Goode, Perriello clash days before election

DANVILLE — With one week remaining before voters head to the polls, U.S. Rep. Virgil H. Goode Jr., R-Rocky Mount, and Democratic challenger Tom Perriello clashed Tuesday night in the third and final debate of a fiercely contested campaign.

Goode, a six-term incumbent, told a raucous crowd of 300 voters in Danville that if he is re-elected, he would push for a national sales tax that would replace all federal income and payroll taxes, expanded domestic drilling for oil and gas, and an end to the “anchor baby” situation that he says attracts illegal immigrants to America to give birth to babies so that they can become eligible for social services.

“I’m for ending the anchor babies, which is a big magnet,” Goode said.

Perriello, a national security consultant and faith-based initiative founder from Albemarle County, said that if he is elected his top priority would be bringing back jobs to the 5th District, which includes the Charlottesville area and stretches down to Danville. Over the past dozen years, he pointed out, the district has lost an estimated 10,000 jobs.

“I’m going to go up, roll up my shirt sleeves and work a double shift every day to bring jobs back to Southside Virginia,” Perriello said.

Perriello said he is opposed to the national sales tax — also known as the “fair tax” — because he believes it would unfairly shift the tax burden onto middle- and working-class families.

“Congressman Goode, who’s worth several million dollars, would get a big tax break,” Perriello said. “I’m concerned about the teachers in our community.”

Goode denied being wealthy and out of touch.

“Compared to [Perriello’s] backers and fellow Democrats, I am a peon,” Goode said.

A “fair tax,” Goode said, would cause the economy to boom, capital to flow into the United States and jobs to be created. It would allow individuals and businesses to keep more of their money, he said.

“I want the IRS basically ended,” Goode said. “And this would end it.”

Goode said he has a long record of securing congressional earmarks that have benefited numerous projects throughout the district, creating jobs and sparking economic growth.

“I have been very effective in Congress and it has irritated some,” Goode said.

Yet Perriello said he would be more effective than Goode, pointing out that Roll Call has ranked Goode as one of the least influential members of Congress. Roll Call has found, Perriello said, that other members of Virginia’s congressional delegation have sent to their district as much as twice the amount of federal spending than Goode has.

“I think the question we need to ask is if we can do better,” Perriello said.

When asked by the president of the Danville Pittsylvania Chamber of Commerce if the candidates support building a bypass around a heavily congested portion of U.S. 29 in Charlottesville, both said they support the project.

Sparks flew between the two rivals when the debate centered on energy policy. Both candidates say they want to help America become energy independent, but they emphasized different ways to achieve that goal.

Goode said he supports alternative energy research, particularly switchgrass, canola oil and other sustainable energy projects being conducted in his district. At the center of Goode’s energy plan, however, is more drilling for oil off America’s shorelines and in the Arctic National Wildlife Preserve in Alaska.

“I’m for a real drill policy, not a sham drill policy like the Democrats have on Capitol Hill so they can say they are for drilling but they are not,” Goode said.

Perriello said he sees energy independence as the nation’s greatest national security threat and biggest opportunity to bring new energy jobs to the district.

He also supports offshore drilling for oil, though he said he opposes drilling in Alaska and does not agree that drilling ought to be the emphasis of a comprehensive energy policy.

“What bothers me is when we spend 90 percent of the debate on 10 percent of the problem,” Perriello said. “It’s time for honest politics. It’s time for leadership.”

Perriello criticized Goode for running an advertisement that distorts Perriello’s record on drilling. The ad states that Perriello opposes offshore drilling, when he in fact supports it.

“Your ad is false,” Perriello said. “And I wonder whether you will apologize for that.”

Goode did not apologize for the ad, saying it was accurate that Perriello only supports “some drilling.”

Both candidates have spent huge sums on TV and radio advertising during the campaign. According to campaign finance records, Perriello spent roughly $656,000 from July 1 until Oct. 15, while Goode has spent $445,000.

As of Oct. 15, Perriello had raised slightly more money than Goode in the race, collecting $1.5 million, compared with Goode’s fundraising total of $1.48 million.

The question of which of the two candidates would exercise greater fiscal responsibility drew a sharp exchange between the candidates.

Goode has voted against tax rebates for the middle class, Perriello said, while voting in favor of subsidies for pharmaceutical companies and other industries. Goode has also opposed “paygo,” a measure that would basically require Congress to find ways to pay for any new spending item that it approves.

Goode responded by saying that the GOP is more fiscally conservative than the Democrats.

“The team of Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid? You think they’re fiscally responsible?” Goode said. “He’s been living in New York too long.”

A recent ad from Goode’s campaign refers to Perriello as a “New York lawyer.”

Perriello, who is from Virginia, put out an ad of his own Tuesday that responds to the charge of carpetbaggery.

“He’d rather talk about my two years in New York than about his 12 years in Washington,” Perriello says in the ad.