06/26/14: Assembly history seems poised to repeat itself

This op-ed appeared in The Virginian-Pilot on the date shown.

ONCE AGAIN, a Virginia governor of one party and a legislature controlled by another party find themselves at odds and probably headed to court. If history is any guide, the result will be the same.

In 1996, Virginia had a Republican governor, George Allen, and a legislature controlled by Democrats. The issue was the budget and the use of a veto. Allen was concerned about the erosion of executive power and filed suit in the Virginia Supreme Court.

Last week, Democratic Gov. Terry McAuliffe, facing a Republican-controlled legislature, vetoed several items in the budget. On Monday, House of Delegates Speaker William J. Howell ruled two of them out of order, thereby preventing a vote. The governor said the speaker’s “procedural tricks” amount to a failure to override his veto.

It seems likely, then, that the issue of the governor’s veto power is once again headed to court. Allen lost his suit.

It’s almost comical to read the arguments offered in 1996 and today about the constitutionality of the governor’s veto power.

They are the same — the only difference is who is making them. Nearly 20 years ago, it was the Democrats who argued that the governor could use veto power only to eliminate specific appropriations; today, it is the Republicans.

The struggle for dominance in a political system rooted in the balance of power is always ongoing. This is one of the reasons Virginia remains alone in having a single-term governor; the legislature believes Virginia’s governor is much too powerful to serve another term.

It also goes to the effect that redistricting has on our legislature.

It strains credulity that Virginia elects statewide representatives from one party while the legislature is in the hands of another. It doesn’t matter which party is in control; legislators will act in their own best interests, the will of the people be damned. History shows that the lines they draw will allow them to choose us, rather than the other way ’round.

Which party controls the legislature is just one thing that has changed. Another is the willingness of the current majority to stand on principle more so than the Democrats in 1996. That’s why I believe this issue will end up in court.

Howell, by denying a vote on two McAuliffe vetoes, went further than Speaker Tom Moss did in 1996. The Allen suit was the direct result of a lingering feud between the governor and the legislature about language in the previous year’s budget that sought to force the governor to apply for federal funds.

Allen vetoed that language. Democrats called the move unconstitutional, but Moss allowed the vote to override it to take place, anyway. The override failed.

Democrats huffed and puffed about filing suit but never did. Should McAuliffe make moves to treat his vetoes as valid, this Republican-dominated legislature will file suit.

And if history is any guide, the GOP will win.