Virginia is for jobs
By JR Hoeft | Thursday, May 27th, 2010 | PolicySince Gov. Bob McDonnell took office in January, the Commonwealth of Virginia has added more than 5,000 jobs. For those of you who are math wizards, that’s more than a thousand jobs a month added.
“Bob’s for Jobs” has certainly been more than a campaign slogan. Since the beginning of the McDonnell Administration there have been:
- 82 – Projects Announced
- 5,473 – Jobs Created
- $673M – Capital Investment
(Source: VEDP)
This information is, of course, specific to what the government has been involved in.
But why stop with those statistics? When you look at overall Department of Labor numbers in the Commonwealth, outside of hirings and projects that the government had direct involvement in, the picture continues to improve.
This past Saturday, the Richmond Times-Dispatch highlighted the administration’s achievements in job creation when they reported that:
Virginia and three other states tied for having the nation’s largest month-over-month percentage increase in employment in April.
The four states each saw a 0.8 percent jump in nonfarm payroll employment in April from March, according to a U.S. Labor Department report on state unemployment released yesterday.
Virginia added 28,100 jobs, ranking it fifth-highest among the states in the actual number of jobs gained.
So, while the left is trying to impugn McDonnell over Confederate History Month (ok, he deserves a little impugning) and a non-existent issue with Fred Malek, McDonnell has been quietly keeping his promises of creating jobs and continuing Virginia’s long tradition of being a business-friendly state.
McDonnell is the same principled leader who Virginia Beach elected so many years ago; and he still exemplifies his campaign slogan from those elections past: Promises Made, Promises Kept.
In this case, jobs promised and jobs delivered.
Tags:
Contribute for Conservatism!
Share this post
About the author
Conservative to the core; liberal with his opinion! J.R. has been involved in politics for over a decade and has worked on several campaigns in Hampton Roads. He has served on the Executive Committee of the Republican Party of Chesapeake and the Central Committee of the Republican Party of Virginia. He is also the director of “Blogs United” in Virginia. E-mail J.R.. Follow J.R. on Twitter.
We're 75% there! Thank you to everyone who has so far contributed! Just $2000 to go!
Comments
26 Responses to "Virginia is for jobs"
more jobs = more tax revenue = less debt
I wish it was that simple. hopefully McDonnell can keep spending down and close VA’s budget gap at the same time.
I can witness from personal example that economic improvement is up around large portions of our nation. At times freight demand for trucks can almost be described as torrid. Even up in Michigan, where the unemployment rate is particularly high, my personal experience was that it was much easier to find loads of freight back out once you had gone in.
While my experience might not be completely representative of everyone within the trucking industry, it matches my own informal polling of various truckers on how freight is for them as well as what the trucking industry and shippers are saying in the news.
Some explanation might lie in that with the number of trucking companies that went out of business during the recession, those who remain might be seeing favorable results from even just a small recovery of freight. However once again those trucking firms who survived are back to hiring and trying to grow the size of their fleets whereas during the depths of the recession they were only trying to protect and maintain the size of the fleets they had.
Virginia has been blessed with possibly its best governor in a century, for sure the best in my lifetime. People knew the man had the right stuff from the moment he threw his hat in the ring. Bob was vetted and earned his stripes the old fashioned way.. hopefully our future political leaders can learn from our governor that honesty, ethics, family values and service to country are the navigational tools best suited to line the path to the high road.
Great piece JR.
JR
I normally agree with you but McDonnell deserved no impugnment on CHM.
JR: Don’t we have to factor in the public sector jobs that have been lost under McDonell? I know Republicans don’t like the public sector but to the person who holds it — and their family and the businesses that they buy goods and services from — a job is a job. I’m not sure McDonnell, who has done a great job so far on Economic Development, a priority in this campaign, is breaking even yet.
Thank you Governor Bob McDonnell; you are a true leader for Virginia and I look forward to seeing you emerge as a national leader in the GOP as the next generation begins to rise!
OK, along with the praise for McDonnell will you admit that with any improvement in the economy even had someone like Creigh Deeds been elected Governor we would have seen about the same results by now? Just what did Bob McDonnell do which resulted in anything that can not be explained by the general improvement in the economy at large as well as the tone for pro-business in Virginia set by previous state administrations which I believe were Democratic for the previous 8 years?
If you try to sell to me that McDonnell is somehow solely responsible while the economy improves nationwide you are going to end up whistling in the dark. Perhaps you should look towards the greater impact both TARP and the stimulus had.
