Bacon's Rebellion

Resurrection of the Conservationist/TaxpayerAlliance?

—

by

James A. Bacon
in

House Speaker William J. Howell is undertaking an interesting political gambit with his high-profile defense yesterday of tax credits for conservation easements (see details in the Charlottesville Daily Progress): He’s aligning House Republicans with the environmental/conservation community, a community that is heavily (though not exclusively) Democratic in its sympathies. I interpret this maneuver as a bid to resurrect the conservationist/taxpayer alliance that defeated the regional taxes-for-transportation proposals in 2002.

Conservationists and their Smart Growth allies are one group of Democrats who have not been lobbying for higher transportation taxes. They oppose Business As Usual road-building programs that accelerate scattered development that ruins country vistas and degrades the environment. This constituency could prove a useful ally for House Republicans as Gov. Timothy M. Kaine ratchets up the political pressure in support of his taxes-for-transportation plan.

I’m not suggesting that Howell’s position on the conservation tax credits is disingenuous. Howell strengthened the conservation credits back in 2002, regarding them as an effective, market-based tool for preserving farmland, woodland and open space from encroaching development. “Sprawl is a real concern to me, conservation organizations and to most Virginians,” Howell said in a press release yesterday.

What’s interesting is that Howell chose to go public on the issue in such a high-profile way, holding a press conference, issuing press releases in conjunction with the Piedmont Environmental Council, and targeting the state Senate for criticism. Senate legislation to cap the level of individual tax credits, on the grounds of fiscal responsibility, would deter many landowners from protecting their lands, Howell charged, making it more difficult to meet Virginia’s commitment to conserve over 400,000 acres in the Chesapeake Bay watershed, as stipulated in the Chesapeake Bay Agreement of 2000. “We pledge to fight Senate actions encouraging sprawl.”

As much as Howell genuinely believes in conservation, my guess is that he has his eye on a larger prize: the upcoming budget negotiations over transportation funding. He’s going to bat for the conservationists on an issue that’s important to them, in marked contrast to the way in which Gov. Timothy M. Kaine abandoned his commitment to push for zoning-and-transportation reforms. I have no insider knowledge here; I am simply observing the logic of the situation. I think Howell is trying to resurrect the conservationist/taxpayer alliance that beat back regional sales taxes-for-transportation referenda in Northern Virginia and Hampton Roads in 2002. It will be interesting to see if that alliance will come back to life in 2006.

Share this article

ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)

Comments

Comments

5 responses to “Resurrection of the Conservationist/TaxpayerAlliance?”

  1. kingfish Avatar
    kingfish

    An interesting gambit, indeed. How odd would it be that a caucus controlled by developers, which killed the Governor’s land use bill without so much as a recorded vote, would convince envoirmentalists that they should make common cause? Strange bedfellows indeed.

  2. Jim Bacon Avatar
    Jim Bacon

    Kingfish, you raise a good point. Maybe it would be better to depict Howell as trying to make amends with the conservationists and resurrect what otherwise would have been a natural alliance.

  3. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    The tax credit, without some reasonable caps, is a massive boondoggle for the rich — the same idle-wealth activist left that funds the enviros, so there is your common cause. If they are so green at heart, why do they want tax credits they can sell to do the right thing? Combined with the House Republican insisitence on estate tax relief for estates above $10 million (the other train wreck with the Senate) they are leaving themselves deeply vulnerable to the charge that their top priority is tax relief for the wealthy.

  4. NotGroverNorquist Avatar
    NotGroverNorquist

    This is more chest beating by the macho Speaker, sticking it in the eye of his former friend, Chichester. The whole transportation issue in the House is not, for many Republicans, about transportation. It’s about Bill Howell’s survival. If there’s a cave on the part of the House involving taxes, look for Speaker Cox in ’07 with Marcus/Allen/Gilmore calling the shots.

  5. Ray Hyde Avatar
    Ray Hyde

    The smart growth and conservation alliances apparently think every road-building program accelerates scattered development, ruins country vistas, and degrades the environment. Name one project that they have come out in favor of in the last twenty years, not counting traffic “calming” projects.

    The tax credits are only an effective tool for the very wealthy who can afford to tie up part of their assets forever: especially if it gives them other benefits like tax credits and, Oh yeah, protection from that density that the market is claimed to want, through creation of tax subsidized private parks.

    For those that think that sprawl is caused by government subsidies, look no further.

    But for everyone else, who can’t afford to give up their major asset, or hasn’t the income to use the tax credits, the program is a sham. In the end, the only thing that will preserve those rural vistas, is when they are as profitable as housing.

    That is what the free market is telling you, so look around and listen up, if that open space is so valuable, stop being a cheapskate by coming up with half baked subsidies for the rich and do what needs to be done: go raise the money and buy the land.

    If you are not willing to do that, then it only means the rural vistas are not valuable enough. Or to put it another way, the market wants the open space to become more dense, just as EMR says.

Leave a Reply

ADVERTISEMENT