Editorial

Editorial

The Assembly and the

1995 Election

It might have been better if the deadlock in Richmond had continued and this session of the General Assembly had to adjourn after 30 days.

This would have meant the assembly would not have acted on many of Gov. George Allen's proposals, and the electorate would, have had a chance to say clearly in November if the approach the governor is taking is what they wanted when they chose him in November 1993.

Gov Allen and his supporters clearly believe the voters wanted him to cut •taxes, cut spending and put more criminals in prison for longer terms. Others, including many Democrats, are equally convinced the voters of Virginia did not want such a radical departure from the course the state has followed for many years,

Do the voters want a tax cut that will amount, at most, to SI 1.50 per person in 1995 if it means eliminating Virginia Tech's extension offices in some localities, less money for public libraries, less money for the arts and mental health, and cuts to education at all levels, primary', secondary and university?

Did the voters want parole ended if it meant debt for years in the future for prison construction and much higher operating costs for corrections?

Did the voters want many of the state’s burdens to be pushed off onto the localities where they will necessarily be funded by real estate taxes? .

Do the voters want their tax dollars to be used to lure businesses to Virginia?

If those things were what the voters meant when they elected Gov. Allen, the> can make that clear by electing Republicans to the General Assembly in November. If that is not the direction they want the state to take, they can signal that by electing Democrats. Even if there is a 47-day session, the November election can provide a clear referendum on Gov. Allen’s plans.

However, this can only work if both parties prov ide credible candidates for all seats in the House of Delegates and State Senate.