JR, I’m sorry, but this puff peice does not classify as journalism. Fact is, professionals in economic development know that it is a team sport; no one person, entity, government, nor staff is totally responsible for a company locating here or expanding their operations. Frankly, any such claim should be dismissed on its face, and given the “facts” presented here, dismissed for lack of evidence as well. Further, as most deals of this type take years to be completed, and claim of these jobs belongs to others anyway. Local and regional economic development entitities are responsible for over 80% of job growth. I applaud the Governor for bringing the message to the nation about Virginia being open for business, but let’s leave it at that instead of making such unsubstantiated claims.
Obama Checkmate on Bob drilling for oil off of Virginia… New game or revise expectations? I hope that a future budget hasn’t included spending predicted oil revenues….
Turbo,
Very kind words about our current Governor. Which surprises me considering some of your past comments on other posts.
You support the Tea Party, whose mission is to defeat the GOP “establishment/machine” and will not support the front-runner (Scott Rigell), because he gave $1000 to Obama, gave money to the YES campaign (voter approval of tax increases for transportation) and supported HB3202 (unelected regional transportation authorities).
Let’s see. Gov. Bob McDonnell – great Governor in your opinion, endorses Rigell. (An establishment move, some might say). Gov. Bob McDonnell – an 8 term member of the House of Delegates (again establishment, who I am sure gave his opinion on candidate recruitment by the party), Gov. Bob McDonnell – strongly supported the YES campaign and HB3202 (along with a number of Republicans).
So, I don’t understand how you can support our Governor, who supports Rigell, represents the GOP establishment/machine you hope to “defeat” and with the exception of the donation of $1000 to Obama (out of the hundreds of thousands he has raised for GOP candidates), also strongly supported the YES campaign and HB3202. Yet you strongly take exception to Scott Rigell supporting those two endeavors and being the “establishment” candidate.
You can’t have it both ways.
Thus far, McDonnell has done a fine job. I do strongly disagree with tolling existing roads. I would prefer that he toll new construction.
Having been a frequent critic of his past performance, I have to credit him with doing pretty well as governor.
Tim J: Virginia only budgets two years at a time. Nobody believed those phantom “oil royalites” which current law says Virginia was NOT getting, btw, were going to show up that quickly. I think even the most fervent members of the “drill, baby, drill” chorus accepted the fact that those revenues, if they ever materialized, were at least ten years off.
J.M. Ripley, you can credit current performance and recognize possible redemption, support the guy and still criticize past performance.
The difference is that McDonnell has a current track record that shows improvement. Rigell has not yet really had an opportunity to show that he has changed his philosophy. Favor from powers that be, can unfairly hurt as well as help. Indeed, the the heavy handedness of the GOP leadership has had a negative affect on people they are supposed to be working for.
Steve Vaughn,
I guess I am one of those “Drill, baby, drill” guys. As one of them I also realized that Louisiana won improved royalties so such royalty improvements were not out of the question for Virginia.
I still remain in favor of offshore drilling but as a realist I will admit the Gulf oil spill has probably delayed for a significant time further expansion of offshore drilling.
What I want to know now is what are McDonnell’s plans for solving our transportation problems in light of recent developments? In my opinion the plans he campaigned on were never realistic to begin with but what are his plans now? Are we going to look back after four years of McDonnell and see that once again nothing was done?
Britt,
Your statement is incorrect. The YES campaign passed in the 2002 session and was on the ballet Nov. 02. Bob, as a delegate, voted for it, supported it, campaigned for it and solicited funds for it (probably asked his friend Rigell to give money).
HB 3202 – Passed in 2007. As AG, he supported and advocated for it. As AG (he was required too), argued in the VA SC for it. It was found unconstitutional Feb. 08.
These events are very recent (HB 3202 barely 2 years ago).
At no time has Bob ever said he made a mistake regarding these two issues (not seeing your redemption here). Now I make these comments not to bash the Governor, I worked very hard to get him elected.
However, I use them as examples as to how someone can hold the Governor in such high regard (and he supported these two endeavors), yet bash the guy the Governor has”endorsed”, who also supported the same two endeavors.
I was pointing out a double standard that I felt Turbo was applying to Governor McDonnell and Scott Rigell.
