NJ Government needs a diet!

An excellent opinion piece appeared in the Courier Post today entitled In '08, government needs to lose weight. The commentary cites some progress made across several fronts this year by the Corzine administration. The challenge has been that almost every success has been "some" success capping property tax increases, "some" success in reducing "some" people's bill via the rebate program and higher rebates and "some" progress on establishing rules to get school budgets cut.

The problem there is that nominal progress in this state is often met with outright backwards movement on the same topic a short time later. Because of this, Corzine needs to make a real effort to make significant progress across these same fronts next year. And the biggest is the size of government.

Trenton should go on a full court press with incentives to get small school districts to share superintendents and other administrative personnel, multiple fire districts in towns to merge, police departments to go regional over several small boroughs, towns to share public works employees, county governments to share services and equipment with towns, etc.

Of course these are the sacred cows of New Jersey regional government.

Then there's the bloated state government with more than 80,000 employees. That has to shrink, significantly.

Lawmakers have so far avoided the type of fiscal reform that would lead to thousands of government jobs being eliminated. Yet that's really the next step for this state. Taxes can only be rebated so much if too many tax dollars continue to pay for a grossly over sized government. Despite being the third smallest state geographically, New Jersey has more municipalities per square mile -- 566 total -- than any other state, and has 615 school districts, more than Pennsylvania, Delaware and Maryland have combined.

Just under 9 million people live in the state of New Jersey. Of those, 37% are either below working age or over the age of 65. That leave 5.5 million people who are of working age. The private non-farm employment in this state is estimated around 3.5 million people. Why then do we make such a big deal of any reduction in the jobs of 80,000 people who work for the state? I know many people who have experienced job reductions in their "private" companies in excess of 15% over the past few years. Yet NJ state employment has grown.

I agree with the Courier Post. It is time for NJ to go on a diet.

---

Lame Duck School Spending Plan

As the legislature tries to unwind the details in Governor Corzine's school funding plan, a few pesky issues keep coming up that are raising eyebrows. For example, The Inquirer points points out a serious question from one legislator:

Assembly Republican Leader Alex DeCroce, who represents communities in Passaic and Morris Counties, posed what he called "the $64,000 question":

"Can you tell me where all of this money is going to come from?"

What I find amazing is that this bill is coming up at all. This is a serious topic and one that should be thoroughly debated with no tricks and gimmicks hidden in the fine print. And I think that everyone involved would likely agree with that sentiment except for Governor Corzine and Assemblyman Greenwald who both want this legislation jammed through the lame duck session.

Because Corzine wants the Legislature to approve the measure before the lame-duck session ends Jan. 7, lawmakers gathered two days after Christmas, when Trenton is usually a ghost town.

"I would work 24-7 to get this done," said Assemblyman Louis D. Greenwald, (D., Camden), chairman of the Budget Committee.

More than 100 people packed the hearing room, waiting for hours to weigh in on the legislation, which has drawn opposition from urban and suburban districts and advocacy groups.

Some complained that the bill, made public last week, was being pushed through despite many questions about its impact.

A good number of the politicians who may vote on this legislation will no longer be in the Assembly or Senate after their vote is cast. Shouldn't that bother us? Put two and two together. An unaccountable legislature and a bill with more questions than answers.

Someone should stand up and just say WAIT! This may very well be an excellent bill. But I expect not when I see the way it is being force fed through the system. WAIT... and let our new legislators handle this next year when the details can be brought to the light.

Read the Inquirer article here.

---

Voter Input Needed On Spending

Assemblyman Michael Doherty of Warren County plans to introduce legislation to require all borrowing in the state to be approved by the voter. The usual suspects for closed government in secret immediately jump to the forefront:

Some state officials, however, believe the "one-size-fits-all" approach would not work.

"It can't always be a popularity vote when you want to do something," said Democratic Sen. Stephen Sweeney, also freeholder director in Gloucester County. "What if you have to bond for your roads and bridges?"

In Gloucester County, for example, Sweeney has proposed a highway system to bypass Route 322 in Harrison Township which would require about $10 million in county bonding for the $22 million venture and an estimated $90 million courthouse project.

"Doing a courthouse is the last thing I wanted to do, but governmentally I needed to do it," Sweeney said. "These are things that have to get done."

Sweeney is typical of our elected politicians. For example, we recently had a major road project near my home. They spent millions of dollars to add a jug handle. Where we never had accidents or traffic backups before, we have them daily now. That is the kind of good government that Mr Sweeney wants. I plan to blog in detail on the road project soon but how much do you want to bet that this project was paid for with Federal transportation "use em or lose em" funds. And there is not one person within 30 miles of here who would have voted for this traffic boondoggle. Lack of popularity usually has a basis in fact.

Maybe if New Jersey politicians were truly accountable to the voter instead of their established party patronage culture, we wouldn't have the highest taxes in the country.

Read the article from the NJ.com here.

---

School Funding Plan - Something for everyone not to like

According to the Inquirer today, it seems that the more our local school districts learn about the governor's school funding plan, the more they don't like. We had always questioned how it was going to be paid for. But, now apparently the districts are going to be forced to reduce property taxes.

