-81's problems but has citizen and business buy-in.
The
Valley's population continues to grow as its economy
remains strong.
Efforts
must be made to channel development near transportation
nodes such as I-81 interchanges or in existing urban
areas.
--
February 28, 2005
|
