"Crossover" has come and gone. The House has produced a budget and the Senate will do so shortly. For those unfamiliar with the term, "crossover" is the day on which work must be completed in each body of origin so it may be considered for final passage. Of the 1,094 bills that were introduced in the House, 580 were approved and "crossed-over" to the Senate. Ten of those bills are mine, and I am busy presenting them in Senate committees in hopes that they may be approved by the Senate in the next ten days, prior to our adjournment.

The House also passed a budget last week, although acknowledging that it is a "half-time" budget because it was adopted prior to our knowledge of the precise impact of the federal stimulus package. The Senate took a different tact and will produce a budget this week. At the present time, we believe that federal aid coming to Virginia will simply offset the most recent shortfalls in state revenue.

The House budget included a change in funding for the water quality improvement program, which is relevant to our region because it could impact monies allocated for improvements to our Moore's Creek Water Treatment Plant. The House proposes to take money that is presently in this program and use it to pay for other ongoing costs in the budget. The problem is that those monies have already been committed to projects such as ours. I am concerned that this may affect our ability to complete these improvements and other water quality initiatives throughout the state. The House and Senate will need to reconcile their budgets before they go to the Governor, so I will be working on this fix.

As always, there were a number of items in the House budget that I did not support. House Republicans inserted a number of conservative policy initiatives in the budget, most notably in the areas of abortion, stem cell research and school vouchers. Against my vote and the vote of most Democrats in the body, the House budget includes prohibitions against using monies for research on embryonic stem cells and forbids funding for Planned Parenthood. Hopefully, these budget amendments will not be included in the final budget.

Last week marked the 200th birthday of Charles Darwin and Abraham Lincoln. There were speeches in support of Lincoln by both Republicans and Democrats, but the reaction to a commending resolution for Darwin was fascinating. When the resolution, which celebrated Darwin's contribution to the theory of Evolution, was presented to the House, a number of Delegates, in a voice vote, indicated their disapproval. I do not know whether this was a reflection of feistiness or that they genuinely disagree with the theory of Evolution. There have been some fascinating books written recently about Darwin, and present research simply confirms many of his initial insights about the origins of species. One has to wonder what is motivating some people who take the position that creationism is somehow on a scientific par with the theory of Evolution.

In other news of the week, the House considered seven separate constitutional amendments. One would place all transportation monies in a "lock box" that could not be accessed for anything other than transportation. Another would create further prohibitions on the use of eminent domain. A third would cap how much the budget could increase in a single year.

To take effect, amendments must be passed in two successive legislative sessions and then be approved by the electorate. I support the Madisonian approach to constitutional amendments, that is, we should reserve amendments for extraordinary circumstances. In the case of the Federal Constitution, we have not made many amendments, and I think it serves our jurisprudence well. In Virginia, we have only adopted 21 amendments since the 1971 Constitution, and I do not believe we should consider further amendments when there are protections in the Virginia Code or to cure problems that do not presently exist. A good example is the proposed eminent domain constitutional amendment. Several years ago, the Virginia Code was dramatically changed in response to a Supreme Court decision arising out of a case in Connecticut. At the time, even Virginia's Attorney General believed that we did not need to change the law. But we did so, and now we are back with a proposed constitutional amendment, which has been generated largely in response to certain interest groups pushing for it in the General Assembly. I am hopeful that the Senate will defeat this constitutional amendment so we do not have to go through the same process next year.

Finally, my poll of the day. Before us is a bill that will establish a new license plate that says "Choose Life" for those who want it. Monies from the purchase of the plates will go to Heartbeat International, a 501(c)(3) organization which is considered "pro-life." Let me know what you think by responding to david@davidtoscano.com.

Thank you for giving me the opportunity to serve you in the Virginia House of Delegates.