General Assembly Speaker Joseph Roberts (D., Camden) praised the tax relief promised by the new formula.

"The state has a moral and a constitutional obligation to provide a quality education," Roberts said. "But we also have an obligation to confront the reality that we have the highest property taxes in the nation."

No issue with Speaker Roberts here. The heart of the problem may be stated more clearly by the Republican leader:

Assembly Republican Leader Alex DeCroce, whose district includes communities in Passaic and Morris Counties, said Democrats were trying to "ramrod a thoroughly complicated and convoluted school-funding formula" into law.

"They're moving faster than the Polar Express on an icy slope," DeCroce said in a statement.

I don't understand why this Governor insists on constant secrecy and then expects the Senate and Assembly to just rubber stamp his whims. If I were in either chamber, I would not stake my political reputation on Corzine as he still could become as notorious as James Florio for all the same reasons.

Slow down guys, Deliberate and get it right. The children of New Jersey deserve that much. Read the entire article here.

---

NJ Politics and Fairness - The Death Penalty Study Scam

I started paying attention to the abolishment of the death penalty in this state when proponents of the change noted a commission recommendation that it would "save money". This was while the New York Times was running a story on how the death penalty SAVES LIVES. Forging ahead, I always wondered about this commission who came up with the political cover to assist in enacting another law which two thirds of our state didn't agree with.

Well, low and behold, it was a stacked deck. As Michael P. Tremoglie from the Philadelphia Bulletin writesin this piece:

This commission was a paradigm of a study, which already knew what it wanted to say and simply went about collecting evidence to support its opinion. From the beginning, it was intent on abolishing capital punishment, and its conclusions were derived from those who want to do so.

In the article it refers to the fact that 8 of the 13 commissioners were against the death penalty (this from a former Presecutor Mary Zdobinski writing for Northjersey.com) and the rest didn't agree with it either. This is a typical New Jersey stacked deck. Governor Corzine is so concerned that the state might potentially kill someone who doesn't deserve it (I don't know how with today's trial, appeal, appeal, appeal, appeal, Governor commutes sentance culture), he fails to even consider the Associated Press finding that executing convicted murderers saves 3-18 innocent lives.

---

47 Billion Dollar Secret Budget Bill

Congress in a sleight of hand has submitted a $47 billion dollar budget bill after midnight last night. Nancy Pelosi intends to rush the bill through tonight. The bill is apparently filled with earmarks that will not see the light of day. I thought that this congress promised to make sure that with "new" ethics, these kinds of things would not happen anymore. Apparently not.

To contact you local representative, you can look them up here.

Tell them to vote no until the bill can be reviewed in full view!
I contacted my Representative Chris Smith today.

---

Lautenberg wants more farm subsidies

Senator Frank Lautenberg wants more farm aid for specialty farmers in New Jersey. The gist of the issue is apparently large corporate farms:

Lautenberg had sought to more fairly distribute some $280 billion in farm aid. Corn, soybean and other commercial crop growers receive the lion's share of aid. Specialty farmers, those who grow fruits, vegetables and organic products like those who dominate the agriculture industry in New Jersey, receive peanuts.

An article in the Courier Post discussed the unfairness of the distribution of farm subsidies to various states. The Senator failed as his colleagues in the larger farming states didn't agree. But maybe Lautenberg is missing the real point.

It isn't about how the money gets distributed. The big question is why do we continue to funnel billions of dollars in subsidies to manipulate the farming industry. For example, if New Jersey organic farmers have found a business niche that the markets wants, why do they need subsidies? I live very close to some extremely successful farms and they are doing very well farming a product people want to buy.

As to the subsidies, this week the NY Post listed several super wealthy New Yorkers who have been receiving farm subsidy money. David Letterman, David Rockefeller Sr and Leonard Lauder are just a few of the needy farmers mentioned.

This program needs to be gutted not redistributed.

---

Congrats NJ - You are the biggest loser!

Some states feast at the expense of others when the federal government hands out money, according to the Tax Foundation's latest annual analysis of federal taxing and spending patterns.

This from a report on The Heartland Institute. While some states like New Mexico get over $2 back for every dollar the send to Washington, NJ gets the nation's lowest 61 cents.

For right or wrong, the statistics are often a measure of the effectiveness congressional delegation sent by the state to DC. So, not only do our legislators locally do a poor job managing the state's finances and keeping spending under control, they assist in making sure we pay the highest taxes with the worst return in the nation.

Neighboring Pennsylvania gets back $1.07, Delaware $.77 and New York $.79 all much better than NJ.

---

Corzine - It's not about the voter - It's all about him

Today's article in Newsday Poll: NJ sharply divided on death penalty; lukewarm on Corzine yields some interesting results. While it is not surprising that our legislators feel no responsibility to take the constituents desires into account in New Jersey, it is rare that an elected official show such contempt for the those who put them in office. From our illustrious governor:

Corzine said he wasn't surprised by the findings, but didn't waver from his position.

"The public is very divided on this issue, and I'm very clear about where I stand and have been since I ran for political office and I'm not changing," he said.