LittleDavid: I’m not all that “green,” I could be convinced that off shore drilling here was a good idea. What that would take is analysis of the risks/rewards that showed that potential benefits to the Commonwealth outweighed the potential risks. In the rush to “drill, baby, drill” that analysis has simply not been done. Also, would it not have been a more prudent way to proceed to work to have the law on off-shore royalties changed BEFORE pushing for off-shore drilling permits?
I share your fear that we’re about to go through another four years without signifiicant transportation improvments.
J.M., it is not that simple. HB 3202 was a classic example of the lack of political will and courage that should be a requirement for serving the Commonwealth. By supporting the bill, it was clear that the majority in the House acknowledged the critical shortfalls in the funding of maintenance, repair, and construction of transportation infrastructure, but instead of fixing the problem, they required local officials to actually pass the tax increases. So those who supported the Bill acknowledged the problem yet failed to exercise the courage of their convictions. That is why we are in the mess we are in today, and the Governor will look the fool, as have past Governors, because the majority in the House has tied his hands.
Look, here is the problem as I see it. Many Virginia citizens from far flung places do not want to pay tax increases to fund transportation improvements in Tidewater and around Washington DC. Why should they pay when they will not benefit?
Problem is that these far flung citizens actually benefit more in the long run. Perhaps they do not benefit, or see the need for, improvements in their local bailiwick. But they benefit from the general economic improvement that comes with progress.
Who pays the real costs of keeping these roads paved in rural communities? The greatest concentration of revenue receipts comes from urban purchasers of fuel. While every inch of pavement laid down in urban areas is more then paid for through the fuel taxes paid by those using it, the costs of keeping rural areas paved are subsidized by urban commuters.
Governor Tim Kaine took the steps necessary to make this clear to rural taxpayers. The money is going to go towards where it came from. As our roads deteriorate due to lack of funding the roads are going to deteriorate more in rural areas. If the rural citizens are willing to let urban dwellers choke on congestion then let them go back to dirt roads over time!
It’s simpler than that. Rural legislators supported tax increases when it benefited them. Mark Warner’s problem was the one time he could’ve gotten rural legislators to vote for one, he didn’t include transportation in the revenue stream. It went to the General fund, which meant lots of money for education all over the state.
2004 was the one bite at the apple for a long, long time, and Warner blew it.
Is McDonnell going to blow it as well? Sure seems like it.
If you want mass transit for this area, I would suggest you look at Metro de Medellín.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metro_de_Medell%C3%ADn
http://www.medellininfo.com/metro/
Great system, I love to ride it. Mostly built 50 to 100 feet above ground, you have fantastic views of the city.
I was told that the Colombian drug lords built this using profits from the cocaine trade.
I hope to “retire” in Medelin one day. Fun place and yes I go to Mango’s when I am in town.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=haGQDZ6Tjn8
Party like you are at Mango’s
Exactly why HB3202, although unconstitutional, was a rural west dream.
For them, it would’ve gotten Hampton Roads to tax themselves for ALL transportation issues. Anytime our area of the state asked for it’s legitimate share of state revenue for transportation enhancements, the rest of the state could just point to the HRTA and say we already have a funding mechanism, and say we’re not going to pay for Hampton Roads issues. Heck, they don’t even want to pay for STATE OWNED Port expansions. The rest of the state wants us to pay for that too! You think it is hard to get our share now? Imagine how much harder it would be if we had a regional funding stream in place!
HB3202 was an opportunity to round us all up as a region into the HRTA corral and rope us into a raw deal as they bleed us for revenue.
I would echo Little David’s remarks in that as our area grows, we just end up adding even more revenue to state coffers from which the “far flung areas” benefit. The answer is not to choke off our area with a heavy tax burden. For some reason, people romanticize killing the goose that lays the golden eggs. As they damage our economy, it damges theirs.
As it is, Hampton Roads is having a tough time squeezing each last dime out of taxpayers just to stay afloat after long stretches of fiscal irresponisbility.
You don’t negotiate for your fair share by putting on shackles the rest of the state agreed to let you pay for.
Britt,
I was in favor of HB3202 because if the rest of the state was going to stand in the way, at least there was a method proposed for us to do it for ourselves.
But perhaps you have convinced me that it being ruled unconstitutional was for the better.
In the past, you voiced your opinion that you were against tolls. I am going to add that the true experts on surface transportation, those in the trucking industry, are in agreement with you. Why should you have to pay a toll when you are also paying the fuel tax? If you are paying tolls to travel, then where is the money you paid in fuel tax going to?
