House Minority Leader David Toscano, D-Charlottesville, recently wrote a commentary in The Roanoke Times and other newspapers critical of the state’s tobacco commission — the panel created to administer the state’s share of the legal settlement with cigarette companies. The commission’s mandate is to use the money to create a new economy in tobacco-growing communities, but Toscano questioned whether some of its appropriations are really achieving that goal. The Times had these follow-up questions for him.
What’s been the response to your op-ed piece?
I have received numerous comments from around the state about my op-ed piece. Many people do not understand much about how the Tobacco Commission works and the circumstances surrounding Sen. [Phil] Puckett’s resignation have simply peaked interest in that organization. I have received offers from commission staff to further brief me on commission business.
People are also reading…
What would you like to see happen?
I would like to see the Office of the Inspector General (OIG) look more closely at the process by which the Tobacco Commission makes decisions. There are some cases where the commission is doing very good work that appears very transparent. In other cases, there is an appearance that decisions have been made out of the public eye and without rigorous criteria.
You singled out for criticism the new medical school at Liberty University (which received a $20 million grant from the Tobacco Commission. Why? Don’t we need more doctors, especially in Southside and Southwest Virginia? Isn’t a medical school a potential economic engine for that part of the state?
I singled out the new medical school at Liberty University for criticism. First, Liberty University is not typically viewed as located in a “tobacco-dependent” community.
Locating the medical school across the boundary line in Campbell County does not alter the fact that Liberty University is really located in Lynchburg, a city not designated as “tobacco-dependent.”
Second, a $20 million allocation is substantial and subjects it to additional scrutiny. We certainly need more doctors in both Southside and Southwest Virginia, but there are no assurances that the people trained at the school will serve Southside Virginia.
Beyond that, there is no evidence that I have seen showing that the students who enroll come from the region. If you are hoping to generate jobs to uplift people who have experienced economic hardship, I would like to see the focus be on people who live in the area.
By contrast, a recent initiative of the Tobacco Commission worked with Microsoft to create jobs [in Meckleburg County] that would employ people who already live there.
While a medical school is a potential economic engine, almost all kinds of spending would do so in the short run. We should focus on economic growth that creates jobs for people who live in the region, rather than initiatives that merely import people from outside of the state or region.
I hope that part of the OIG review of the commission will be to focus on the economic data that was or was not part of the decision to spend the $20 million.