Sounds like his position on taxpayer funding for stem cell research. He said the public was for it. When they told him they weren't in a referendum, he said he didn't care he would find a way to spend the money anyway.

Until the voters in this state learn to get a backbone, we will continue to be taxed incessantly and watch as the legislature bans the death penalty in the face of a 40 percent increase in murders in NJ. Maybe the repeal of the death penalty will help us be able to franchise the success of top murder cities like Camden, Trenton and Newark to other cities in the state. We could start a cottage industry in political corruption combined with citizen murder.

Oops. We already have that. Never mind.

---

Another day...another tax...on events?

Another day, another proposed tax. New Jersey state legislators are considering a new tax on event tickets of as much as 5 percent per ticket to help offset costs associated with increased traffic and public safety concerns in cities where arenas and stadiums are located.

So says Alfred Branch Jr in this article on TicketNews.com.

Why do we never pick up the paper and ready about our legislators cutting out of control state spending? How about rescinding the 274 million dollars Governor Corzine spent WITHOUT any legislative approval for three stem cell labs that the voters rejected. How many ticket taxes need to be collected to add up to 274 million dollars.

I wonder...

---

Rutgers Ethics Study - Corruption Costs NJ $1 Billion

An ethics study released on November 28 from the Prudential Business Ethics Center at Rutgers entitled New Jersey State Government Ethics Reform: Business Leaders and the Public Call for Change caught my attention due to the various headlines surrounding an estimated 1 billion dollar cost of corruption in New Jersey. One interesting part of the study was summarized in the press release:

The poll findings indicate that “New Jersey residents view citizens’ groups as having the greatest potential for raising ethical standards to combat political corruption,” with 26% of the respondents looking to citizens’ groups, “followed by the governor (20%), state and federal prosecutors (17%) and the State Legislature (12%). Business leaders were at the bottom of the list (6%).”

What I find interesting about this comment is that the leaders polled had such an exceptionally low view of the ability of the governor, elected leaders as well as the business community to fix the ethics problem. When I saw this, I expected an unnamed list of participants from the general public. I could not have been more wrong. This study relied on an impressive list of various public policy and business savvy individuals who are listed by name. More interesting is that many of the players polled are typically at odds on various issues politically.

I am however left with the feeling that this study could start the process rolling but a lot more needs to happen to get the ethics problem under control. Given the cost of corruption here, it should be a priority item.

---

Decency and Sub Prime Mortages

With the most conservative estimate of sub-prime impact of NJ homeowners as 13% of sub-prime mortages in near default, where are our legislators. Instead of supporting a 5 year delay in impending default, maybe we should we proposing to put the owners of those loans into a housing situation that has some certainty for 3-5 years. Carrying loans that should never have been made is silly. When you loan someone money to produce a payment that is substantially below what the market and your average bank will bear in order to get a decent billpaying person on the hook for payments and then potential bankruptcy, there should be consequences.

As a small government conservative (which would seem to be obvious to most who read this blog), I am appalled that the only consequence of this mess seems to be born by the people who frankly should have been rejected for loans in the first place. I may seem cold but if you loaned money to get a payment you could barely afford...shame on you. If you are the lender who did it...YOU AND YOUR FIRM should pay rather than the taxpayer.

I am going to score big with certain quarters with this one but free markets penalize on both sides. Sorry.

---

Alternative Minimum Tax and Common Sense-Sorry Charlie...Rangel!

Well, apparently there are some people with sense in Washington DC after all. We have had a continued debate about the Alternative Minimum Tax(AMT), the alleged tax on the rich that has extended its reach way beyond its original planned target of 2000 very wealthy Americans. The bizarre nature of the debate has always centered around the fact that even though the tax was unfair and was taxing beyond its mandate-once instituted the politicians felt the additional money was theirs to spend. Charlie Rangel (D-NY) the Chairman of the House Way and Means committee was holding hostage any fix to the AMT until he got agreement on a more comprehensive tax reform.

Congress has dropped it demand to link the fix on AMT to new taxes. From Bloomberg:

Congress moved closer to protecting 23 million households from the alternative minimum tax as Senate Democrats dropped a demand to link it to a tax increase on executives at private equity firms and hedge funds.

The Senate approved a one-year, stop-gap measure that temporarily indexes the minimum tax for inflation, sparing 23 million American households from an average tax increase of $2,000 this year.

This is only one step but a big one. The House is going to be under significant pressure to follow suit with similar adjustments to their legislation.

Read the entire article here.

---

School Funding Plan - It's gonna cost ya...

As predicted here, the Governor's plan to revamp school funding looks like a real spending fiasco. Says NJ.Com's Paul Mulshine:

On Friday, we got a glimpse of the plan. And here's what it calls for: the single most costly expansion of public education in New Jersey history.

Even more telling is one conclusion based on the analysis of the plan:

This new preschool bureaucracy could easily cost hundreds of millions of dollars a year. Meanwhile, the governor has proposed to increase annual school spending by only about $500 million a year. That barely keeps pace with inflation. So forget about tax relief if you live in a typical middle-class school district in suburbia.

Read the entire article here but don't say you weren't warned.

---