Deeds has also made clear his willingness to sign a transportation bill, the main component of which would likely call for, you guessed it, tax increases for roads funding.
So here we have one of those tricky paradoxes. How can Deeds reconcile being against more taxes yet indicate that, in fact, there will be more taxes coming? It's money out of constituents' pockets either way, right? Will he just hold his nose while signing the bill?
When asked to explain the apparent contradiction, Deeds said he would not raise taxes for the general fund, the account that pays for such government functions as schools, prisons and social services. The gas tax goes to the transportation trust fund, and Deeds would look at that and other options for roads.
Quite the feat of equivocation. Meanwhile, Deeds' opponent, Bob McDonnell, has vowed not to raise taxes, not even for roads. However, experts note that many of the promises McDonnell makes for higher education would require tax hikes.
Does this make it a zero-sum game for voters, judging between two candidates who assure no increased taxes only to increase them in support of specific issues?