So where is the money going to come from? I think there needs to be a 10 cent increase in the fuel tax. Why ten cents? because I have heard it said that 5 cents is the minimum to fund maintenance of what we already have let alone having enough money for improvements. Also, from personal experience I can attest that states with fuel taxes at that level can achieve superior results.
Not all states with high fuel taxes have great roads. However in my opinion Virginia gives us pretty good results with meager funding. If Virginia DOT can do a good job with small money I think we can have some confidence they will do good with larger funding.
Why is an increase necessary? Because vehicles get much better fuel mileage today then they did yesterday. Improved fuel mileage is good and should be applauded. However as the average vehicle travels more miles per gallon they are still adding to the congestion and wearing out the roads just as fast as back when they had to purchase more fuel per mile.
Increased fuel taxes are the most fair and efficient method of raising the justifiable needs for increased revenue.
Well, David, I am opposed to tolls on previous construction. I have absolutely NO objections to tolls on new construction.
Tolling 95 is a bad idea to me. Yes, it is tempting to try to collect from all the northerners rushing back and forth to Florida etc, but often tolls can be avoided if you get enough local experience or have good map skills/gps. It also is counter to principle since it is already paid for.
While I get your point on increased mpg in current autos, I object strongly to any idea of raising the gas tax. Especially by 10 cents! I don’t even want your deisel taxes raised. It will just cost more for the consumer after your freight expenses get passed along anyway.
The local economy is already struggling as it is. How about making sure the current gas tax goes to roads and not the general fund(or education fund as I like to call it)? Why not get a revenue stream that isn’t as suceptible to inflation or changes in technology? How about we get our fair share? If our “representatives” actually funded transportation instead of blackmailing us with it for increased taxes, we wouldn’t have these problems.
Little davis and Mike Barrett, SB-668 and HB 3202 were both funding schemes to fund a “package” of highway projects that were chosen by a corrupt process and not by a legitimate regional decision making process that is accountable to the citizens. When the question was placed on the ballot, the region’s voters rejected the plan by a 2-to-1 margin opposed. The fact that the GA passed pretty much the same “package” of the worng roadways in 2007 is an example of bad government, plain and simple.
Little David, you lobby for the trucking industry and Mike Barrett, you lobby for certain special interests in a regional business lobby – as well as for your vacation buddy, Jim Spore – and for growing the amount of wealth taken from families and being handed over to a combination of government and “public-private partnerships” to spend.
Here is the glaring flaw in thinking about such spending as “growing jobs”. It is simply unsustainable. Real job growth that will add money to the tax base are not jobs that are subidized by taxpayers, but are jobs that crate profits without depending of tax funds.
In the case of our roads, HB 3202, SB 668/YES Campaign, tolls, and unelected, all-appointed regional “decision-making” bodies. I deal with the mess being constructed in our region day in, and day out. It is very BAD government.
Little David, if you supported HB 3202 then you join Mike Barrett in your support of bad government. I see where you decided to attack me on a discussion of Jessica Sandlin and her apparent belief that CONGRESS needs to get involved in finding a solution for local homelessness. You stated I oppose all transportation solutions for our region.
Actually, you are wrong about that – I support solution that will reduce traffic congestion for those that are targeted to pay for the “solutions” being proposed/lobbied for.
I oppose bad plans and bad “packages” of big ticket economic development “wants” instead of real solutions that will actually reduce exisiting traffic congestion, make the more dangerous intersections safer, repair bridges that NEED repair – and do so by placing a higher priority on limited funds for true NEEDS and not ‘wants” like Norfolk’s wasteful and far too expensive 7.4 mile, low capacity light rail line.
Reid,
I am a lobbyist? Nope, I am a concerned citizen who just paid more this past year to fund transportation then you will probably pay in a lifetime. I want the money I pay to be wisely spent and I think I have more experience to judge when this is being done then the average citizen. I get around some and think I know when I am being ripped off.
Britt,
I might be willing to compromise with tolls on new construction only, but I think the RTA’s would have been a better compromise. You do realize that the national average is for one third of the money collected from tolls goes towards paying for the costs of collecting the tolls? If you ride down the tollway you pay both the fuel tax and the toll.
If we had to compromise with regional taxes at least 100% of the increased revenue collected would have ended up in the asphalt. In my estimation that would have been preferable to toll roads to meet our region’s transportation needs.
Leave your response